AI
Agentic RAG Evaluation: Budget Allocation Across Questions, Trajectories, and Reads
Publication: Hugging Face Daily Papers
Author: Not available in collected metadata
Source published: 03/10/2026, 20:00:00 UTC
Briefing created: 04/11/2026, 09:06:13 UTC
Based on a feed excerpt; full article content has not been acquired. Source evidence retrieved 08/10/2026, 02:18:25 UTC.
Briefings
A 2026 study evaluated agentic RAG budget allocation across questions, search trajectories, and repeated answers using HotpotQA and MuSiQue. At 34.14-34.39M tokens, broader question coverage reduced standard error by 33% versus five reads and 12.6% versus three trajectories. Archived nested and Q-only forecasts predicted allocations within 4.0% and 3.5% respectively. One-read variance penalties relative to the fitted optimum ranged from 0% to 9.9% with substantial uncertainty. Under recorded model fees, more questions beat more trajectories at search prices of $0-1 per 1,000 requests, but question-versus-read fee rankings remained unresolved.
Key points
- At 34.14-34.39M model tokens, broader question coverage lowered standard error by 33% compared to five reads.
- Archived nested and Q-only forecasts predicted allocation budgets within 4.0% and 3.5% of actual values.
Context
This research investigates how budget allocation strategies affect performance in agentic RAG systems using HotpotQA and MuSiQue datasets.
Limitations
Forecast accuracy for nested and Q-only strategies was within 4.0% and 3.5% of actual allocations. One-read variance penalties relative to the fitted optimum ranged from 0% to 9.9% with substantial uncertainty. Question-versus-read fee rankings remain unresolved under recorded model fees.
Generated by Bittrees-hosted qwen35-2b sha256:aaf42c8b7c3c on 04/11/2026, 09:06:13 UTC. Based on publisher-provided feed evidence; may not cover the full original article. Check the source for details.
View archived briefing on IPFS
bafybeia2fx2a4ycza2gzqjfjcjo46k43dbv4qlqmrezchyr2zqwhumx3hq