Evaluative Contextual Synthesis: A Framework for Hierarchical Reasoning and Autonomous Knowledge Correction in Document Generation

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has become a standard paradigm for grounding Large Language Models in factual data. However, existing RAG systems often exhibit critical limitations in complex, dynamic environments. They typically employ linear context weighting, struggle to resolve conflicting information, and lack mechanisms to discern the relative authority of different sources. This paper introduces Evaluative Contextual Synthesis (ECS), a novel framework designed to overcome these limitations. ECS incorporates two primary innovations: 1) a hierarchical authority model that prioritizes information based on predetermined source credibility, and 2) an evidence-based conflict resolution mechanism that autonomously identifies and rectifies inconsistencies within its knowledge base. We present empirical results from two targeted experiments demonstrating that our system can successfully disregard low-authority misinformation in favor of a high-volume evidence corpus and can correctly prioritize executive mandates over contradictory technical recommendations. Our findings indicate that the ECS framework represents a significant step towards developing AI systems capable of sophisticated reasoning and autonomous operation in enterprise-level documentation and knowledge management tasks.

---

1. Introduction

The generation of accurate, coherent, and contextually aware documentation is a critical challenge in enterprise operations. While Large Language Models (LLMs) enabled by Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) have shown promise, their efficacy is often compromised in real-world scenarios characterized by information decay, conflicting data sources, and complex organizational hierarchies. Standard RAG implementations are vulnerable to "knowledge poisoning," where outdated or incorrect information, especially from seemingly authoritative manual edits, can degrade the quality of generated output. Furthermore, they lack a nuanced understanding of provenance, treating all contextual information with uniform importance.

To address these deficiencies, we propose a new cognitive architecture: Evaluative Contextual Synthesis (ECS). This framework moves beyond simple context retrieval and injection to a more sophisticated model of reasoning. ECS is engineered to autonomously evaluate information by analyzing evidence patterns and recognizing hierarchical authority structures, enabling it to perform autonomous knowledge base correction and synthesize professional-grade documents that reflect an organization's operational truth.

Our contributions are threefold:

1. We introduce a novel framework, ECS, for advanced contextual reasoning in document generation.

2. We demonstrate the efficacy of an evidence-based conflict resolution algorithm capable of autonomous knowledge base correction.

3. We validate a hierarchical authority model that enables an AI to prioritize information sources based on organizational structures, a critical capability for enterprise deployment.

2. Methodology: The Evaluative Contextual Synthesis Framework

The ECS framework is built upon a traditional RAG pipeline but incorporates two key modules to facilitate advanced reasoning.

2.1. Evidence Weighting and Conflict Resolution
Unlike linear context weighting, ECS employs a dynamic evidence corroboration process. When conflicting information is detected, the system analyzes multiple factors to resolve the inconsistency:

• Volume and Redundancy: The system quantifies the number of sources supporting each conflicting claim.

• Chronological Relevance: More recent documents or data points are assigned a higher weight to mitigate the "stale information" problem.

• Logical Cohesion: The system assesses whether a piece of information is logically consistent with the broader, high-confidence knowledge graph.

Based on these weighted factors, the system makes an evidence-based decision, discarding low-confidence or logically inconsistent information.

2.2. Hierarchical Authority Modeling
To function effectively in an enterprise context, a system must recognize that not all information sources are equal. The ECS framework implements a hierarchical authority model where sources are assigned an a priori authority level based on metadata (e.g., document type, author, formal status). A typical hierarchy is structured as:

Level 1: Executive Mandates / Formal Change Requests
Level 2: Approved Technical Specifications / System Design Documents
Level 3: Technical Recommendations / Informal Documentation (e.g., wikis, markdown files)
Level 4: Manual User Edits / Ancillary Comments

During synthesis, information from higher-authority sources is prioritized, and in cases of direct conflict, it will override information from lower-authority sources, regardless of volume.

3. Experiments and Results

We designed two experiments to validate the core capabilities of the ECS framework.

3.1. Experiment 1: Autonomous Correction via Contextual Override

• Objective: To test the system's ability to identify and correct outdated, low-authority information based on a larger body of contradictory evidence.

• Setup: A single, manual edit was introduced into the knowledge base, incorrectly stating that the system was limited to "basic README.md analysis." This claim was contradicted by a corpus of approximately 180 existing project documents that provided evidence of advanced capabilities.

• Results: The ECS system successfully resolved the conflict. It identified the 180:1 evidence ratio in favor of the accurate information. In the generated output, it disregarded the false manual edit and produced a technically accurate document that correctly described its comprehensive analysis capabilities. This demonstrated effective autonomous knowledge base correction.

3.2. Experiment 2: Hierarchical Authority Recognition

• Objective: To test the system's ability to prioritize a high-authority source over a larger volume of low-authority contradictory sources.

• Setup: The knowledge base contained one high-authority document (a formal change request, CR-2025-001) mandating the implementation of security encryption. This was contradicted by three separate, lower-authority technical documents suggesting security was not required. The evidence ratio was approximately 95:2 in favor of the "no security needed" position.

• Results: The system correctly applied its hierarchical authority model. It recognized the formal change request as the highest authority and discarded the contradictory technical recommendations. The generated output was a clean, authoritative compliance document stating, "The system shall implement end-to-end data encryption," without referencing the superseded, lower-authority debate. This confirmed the system's ability to understand organizational power structures and generate implementation-ready directives.

4. Discussion and Conclusion

The results of our experiments validate the efficacy of the Evaluative Contextual Synthesis framework. By integrating evidence-based conflict resolution and hierarchical authority modeling, our system demonstrates a significant advancement over traditional RAG models. The ability to autonomously correct its own knowledge base and to understand organizational context allows the system to move from a simple information aggregator to a trusted, autonomous partner for professional document generation.

This research establishes a foundation for a new class of enterprise-intelligent AI systems that can reason about the provenance and veracity of information. Future work will focus on expanding the complexity of the authority models and testing the framework's scalability in larger, real-time enterprise environments.