Jeonghyun Park, Ingeol Baek, Seunghyun Yoon, Haeun Jang, Aparna Garimella, Akriti Jain, Nedim Lipka, Hwanhee Lee
Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.
Real-world multi-hop QA is naturally linked with ambiguity, where a single query can trigger multiple reasoning paths that require independent resolution. Since ambiguity can occur at any stage, models must navigate layered uncertainty throughout the entire reasoning chain. Despite its prevalence in real-world user queries, previous benchmarks have primarily focused on single-hop ambiguity, leaving the complex intera ...
ction between multi-step inference and layered ambiguity underexplored. In this paper, we introduce \textbf{MARCH}, a benchmark for their intersection, with 2,209 multi-hop ambiguous questions curated via multi-LLM verification and validated by human annotation with strong agreement. Our experiments reveal that even state-of-the-art models struggle with MARCH, confirming that combining ambiguity resolution with multi-step reasoning is a significant challenge. To address this, we propose \textbf{CLARION}, a two-stage agentic framework that explicitly decouples ambiguity planning from evidence-driven reasoning, significantly outperforms existing approaches, and paves the way for robust reasoning systems.
Audit each benchmark finding before selecting an implementation path. Evidence refs map to the disclosure section below.
| Task | Dataset | Metric | Value | Source | Evidence refs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Retrieval | Qwen3-235b | Disambig-F1) | 21.19 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
| Retrieval | CoT | STR-EM | 22.32 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
| Agentic tool use | Qwen3-235b | STR-EM | 35.00 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
| Agentic tool use | Constraint | STR-EM | 33.91 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
| Agentic tool use | Semantic | STR-EM | 24.86 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
Real-world multi-hop QA is naturally linked with ambiguity, where a single query can trigger multiple reasoning paths that require independent resolution.
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
Hardware Notes
Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 95/100, grounding 68/100, status medium.
Compare maintenance quality, reproducibility coverage, and evidence confidence before choosing a reproduction baseline.
Matched via arXiv identifier search · Strong overlap with paper title keywords
Risk flags
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
Hardware requirements
No verified implementation available
No additional official repositories detected.
[ACL 2026] Official Code Repository for the paper "MARCH: Evaluating the Intersection of Ambiguity Interpretation and Multi-hop Inference"
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet.
Continue with targeted Hugging Face searches derived from the paper title and method context:
Tip: start with models, then check datasets/spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Direct artifact matches are currently sparse. Use targeted Hugging Face searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Tasks
Agentic tool use
Methods
Transformer, Agentic systems
Domains
Large Language Models, AI Agents
Evaluation & Human Feedback Data
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXExplore Similar Papers
Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.
Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.