arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2603.16138

Answer Bubbles: Information Exposure in AI-Mediated Search

Michelle Huang·Agam Goyal·Koustuv Saha·Eshwar Chandrasekharan
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Generative search systems are increasingly replacing link-based retrieval with AI-generated summaries, yet little is known about how these systems differ in sources, language, and fidelity to cited material. We examine responses to 11,000 real search queries across five systems---vanilla GPT, Search GPT, Perplexity Search with Grok, Google AI Overviews, and traditional Google Search---at three levels: source diversity, linguistic characterization of the generated summary, and source-summary fidelity. We find that generative search systems exhibit significant \textit{source-selection} biases in their citations, favoring certain sources over others. Incorporating search also selectively attenuates epistemic markers, reducing hedging by up to 60\% while preserving confidence language in the AI-generated summaries. At the same time, AI summaries further compound the citation biases: Wikipedia and longer sources are disproportionately overrepresented, whereas cited social media content and negatively framed sources are substantially underrepresented. Our findings highlight the potential for \textit{answer bubbles}, in which identical queries yield structurally different information realities across systems, with implications for user trust, source visibility, and the transparency of AI-mediated information access.

Explore related subjects

cs.IRcs.CL

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Michelle Huang, Agam Goyal, Koustuv Saha, Eshwar Chandrasekharan. 2026-08-28. Answer Bubbles: Information Exposure in AI-Mediated Search. https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.16138

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

cs.CL subjectcs.IR subject

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

SABER-Math: Automated Benchmark for Information Retrieval Evaluation in Mathematics

As agentic AI systems tackle more complex mathematical tasks, they increasingly rely on information retrieval (IR) to search problem databases, theorem libraries, and educational resources. However, choosing the right retriever remains difficult, as it is infeasible to directly isolate its effect on downstream performance. On the other hand, existing retrieval-specific benchmarks often fail to capture fine-grained mathematical relevance, penalizing relevant documents. We address this gap by introducing SABER-Math, the first fully automated benchmark for evaluating mathematical IR without expert annotation. Starting from 283K high-school-level math problems with solutions, SABER-Math builds challenging reranking tasks in three steps: (i) first, LLMs extract concise solution summaries and mathematical topics for each problem; (ii) then, per-query relevant documents are discovered using ontology topic-based and lexical solutions-summary-based similarities, and (iii) finally, a Swiss-style LLM preference tournament produces fine-grained relevance ratings for the documents. We evaluate lexical retrievers, specialized mathematical retrieval systems, and recent embedding models. We find that while modern embedding models substantially outperform classical and math-specific baselines, even the strongest systems struggle in symbol-heavy domains like Algebra and Calculus. Importantly, we show that general-purpose IR benchmarks such as MTEB do not reliably predict mathematical performance, especially for recent embedding models, highlighting the need for math-specific retrieval benchmarks.

cs.IR↗
arXiv2026

Beyond Polarization: The Generative Constraint of Chain-of-Thought in Pointwise Reranking

In pointwise document reranking, Chain-of-Thought models typically underperform direct scoring models. While existing diagnostics attribute this to inferior classification, score polarization, or calibration breakdown, whether targeted training can bridge this gap remains unclear. Our empirical study first confirms that this gap is stable across scales up to 32B parameters, ruling out model and data capacity confounders. We then apply stress tests utilizing reinforcement learning, fine-grained supervision, and architectural decoupling to explicitly repair these deviations. Although these interventions improve classification accuracy and absolute scores, the relative ranking gap persists. These findings suggest that, within the pointwise scoring paradigm, routing continuous relevance semantics through discrete text constrains ranking signal resolution, revealing a bottleneck that is stable and difficult to overcome under current standard methods, rather than an easily resolvable training bias.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Loci Similes: A Benchmark for Extracting Intertextualities in Latin Literature

Tracing connections between historical texts is an important part of intertextual research, enabling scholars to reconstruct the virtual library of a writer and identify the sources influencing their creative process. These intertextual links manifest in diverse forms, ranging from direct verbatim quotations to subtle allusions and paraphrases disguised by morphological variation. Language models offer a promising path forward due to their capability of capturing semantic similarity beyond lexical overlap. However, the development of new methods for this task is held back by the scarcity of standardized benchmarks and easy-to-use datasets. We address this gap by introducing Loci Similes, a benchmark for Latin intertextuality detection comprising a curated dataset of ~176k text segments and 1,490 expert-verified parallels, including 945 labeled references from an existing dataset. Using this data, we establish baselines for retrieval and classification of intertextualities with both lexical methods and pretrained encoder language models.

cs.IR↗