论文库

原文摘要

Recent systems applying retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) and "deep research" iteratively generate queries, retrieve documents, and examine their contents, using the resulting information to guide subsequent search steps. When this process is carried out autonomously rather than by a human searcher, the system must make explicit decisions about which search trajectories to explore and what objective the search is intended to optimize. We introduce a simple framework for reasoning about such search policies, providing a principled approach to evaluation. The framework models the search environment as a set of ranked lists and represents behavior using two primitive actions: select, which advances judgment through an existing ranking, and spawn, which generates a new ranking through query generation or reformulation. Each action produces a document to inspect, yields information that updates the search state, and contributes a reward for a task-specific objective. Within this abstraction, a variety of existing retrieval strategies can be expressed as policies operating over a common environment, while common retrieval objectives can be represented through reward and weighting functions over the resulting search trajectory, and the resulting formulation admits a natural reinforcement learning interpretation. We illustrate the approach using high-recall information retrieval (HRIR), where the goal is to identify as many relevant documents as possible with limited judging effort, showing how the framework provides a unified way to describe and reason about strategies for both classical retrieval tasks and emerging LLM-guided search systems. Through experiments, we demonstrate that both the underlying retrieval method and the "deep research" policy employed can materially affect performance.