While Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely used in open-domain Question Answering (QA), their ability to handle inferential questions—where answers must be derived rather than directly retrieved—remains still underexplored. This study investigates how the structure and quality of passages influence LLM performance on such questions. We focus on convergence, a measure of how effectively sentences (hints) eliminate incorrect answers, as a criterion for constructing passages. Using subsets of the TriviaHG dataset, we form passages by combining sentences with varying convergence levels and evaluate six LLMs of different sizes and architectures. Our results show that passages built from higher-convergence sentences lead to substantially better answer accuracy than those selected by cosine similarity, indicating that convergence captures meaningful relevance for inferential reasoning. Additionally, ordering sentences by descending convergence slightly improves performance, suggesting that LLMs tend to prioritize earlier, information-rich cues. These findings highlight convergence as a practical signal for guiding passage construction and analyzing inferential reasoning behavior in LLMs.

Large language models (LLMs) exhibit systematic preferences for well-known entities, a phenomenon often attributed to popularity bias. However, the extent to which these preferences reflect real-world popularity versus statistical exposure during pretraining remains unclear, largely due to the inaccessibility of most training corpora. We provide the first direct, large-scale analysis of popularity bias grounded in fully observable pretraining data. Leveraging the open OLMo models and their complete pretraining corpus, Dolma, we compute precise entity-level exposure statistics across 7.4 trillion tokens. We analyze 2,000 entities spanning five types (Person, Location, Organization, Art, Product) and compare pretraining exposure against Wikipedia pageviews and two elicited LLM popularity signals: direct scalar estimation and pairwise comparison. Our results show that pretraining exposure strongly correlates with Wikipedia popularity, validating exposure as a meaningful proxy for real-world salience during the training period. More importantly, we find that LLM popularity judgments align more closely with exposure than with Wikipedia, especially when elicited via pairwise comparisons. This alignment is strongest for larger models and persists in the long tail, where Wikipedia popularity becomes unreliable. Overall, our findings demonstrate that popularity priors in LLMs are primarily shaped by pretraining statistics rather than external popularity signals, offering concrete evidence that data exposure plays a central role in driving popularity bias.

Despite extensive research on a wide range of question answering (QA) systems, most existing work focuses on answer containment-i.e., assuming that answers can be directly extracted and/or generated from documents in the corpus. However, some questions require inference, i.e., deriving answers that are not explicitly stated but can be inferred from the available information. We introduce Inferential QA -- a new task that challenges models to infer answers from answer-supporting passages which provide only clues. To study this problem, we construct QUIT (QUestions requiring Inference from Texts) dataset, comprising 7,401 questions and 2.4M passages built from high-convergence human- and machine-authored hints, labeled across three relevance levels using LLM-based answerability and human verification. Through comprehensive evaluation of retrievers, rerankers, and LLM-based readers, we show that methods effective on traditional QA tasks struggle in inferential QA: retrievers underperform, rerankers offer limited gains, and fine-tuning provides inconsistent improvements. Even reasoning-oriented LLMs fail to outperform smaller general-purpose models. These findings reveal that current QA pipelines are not yet ready for inference-based reasoning. Inferential QA thus establishes a new class of QA tasks that move towards understanding and reasoning from indirect textual evidence.

Evaluating the quality of retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) and document reranking systems remains challenging due to the lack of scalable, user-centric, and multi-perspective evaluation tools. We introduce RankArena, a unified platform for comparing and analysing the performance of retrieval pipelines, rerankers, and RAG systems using structured human and LLM-based feedback as well as for collecting such feedback. RankArena supports multiple evaluation modes: direct reranking visualisation, blind pairwise comparisons with human or LLM voting, supervised manual document annotation, and end-to-end RAG answer quality assessment. It captures fine-grained relevance feedback through both pairwise preferences and full-list annotations, along with auxiliary metadata such as movement metrics, annotation time, and quality ratings. The platform also integrates LLM-as-a-judge evaluation, enabling comparison between model-generated rankings and human ground truth annotations. All interactions are stored as structured evaluation datasets that can be used to train rerankers, reward models, judgment agents, or retrieval strategy selectors. Our platform is publicly available at https://rankarena.ngrok.io/, and the Demo video is provided. https://youtu.be/jIYAP4PaSSI.

