CoRA-Bench: Evaluating Evidence Preservation by Context Selectors Under Token Budgets
arXiv:2611.10238v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Context selection can reduce input length during long-input inference but can remove evidence required to answer a query. We introduce CoRA-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating evidence preservation under shared token budgets. We compare head and tail truncation, BM25, dense retrieval, dense retrieval with reranking, LLMLingua-2, and Provence across BABILong, LOONG Financial Spotlight, a custom NoLiMa diagnostic, and LongMemEval. Evidence-preservation
Read original source
Source record
Research analysis
Research claim
Paper identifier: 2611.10238. Source account: arXiv:2611.10238v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Context selection can reduce input length during long-input inference but can remove evidence required to answer a query. We introduce CoRA-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating evidence preservation under shared token budgets. We compare head and tail truncation, BM25, dense retrieval, dense retrieval with reranking, LLMLingua-2, and Provence across BABILong, LOONG Financial Spotlight, a custom NoLiMa diagnostic, and LongMemEval. Evidence-preservation
Evaluation record
Recent records to compare: “SituRecBench: Evaluating Frontier Models as Situated Recommendation Assistants in 3D Environments” (arXiv, Nov 10, 2026); “Is Recursive Self-Improvement Safe?” (arXiv, Nov 10, 2026). Shared themes are navigation hints; they have not been verified as the same need or independent corroboration.
What the result supports
Interpret results only for the reported model version, task, data and inference budget. Community votes, downloads or a benchmark position do not establish reliability in a different workflow.
Validity gaps
Check sample selection, baseline configuration, uncertainty, contamination risk, negative results and access to code or weights. No reproduction by WeWorkBuddy is recorded here.
Verification plan
Read the paper or model card and its evaluation appendix. Reproduce one bounded result against the stated baseline, then test a representative user task and record where the conclusion fails.