Buildability / Receipt
Evaluating Multi-Hop Reasoning in RAG Systems: A Comparison of LLM-Based Retriever Evaluation Strategies
This public receipt window renders only fields present in the canonical receipt object, deterministic fixture receipt, or canonical evidence receipt. Missing compute, demo, hash, signature, approval, telemetry, and adoption fields stay explicit.
Public buildability page receipt window
Ready for execution: Evaluating Multi-Hop Reasoning in RAG Systems: A Comparison of LLM-Based Retriever Evaluation Strategies
/buildability/evaluating-multi-hop-reasoning-in-rag-systems-a-comparison-of-llm-based-retriever-evaluation-strategies
Subject: Evaluating Multi-Hop Reasoning in RAG Systems: A Comparison of LLM-Based Retriever Evaluation Strategies
Verdict
Build Now
Verdict is Build Now because viability and implementation proof cleared the Wave 1 scaffold thresholds.
Time to first demo
Insufficient data
No first-demo timestamp, owner estimate, or elapsed demo receipt is attached to this surface.
Compute envelope
Data
{"file name": "input.pdf", "number of pages": 15, "author": "Lorenz Brehme; Thomas Str\u00f6hle; Ruth Breu"
Compute
{"file name": "input.pdf", "number of pages": 15, "author": "Lorenz Brehme; Thomas Str\u00f6hle; Ruth Breu", "title": "Evaluating Multi-Hop Reasoning in RAG Systems: A Comparison of LLM-Based Retriever Evaluation Strategies", "creation date": null, "modification date": null, "kids": []}
Inference
{"file name": "input.pdf", "number of pages": 15, "author": "Lorenz Brehme; Thomas Str\u00f6hle; Ruth Breu", "title": "Evaluating Multi-Hop Reasoning in RAG Systems: A Comparison of LLM-Based Retriever Evaluation Strategies", "creation date": null, "modification date": null, "kids": []}
Hardware
{"file name": "input.pdf", "number of pages": 15, "author": "Lorenz Brehme; Thomas Str\u00f6hle; Ruth Breu", "title": "Evaluating Multi-Hop Reasoning in RAG Systems: A Comparison of LLM-Based Retriever Evaluation Strategies", "creation date": null, "modification date": null, "kids": []}
Evidence ids
Receipt path
/buildability/evaluating-multi-hop-reasoning-in-rag-systems-a-comparison-of-llm-based-retriever-evaluation-strategies
Paper ref
evaluating-multi-hop-reasoning-in-rag-systems-a-comparison-of-llm-based-retriever-evaluation-strategies
arXiv id
2604.18234
Freshness
Generated at
2026-04-21T20:33:47.995Z
Evidence freshness
stale
Last verification
2026-04-21T20:33:47.995Z
Sources
4
References
0
Coverage
83%
Hash state
Lineage hash
ed61f8ca8c04c11ef6d6e3bb14f2ec53dcb361820ae79749bdb46c1c0028dbf3
Canonical opportunity-kernel lineage hash.
Signature state
External signature
unsigned_external
No founder, registry, pilot, or production-adoption signature is attached to this receipt.
Verification
not_verified
Verification is blocked until an external signature is provided.
Blockers
- Missing: references
Some score or evidence fields are outside the preferred freshness window.
references
Truth Boundary
External gate remains unresolved for live deployment claims.
Buildability surfaces only report computed viability and proof receipts. They do not claim live production usage, pilot outcomes, founder sign-off, public Brier calibration, judge divergence, or external adoption unless explicitly sourced.