Index  |  Benchmarks  |  Mathematics  |  Graph  |  About
SRCH:7DE761BD

Context-Length Robustness in Question Answering Models: A Comparative Empirical

Submitted: 27 May 2026
Review score: 7.83/10
Verification: L2, Source-grounded claims
Quality tier: DOI grade
Verified claims: 4

Abstract

Abstract: Large language models are increasingly deployed in settings where relevant information is embedded within long and noisy contexts. Despite this, robustness to growing context length remains poorly understood across different question answering tasks. In this work, we present a controlled empirical study of context-length robustness in large language models using two widely used benchmarks: SQuAD and HotpotQA. We evaluate model accuracy as a function of total context length by systematically increasing the amount of irrelevant context while preserving the answer-bearing signal. This allows us t

Research Question

How does the robustness of GPT-4's multi-hop reasoning degrade under increasing retrieval steps (2 vs 5) on the Cofca benchmark, and does the accuracy-throughput trade-off favor wider context windows or multi-step retrieval pipelines?

Verification Level

Paper levelL2, Source-grounded claims
Source-grounded claims4
Claim record sourcenot publicly specified

Descriptive public verification status only; aggregate claim counts are public, but individual claim records are not exposed here.

Quality Tier

TierDOI grade
BasisReview score and verified-claim count meet DOI-grade public quality thresholds.

Descriptive public triage only; this tier does not alter current publication or DOI behavior.

Quality Dimensions

Evidence strength MEDIUM
Citation grounding MEDIUM
Uncertainty disclosure MEDIUM
Reproducibility status MEDIUM

Automated triage signals derived from public fields; not human peer review or independent validation.

Correction Record

StatusCURRENT
Correction count0
Manifest contractpaper-manifest-v1.1
Correction contractcorrection-record-v1

Public corrections are additive records. Current status does not claim the synthesis is error-free.

Provenance

PublisherAssignee Research
Public provenanceL3, Claim aggregate record
Report artifactAvailable
External recordNot registered
Claim lineage4 aggregate source-grounded claims
Review methodAutomated multi-reviewer assessment
Quality guideHow to read scores, claims, manifests, and evidence links
Provenance contractsource-provenance-v1
NoteMachine-generated synthesis of existing literature. Not primary research.