LLM Question Answering With Retrieval and Citation Verification

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Large language models like GPT-4 can hallucinate and generate incorrect information, which is detrimental in educational contexts, impairing learning.

Innovation Solution

Implementing guardrails and safeguards in generative models to minimize hallucinations, using internal databases for answers and explanations, and leveraging generative models like LLMs for additional coverage, with techniques such as retrieval-augmented generation and citation generation to enhance accuracy.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If large language models are used for generating answers and explanations, then the coverage and capability of the learning platform are enhanced, but the hallucination rate and accuracy of information increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecapability coverageVSAvoidinformation accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces an intermediary verification system that acts as a mediator between the LLM and the final output. This system includes multiple layers: retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) that fetches ground truth from internal databases, citation generation that attributes sources, and hallucination detection mechanisms that verify LLM outputs against reliable sources before presentation to users.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements feedback loops where the system continuously monitors LLM performance, tracks hallucination patterns, and uses this information to refine verification processes. The citation generation component provides feedback by indicating which statements are supported by evidence, allowing the system to learn from accuracy metrics and improve future answer generation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Reliability

If guardrails and safeguards are implemented to minimize hallucinations, then the information accuracy improves, but the system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinformation accuracyVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the answer generation process into distinct modular components: LLM generation, retrieval-augmented verification, citation generation, and hallucination detection. Each module handles a specific aspect of the task, making the overall complex system manageable through clear separation of concerns and independent optimization of each component.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system incorporates self-verification capabilities where the LLM-generated answers automatically undergo internal validation through citation generation and cross-checking against internal databases. The system serves itself by detecting and correcting potential hallucinations without requiring external manual verification, reducing the operational burden despite increased structural complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

3Reliability

If internal databases are used for answers and explanations, then the accuracy and reliability of information improve, but the coverage and versatility of the platform are limited

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinformation reliabilityVSAvoidplatform coverage
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The patent merges two information sources: the reliable but limited internal database and the versatile but potentially inaccurate LLM. The system combines retrieval-augmented generation (fetching from internal databases) with LLM-generated content, creating a hybrid approach that leverages the strengths of both sources to achieve both accuracy and coverage.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent creates a composite answer generation system that combines multiple material (information) types: verified facts from internal databases, contextual understanding from LLMs, and attribution through citations. This composite approach produces answers that are both reliable (grounded in verified information) and versatile (enhanced by LLM capabilities).

Inventive Principle:
Principle #40Composite materials

Data Source

PatentUS12393620B1Large language model-based question answering system
Publication Date: 2025.08.19 LEARNEO INC
  • US12393620B1 patent drawing
  • US12393620B1 patent drawing
  • US12393620B1 patent drawing

AI summary

Generative question answering and explanation includes receiving a question. It further includes identifying a type of the question. It further includes constructing a prompt to provide to a generative model based on the identified type of the question. It further includes providing output based on a generative response provided by the generative model. The output further comprises a citation. The citation is based at least in part on one or more contextual passages.