Evidence Hub

The use of Guided Generation to Enhance Extraction of Information from Technical Research Papers

Sandia National Laboratories (SNL-NM), Albuquerque, NM (United States), Travis Bauer, USDOE National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

2026

Abstract

This project studied whether "guided generation"-forcing a Large Language Model (LLM) to answer a question using a structured format-helps extract information from technical research literature better than letting it answer free form.Finding answers in technical literature has historically meant keyword search plus manual review; LLMs are changing that, and Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), which grounds an LLM's answers in retrieved source passages, is an alternative that is explored in the AI community 1 .Using a corpus built from the International Symposium for Testing and Failure Analysis (ISTFA) proceedings 2 , we generated answers under ten conditions-a no-retrieval baseline, two synthetic degraded conditions for validating the judge, five RAG retrieval conditions, the guided generation condition, and "pondering," a two-turn condition.We tested these with two completion models (Mistral-Small 24B and GPT-OSS 120B) and two embedding backends (a local Model2Vec embedder and Google's EmbeddingGemma).All answers (~431 per configuration) were scored 0-10 by a fixed LLM-as-judge, which we first validated: it ranks deliberately degraded answers monotonically (No-RAG baseline > Mostly Right > False), confirming it scores correctness rather than fluency.Retrieval reliably improved quality over the no-RAG baseline, with most gains within two to three documents.Critically, guided generation did not materially help and actively harmed the smaller model (-1.9 to -2.3 points…

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free