How often do Answers Change? Estimating Recency Requirements in Question Answering
arXiv:2603.16544v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) often rely on outdated knowledge when answering time-sensitive questions, leading to confident yet incorrect responses. Without explicit signals indicating whether up-to-date information is required, models struggle to decide when to retrieve external evidence, how to reason about stale facts, and how to rank answers by their validity. Existing benchmarks either periodically refresh answers or rely on fixed templates, but they do not reflect on how frequently answers change or whether a question inherently requires up-to-date information. To address this gap, we introduce a recency-stationarity taxonomy that categorizes questions by how often their answers change and whether this change frequency is time-invariant or context-dependent. Building on this taxonomy, we present RecencyQA, a dataset of 4,031 open-domain questions annotated with recency and stationarity labels. Through human evaluation and empirical
arXiv:2603.16544v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) often rely on outdated knowledge when answering time-sensitive questions, leading to confident yet incorrect responses. Without explicit signals indicating whether up-to-date information is required, models struggle to decide when to retrieve external evidence, how to reason about stale facts, and how to rank answers by their validity. Existing benchmarks either periodically refresh answers or rely on fixed templates, but they do not reflect on how frequently answers change or whether a question inherently requires up-to-date information. To address this gap, we introduce a recency-stationarity taxonomy that categorizes questions by how often their answers change and whether this change frequency is time-invariant or context-dependent. Building on this taxonomy, we present RecencyQA, a dataset of 4,031 open-domain questions annotated with recency and stationarity labels. Through human evaluation and empirical analysis, we show that non-stationary questions, i.e., those where context changes the recency requirement, are significantly more challenging for LLMs, with difficulty increasing as update frequency rises. By explicitly modeling recency and context dependence, RecencyQA enables fine-grained benchmarking and analysis of temporal reasoning beyond binary notions of freshness, and provides a foundation for developing recency-aware and context-sensitive question answering systems.
Executive Summary
The article introduces a recency-stationarity taxonomy to categorize questions based on how often their answers change and whether this change frequency is time-invariant or context-dependent. The authors present RecencyQA, a dataset of 4,031 open-domain questions annotated with recency and stationarity labels, to address the gap in existing benchmarks. The study reveals that non-stationary questions are significantly more challenging for large language models, with difficulty increasing as update frequency rises. The RecencyQA dataset enables fine-grained benchmarking and analysis of temporal reasoning, providing a foundation for developing recency-aware and context-sensitive question answering systems.
Key Points
- ▸ Introduction of recency-stationarity taxonomy to categorize questions
- ▸ Presentation of RecencyQA dataset with 4,031 open-domain questions
- ▸ Non-stationary questions are more challenging for large language models
Merits
Comprehensive Taxonomy
The recency-stationarity taxonomy provides a thorough framework for understanding how often answers change and whether this change frequency is time-invariant or context-dependent.
Demerits
Limited Dataset Size
The RecencyQA dataset, although significant, may not be exhaustive, and its size may limit its generalizability to all question types and domains.
Expert Commentary
The article contributes significantly to the field of natural language processing by highlighting the importance of recency awareness and temporal reasoning in question answering systems. The introduction of the recency-stationarity taxonomy and the RecencyQA dataset provides a valuable framework for analyzing and improving the performance of large language models. However, further research is needed to explore the applicability of this framework to diverse domains and question types. The study's findings have important implications for the development of more accurate and reliable AI systems, and its methodology can inform future research in this area.
Recommendations
- ✓ Future studies should explore the application of the recency-stationarity taxonomy to various domains and question types
- ✓ Developing more comprehensive datasets that capture a broader range of questions and contexts