Context selection can reduce input length during long-input inference but can remove evidence required to answer a query. We introduce CoRA-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating evidence preservation under shared token budgets. We compare head and tail truncation, BM25, dense retrieval, dense retrieval with reranking, LLMLingua-2, and Provence across BABILong, LOONG Financial Spotlight, a custom NoLiMa diagnostic, and LongMemEval. Evidence-preservation results reveal task-dependent tradeoffs: BM25 achieves 0.921 supporting-fact recall on BABILong at 128K, dense retrieval and dense reranking each achieve 0.908 needle recall on NoLiMa at 64K, and dense retrieval achieves 0.993 answer-bearing-turn recall on LongMemEval at 64K. Evidence, token retention, and complementary reader evaluations use the same selected contexts. Reader evaluations use dataset-native answer metrics and three runs on the same questions, with paired bootstrap confidence intervals. At a 32K budget, BM25 achieves 46.20% BABILong answer accuracy and dense retrieval achieves 71.13% LongMemEval accuracy. The results show that method rankings vary across evidence types and between evidence recall and downstream accuracy.

翻译：暂无翻译