A new arXiv paper highlights a subtle risk in generative search: an answer may cite a passage that supports its claims, while silently dropping a source relationship that would alter how those claims should be interpreted. The authors argue that such omissions are not caught by simple citation checks, because the cited text itself is accurate.
To address this, they specify a claim-gated audit of the query-source-answer tuple. This approach appears to treat each claim in the answer as a gate that must be checked against the source relationships present in the retrieved passages, rather than only verifying that a citation exists.
The abstract is cut off mid-sentence at the point of describing when an omission is resolved, so the full resolution criterion is not available from this source. As presented, the work focuses on identifying cases where a missing relationship changes the meaning of an answer, leaving the complete audit logic for the full paper.