Vuong, Hoang Tran, Pham, Ngoc Quan, Bui, Hung, Porikli, Fatih, Nguyen, Dat Quoc · Nov 5, 2026
arXiv: CORE combines coarse-to-fine search with context management for deep research
Markdown · JSON · Original source
In an abstract on , the authors introduce CORE, a training-free harness for deep research agents that repeatedly search for evidence to answer complex questions. They frame its design around a trade-off: long passages can help search match meaning reliably, but every returned observation remains in the agent’s context for the rest of its trajectory. CORE first retrieves passages with a dense retriever, then uses token-level similarities from a late-interaction reranker to return a relevant snippet from each passage. Its context management can expand context around retrieved sources and suppress repeated snippets. In controlled closed-search comparisons with the Tongyi DeepResearch and OpenResearcher harnesses, the authors report state-of-the-art answer accuracy and evidence recall across three agent models and three , on corpora containing up to 553M documents. The result concerns those comparison settings; the abstract does not establish how CORE performs in other research conditions.
Headline and summary by Escape Meridian, prepared by Luna from the attributed source. A source check is not independent confirmation of the source’s claims.
Original source
cs.AI · Article
Source details
Original source date: Nov 5, 2026 (2026-11-05).
Date basis: Date basis not provided.
Added to Escape Meridian: 2026-11-08T21:53:02.963Z. First observed: 2026-11-06T05:10:50.902Z. Retrieved: 2026-11-08T21:48:58.459Z.
Referenced by
Recorded citations and public file attachments. A reference alone does not establish agreement or influence.
No public references recorded here yet.
Limits
The reported comparison is explicitly described as controlled closed-search; the abstract does not establish performance in other research conditions. The evidence supplied is the paper’s abstract and does not provide the experimental details behind its reported comparisons.
Open question
How would CORE’s reported results change outside the controlled closed-search comparisons described by the authors?
Source-stated
The authors introduce CORE as a training-free harness combining coarse-to-fine search and context management for deep research agents.
We introduce CORE, a training-free harness that combines coarse-to-fine search with context management.
Source-stated
The authors describe a trade-off between searching with longer passages and limiting the evidence returned to an agent’s context.
Search works best over long passages, which give enough context for reliable semantic matching. But the returned evidence should be short, because every observation stays in the agent's context for the rest of the trajectory.
Source-stated
CORE retrieves passages with a dense retriever and uses token-level similarities from a late-interaction reranker to select a relevant snippet from each passage.
CORE retrieves passages with a dense retriever. It then reuses the token-level similarities from a late-interaction reranker to return only the most relevant snippet from each passage.
Source-stated
CORE’s context management expands context around retrieved sources and suppresses repeated snippets.
Context management lets the agent expand the context around sources it has already retrieved and suppresses repeated snippets.
Source-stated
In controlled closed-search comparisons, the authors report state-of-the-art answer accuracy and evidence recall across three agent models and three benchmarks, on corpora containing up to 553M documents.
In controlled closed-search comparisons with the Tongyi DeepResearch and OpenResearcher harnesses, CORE achieves state-of-the-art answer accuracy and evidence recall across three agent models and three benchmarks (BrowseComp-Plus, BrowseComp-Wikipedia and BrowseComp-Plus-CM), on corpora containing
Source and contributor context
Vuong, Hoang Tran, Pham, Ngoc Quan, Bui, Hung, Porikli, Fatih, Nguyen, Dat Quoc · Article author
These are credits stated by the source; they do not establish a profile match or authorship of every passage.
Source media
No suitable media was found by the supported page extraction.
Terms and references
Reference context selected by Escape Meridian; separate from source evidence. Entity mentions do not establish authorship, involvement or endorsement.
Benchmark
A defined set of tests used to compare systems. Results depend on the tasks and measures selected.
arXiv
arXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Editorial provenance
Version 1. Publication ID: 02624475-6415-45df-80a2-8ca995e8a71c.
Prepared by gpt-6-luna; grounding review by gpt-6-luna.
Source check: uncertain by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 on 2026-11-08T21:53:02.963Z. This checks fidelity to the source, not whether its claims are independently true.
Editorial selection: accept; reasons: material_development.
Observation: ba3870ced0c0b2e95ce16c3b795ba08c84b62028c70fb3c77acc7516d8591b19. Source text hash: e67245b6ca74efd4f985e7fe05e8b46e2c83beeafc68d48d076b2d120c6d73da.
Revision and source-check history
Version 1 · 2026-11-08T21:53:02.963Z
arXiv: CORE combines coarse-to-fine search with context management for deep research
In an abstract on , the authors introduce CORE, a training-free harness for deep research agents that repeatedly search for evidence to answer complex questions. They frame its design around a trade-off: long passages can help search match meaning reliably, but every returned observation remains in the agent’s context for the rest of its trajectory. CORE first retrieves passages with a dense retriever, then uses token-level similarities from a late-interaction reranker to return a relevant snippet from each passage. Its context management can expand context around retrieved sources and suppress repeated snippets. In controlled closed-search comparisons with the Tongyi DeepResearch and OpenResearcher harnesses, the authors report state-of-the-art answer accuracy and evidence recall across three agent models and three , on corpora containing up to 553M documents. The result concerns those comparison settings; the abstract does not establish how CORE performs in other research conditions.
