The advent of complex, interconnected long-horizon LLM systems has made it incredibly tricky to identify where and when these systems break down. Evaluation capabilities that currently exist today are limited in that they often focus on simple metrics, end-to-end outcomes, and are dependent on the perspectives of humans. In order to match the increasing complexity of these many component systems, evaluation frameworks must also be able to reason, probe, iterate, and understand the nuanced logic passing through these systems. In this paper, we present RAFFLES, an offline evaluation architecture that incorporates iterative reasoning. Specifically, RAFFLES operates as an iterative, multi-component pipeline, using a central Judge to systematically identify faults and a set of specialized Evaluators to assess the quality of the candidate faults as well as rationales of the Judge. We evaluated RAFFLES with several benchmarks - the Who&When dataset to identify step-level faults in multi-agent systems and the ReasonEval datasets to diagnose step-level mathematical reasoning errors. RAFFLES outperforms strong baselines, achieving an accuracy of over 20% and 50% on the Who&When Hand-Crafted and Algorithmically-Generated datasets, and over 80% on the ReasonEval datasets. These results demonstrate a key step towards introducing automated fault detection for autonomous systems over labor-intensive manual review.

Summarization of multi-party dialogues is a critical capability in industry, enhancing knowledge transfer and operational effectiveness across many domains. However, automatically generating high-quality summaries is challenging, as the ideal summary must satisfy a set of complex, multi-faceted requirements. While summarization has received immense attention in research, prior work has primarily utilized static datasets and benchmarks, a condition rare in practical scenarios where requirements inevitably evolve. In this work, we present an industry case study on developing an agentic system to summarize multi-party interactions. We share practical insights spanning the full development lifecycle to guide practitioners in building reliable, adaptable summarization systems, as well as to inform future research, covering: 1) robust methods for evaluation despite evolving requirements and task subjectivity, 2) component-wise optimization enabled by the task decomposition inherent in an agentic architecture, 3) the impact of upstream data bottlenecks, and 4) the realities of vendor lock-in due to the poor transferability of LLM prompts.

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is a common technique for grounding language model outputs in domain-specific information. However, RAG is often challenged by reasoning-intensive question-answering (QA), since common retrieval methods like cosine similarity maximize relevance at the cost of introducing redundant content, which can reduce information recall. To address this, we introduce Diversity-Focused Retrieval-Augmented Generation (DF-RAG) that systematically incorporates diversity into the retrieval step to improve performance on complex, reasoning-intensive QA benchmarks. DF-RAG builds upon the Maximal Marginal Relevance framework to select information chunks that are both relevant to the query and maximally dissimilar from each other. A key innovation of DF-RAG is its ability to optimize the level of diversity for each query dynamically at test time without requiring any additional fine-tuning or prior information. We show that DF-RAG improves F1 performance on reasoning-intensive QA benchmarks by 4–10% over vanilla RAG using cosine similarity and also outperforms other established baselines. Furthermore, we estimate an Oracle ceiling of up to 18% absolute F1 gains over vanilla RAG, of which DF-RAG captures up to 91.3%.