# Fine-Tuning vs. RAG for Multi-Hop Question Answering with Novel Knowledge

Source: [Fine-Tuning vs. RAG for Multi-Hop Question Answering with Novel Knowledge](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/6965d1ae6343fa78c8323896>)

Collection index: [llms.txt](<https://www.sota2.com/research/llms.txt>)

Data updated: 2026-01-14T05:00:12.520Z

Authors: Zhuoyi Yang, Yurun Song, Iftekhar Ahmed, Ian Harris

Published: 2026-01-11T20:24:25.000Z

## Abstract

Multi-hop question answering is widely used to evaluate the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs), as it requires integrating multiple pieces of supporting knowledge to arrive at a correct answer. While prior work has explored different mechanisms for providing knowledge to LLMs, such as finetuning and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), their relative effectiveness for multi-hop question answering remains insufficiently understood, particularly when the required knowledge is temporally novel.   In this paper, we systematically compare parametric and non-parametric knowledge injection methods for open-domain multi-hop question answering. We evaluate unsupervised fine-tuning (continual pretraining), supervised fine-tuning, and retrieval-augmented generation across three 7B-parameter open-source LLMs. Experiments are conducted on two benchmarks: QASC, a standard multi-hop science question answering dataset, and a newly constructed dataset of over 10,000 multi-hop questions derived from Wikipedia events in 2024, designed to test knowledge beyond the models' pretraining cutoff.   Our results show that unsupervised fine-tuning provides only limited gains over base models, suggesting that continual pretraining alone is insufficient for improving multi-hop reasoning accuracy. In contrast, retrieval-augmented generation yields substantial and consistent improvements, particularly when answering questions that rely on temporally novel information. Supervised fine-tuning achieves the highest overall accuracy across models and datasets. These findings highlight fundamental differences in how knowledge injection mechanisms support multi-hop question answering and underscore the importance of retrieval-based methods when external or compositional knowledge is required.

## Recorded benchmark results

A research result applies to its stated dataset, split, metric and evaluation configuration. Compare like-for-like settings, preserve the metric's unit and direction, and distinguish paper-reported results from independent reproduction. The best result recorded here is not a claim of exhaustive, current global coverage.

## Original sources and implementation

[Original paper](<https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.07054>)

[PDF](<https://arxiv.org/pdf/2601.07054.pdf>)