Optical Character Recognition (OCR) plays a crucial role in digitizing historical and multilingual documents, yet OCR errors - imperfect extraction of text, including character insertion, deletion, and substitution can significantly impact downstream tasks like question-answering (QA). In this work, we conduct a comprehensive analysis of how OCR-induced noise affects the performance of Multilingual QA Systems. To support this analysis, we introduce a multilingual QA dataset MultiOCR-QA, comprising 50K question-answer pairs across three languages, English, French, and German. The dataset is curated from OCR-ed historical documents, which include different levels and types of OCR noise. We then evaluate how different state-of-the-art Large Language Models (LLMs) perform under different error conditions, focusing on three major OCR error types. Our findings show that QA systems are highly prone to OCR-induced errors and perform poorly on noisy OCR text. By comparing model performance on clean versus noisy texts, we provide insights into the limitations of current approaches and emphasize the need for more noise-resilient QA systems in historical digitization contexts.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are revolutionizing information retrieval, with chatbots becoming an important source for answering user queries. As by their design, LLMs prioritize generating correct answers, the value of highly plausible yet incorrect answers (candidate answers) tends to be overlooked. However, such answers can still prove useful, for example, they can play a crucial role in tasks like Multiple-Choice Question Answering (MCQA) and QA Robustness Assessment (QARA). Existing QA datasets primarily focus on correct answers without explicit consideration of the plausibility of other candidate answers, limiting opportunity for more nuanced evaluations of models. To address this gap, we introduce PlausibleQA, a large-scale dataset comprising 10,000 questions and 100,000 candidate answers, each annotated with plausibility scores and justifications for their selection. Additionally, the dataset includes 900,000 justifications for pairwise comparisons between candidate answers, further refining plausibility assessments. We evaluate PlausibleQA through human assessments and empirical experiments, demonstrating its utility in MCQA and QARA analysis. Our findings show that plausibility-aware approaches are effective for MCQA distractor generation and QARA. We release PlausibleQA as a resource for advancing QA research and enhancing LLM performance in distinguishing plausible distractors from correct answers.

The use of Large Language Models (LLMs) has increased significantly with users frequently asking questions to chatbots. In the time when information is readily accessible, it is crucial to stimulate and preserve human cognitive abilities and maintain strong reasoning skills. This paper addresses such challenges by promoting the use of hints as an alternative or a supplement to direct answers. We first introduce a manually constructed hint dataset, WikiHint, which is based on Wikipedia and includes 5,000 hints created for 1,000 questions. We then finetune open-source LLMs for hint generation in answer-aware and answer-agnostic contexts. We assess the effectiveness of the hints with human participants who answer questions with and without the aid of hints. Additionally, we introduce a lightweight evaluation method, HintRank, to evaluate and rank hints in both answer-aware and answer-agnostic settings. Our findings show that (a) the dataset helps generate more effective hints (b) including answer information along with questions generally improves the quality of generated hints, and (c) encoder-based models perform better than decoder-based models in hint ranking.

Nowadays, individuals tend to engage in dialogues with Large Language Models, seeking answers to their questions. In times when such answers are readily accessible to anyone, the stimulation and preservation of human's cognitive abilities, as well as the assurance of maintaining good reasoning skills by humans becomes crucial. This study addresses such needs by proposing hints (instead of final answers or before giving answers) as a viable solution. We introduce a framework for the automatic hint generation for factoid questions, employing it to construct TriviaHG, a novel large-scale dataset featuring 160,230 hints corresponding to 16,645 questions from the TriviaQA dataset. Additionally, we present an automatic evaluation method that measures the Convergence and Familiarity quality attributes of hints. To evaluate the TriviaHG dataset and the proposed evaluation method, we enlisted 10 individuals to annotate 2,791 hints and tasked 6 humans with answering questions using the provided hints. The effectiveness of hints varied, with success rates of 96%, 78%, and 36% for questions with easy, medium, and hard answers, respectively. Moreover, the proposed automatic evaluation methods showed a robust correlation with annotators' results. Conclusively, the findings highlight three key insights: the facilitative role of hints in resolving unknown questions, the dependence of hint quality on answer difficulty, and the feasibility of employing automatic evaluation methods for hint assessment.

Question answering (QA) and Machine Reading Comprehension (MRC) tasks have significantly advanced in recent years due to the rapid development of deep learning techniques and, more recently, large language models. At the same time, many benchmark datasets have become available for QA and MRC tasks. However, most existing large-scale benchmark datasets have been created predominantly using synchronous document collections like Wikipedia or the Web. Archival document collections, such as historical newspapers, contain valuable information from the past that is still not widely used to train large language models. To further contribute to advancing QA and MRC tasks and to overcome the limitation of previous datasets, we introduce ChroniclingAmericaQA, a large-scale temporal QA dataset with 487K question-answer pairs created based on the historical newspaper collection Chronicling America. Our dataset is constructed from a subset of the Chronicling America newspaper collection spanning 120 years. One of the significant challenges for utilizing digitized historical newspaper collections is the low quality of OCR text. Therefore, to enable realistic testing of QA models, our dataset can be used in three different ways: answering questions from raw and noisy content, answering questions from cleaner, corrected version of the content, as well as answering questions from scanned images of newspaper pages. This and the fact that ChroniclingAmericaQA spans the longest time period among available QA datasets make it quite a unique and useful resource.