Original source
cs.AI · Article
Source details
Original source date: Nov 5, 2026 (2026-11-05).
Date basis: Date basis not provided.
Added to Escape Meridian: 2026-11-08T21:53:02.963Z. First observed: 2026-11-06T05:10:50.902Z. Retrieved: 2026-11-08T21:48:58.459Z.
Limits
The reported comparison is explicitly described as controlled closed-search; the abstract does not establish performance in other research conditions. The evidence supplied is the paper’s abstract and does not provide the experimental details behind its reported comparisons.
Open question
How would CORE’s reported results change outside the controlled closed-search comparisons described by the authors?
Source-stated
The authors introduce CORE as a training-free harness combining coarse-to-fine search and context management for deep research agents.
We introduce CORE, a training-free harness that combines coarse-to-fine search with context management.
Source-stated
The authors describe a trade-off between searching with longer passages and limiting the evidence returned to an agent’s context.
Search works best over long passages, which give enough context for reliable semantic matching. But the returned evidence should be short, because every observation stays in the agent's context for the rest of the trajectory.
Source-stated
CORE retrieves passages with a dense retriever and uses token-level similarities from a late-interaction reranker to select a relevant snippet from each passage.
CORE retrieves passages with a dense retriever. It then reuses the token-level similarities from a late-interaction reranker to return only the most relevant snippet from each passage.
Source-stated
CORE’s context management expands context around retrieved sources and suppresses repeated snippets.
Context management lets the agent expand the context around sources it has already retrieved and suppresses repeated snippets.
Source-stated
In controlled closed-search comparisons, the authors report state-of-the-art answer accuracy and evidence recall across three agent models and three benchmarks, on corpora containing up to 553M documents.
In controlled closed-search comparisons with the Tongyi DeepResearch and OpenResearcher harnesses, CORE achieves state-of-the-art answer accuracy and evidence recall across three agent models and three benchmarks (BrowseComp-Plus, BrowseComp-Wikipedia and BrowseComp-Plus-CM), on corpora containing
Source and contributor context
Vuong, Hoang Tran, Pham, Ngoc Quan, Bui, Hung, Porikli, Fatih, Nguyen, Dat Quoc · Article author
These are credits stated by the source; they do not establish a profile match or authorship of every passage.
Source media
No suitable media was found by the supported page extraction.
Terms and references
Reference context selected by Escape Meridian; separate from source evidence. Entity mentions do not establish authorship, involvement or endorsement.
Benchmark
A defined set of tests used to compare systems. Results depend on the tasks and measures selected.
arXiv
arXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Editorial provenance
Version 1. Publication ID: 02624475-6415-45df-80a2-8ca995e8a71c.
Prepared by gpt-6-luna; grounding review by gpt-6-luna.
Source check: uncertain by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 on 2026-11-08T21:53:02.963Z. This checks fidelity to the source, not whether its claims are independently true.
Editorial selection: accept; reasons: material_development.
Observation: ba3870ced0c0b2e95ce16c3b795ba08c84b62028c70fb3c77acc7516d8591b19. Source text hash: e67245b6ca74efd4f985e7fe05e8b46e2c83beeafc68d48d076b2d120c6d73da.
uncertain · 2026-11-08T21:53:02.963Z · anthropic/claude-opus-5.5
Publication: 02624475-6415-45df-80a2-8ca995e8a71c
attribution — pass: The draft attributes CORE, its design rationale and its results to the paper's authors in an arXiv abstract. Performance claims are framed as reported by the authors, not as established fact.
Authors:Hoang Tran Vuong, Ngoc Quan Pham, Hung Bui, Fatih Porikli, Dat Quoc Nguyen
summary — uncertain: The draft faithfully tracks the abstract, but its central term, harness, is never explained. The abstract defines it as the layer that runs an agent's tool calls and returns evidence to its context. Without that, a general reader cannot see what CORE replaces or why snippet length matters. Smallest repair: add the source's own definition and keep the terms with tooltips. Dense retriever, late-interaction reranker and closed-search also need tooltips. Minor: 'a relevant snippet' softens the source's 'only the most relevant snippet'.
They rely on a harness that runs their tool calls and returns evidence to their context.
date — pass: The displayed original publication date of 2026-11-05 matches the v1 submission date on arXiv. The draft does not confuse it with the 2026-11-06 feed date.
[Submitted on 5 Nov 2026]
support — pass: Every claim matches the abstract verbatim in substance. The limitations and question stay within the source's stated controlled closed-search scope, and the draft adds no invented benefits or costs.
In controlled closed-search comparisons with the Tongyi DeepResearch and OpenResearcher harnesses, CORE achieves state-of-the-art answer accuracy and evidence recall across three agent models and three benchmarks
media — pass: The selected media is the verified, direct arXiv abstract page for this paper, which is the most direct way to reach the source.
Challenge or correct this reading
Send a correction or an opposing source with this reading’s URL. Disagreement and uncertainty can remain unresolved.
arXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Explore arXivA defined set of tests used to compare systems. Results depend on the tasks and measures selected.
Definition referencearXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Explore arXivarXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Explore arXivA defined set of tests used to compare systems. Results depend on the tasks and measures selected.
Definition referencearXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Explore arXiv