TechRAG: Evidence-Gated Multimodal Agentic RAG for Technical Literature Reasoning
Kanwar Bharat Singh · arXiv (Cornell University) · 2026
AI-generated evidence extraction, verified across multiple analytical personas. Not a substitute for the peer-reviewed original.
This is an AI analysis. Read the peer-reviewed original at the publisher: https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2606.01613
Methodology & findings
Study design
Artifact design and implementation.
Primary method
Design science (system design and implementation of a retrieval-augmented generation framework with multiple integrated subsystems)
Main result
The framework presents a practical, evidence-gated multimodal agentic RAG architecture with key contributions including "a scalable multimodal retrieval architecture combining text, graph, and visual evidence over 40,000 document pages; (ii) an interpretable evidence sufficiency and retry mechanism; (iii) a multi-agent generation pipeline with evidence mapping and critic-driven revision; (iv) a domain knowledge graph with LLM-based entity extraction, OpenAlex author validation, and intra-corpus citation resolution; and (v) a route-dependent external search architecture for targeted literature expansion."
Research paradigm
Design science / Systems engineering
Author conclusions
The authors present "a practical, evidence-gated, multimodal agentic RAG architecture for technical reasoning over specialized research corpora" as their instantiation on a domain-specific corpus of "several thousand papers in intelligent tires, vehicle dynamics, vehicle control, sensing, estimation, and machine learning."
Explore related topics
Related papers
- Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviewsMourad Ouzzani · 2016 · 24,664 citations
- Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviewsMicah D.J. Peters · 2015 · 7,472 citations
- Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta‐analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resourcesMichael Gusenbauer · 2019 · 2,116 citations
- Hallucination Rates and Reference Accuracy of ChatGPT and Bard for Systematic Reviews: Comparative AnalysisMikaël Chelli · 2024 · 295 citations
- Artificial intelligence and the conduct of literature reviewsGerit Wagner · 2021 · 275 citations
- Artificial intelligence for literature reviews: opportunities and challengesF. J. Bolaños · 2024 · 188 citations