Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Evidence Sufficiency and Model Comparisons in MexRegQA: An Item-Level Audit of Mexican-Spanish Regulatory QA

Similarity-gated coverage does not establish that retrieved evidence contains the facts needed to answer a question. We audit Mexican-Spanish financial-regulatory QA and find that 35 of 135 covered items lack some or all load-bearing facts. On the post-hoc full-evidence slice (n=98), eleven prompt-matched models score 95-98/98 and none differs significantly from the anchor; this does not establish equivalence. Removing evidence-defective items changes the nominal significance status of 14 of 55 pairwise comparisons. On 56 zero-evidence items, accuracy spans 33.9%-89.3%. Removing evidence from the audited items under an abstention-permitting prompt reduces accuracy by 63-81 percentage poin...

AuthorsFred Hu, Yeqi Wang, Xing Zhou
Primary categorycs.LG
Published19 October 2026
Last updated at source19 October 2026
cs.LG
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/040252ec-a4e0-4d79-8414-97ff6c0b7ea5" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Popularity, last 3 days

0 now. Counts as reported by the source, snapshotted daily by Silytics.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 22 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.