github.devotd.
NewRAG & retrieval

langchain-ai/local-deep-researcher — Local LLM Web Research Assistant

A Python research assistant that repeatedly researches the web with a local LLM hosted on Ollama or LMStudio and produces a markdown summary that keeps its sources.

Repositorylangchain-ai/local-deep-researcher ↗

A Python research assistant that repeatedly researches the web with a local LLM hosted on Ollama or LMStudio and produces a markdown summary that keeps its sources.

GitHub description: Fully local web research and report writing assistant

stars
★ 9.4K
Forks
981
Language
Python
License
MIT
Read original source ↗View on GitHub ↗

langchain-ai/local-deep-researcher is a local research assistant that investigates the web on its own and even writes up a report. The model handling the queries is a local LLM that runs directly on the user's own computer, and it assumes that model is hosted on Ollama or LMStudio. It is set up to handle both web search and report writing with the local model, the implementation language is Python, and the license is MIT. The repository was created on December 4, 2024, and there are no publicly released versions yet. All that can be checked right now is the repository code itself.

The research flow repeats a cycle of building a search query, searching the web, and then summarizing the results and reflecting on them. The user enters the topic to research and a search query is generated; after each round of summarizing, the assistant checks the points that still lack supporting evidence, that is, the knowledge gaps, and continues with follow-up searches to fill those gaps. The user sets the number of iterations directly, and the run ends with a final markdown summary that also records the sources used in the research. The default search tool is DuckDuckGo, which needs no API key, and SearXNG, Tavily, and Perplexity can also be configured. It has 9379 stars.

That said, no benchmark figures backing up its performance are given. Because there is no release, there is nothing to compare version-by-version improvements against either, and there is no record that would let you judge it on research accuracy or summary quality. What certainly remains is the MIT license, the iterative research structure, and the user-configurable iteration count and search tools. So rather than trying to verify the actual accuracy in advance, it is better to treat this as a project whose flow, from query generation to repeated searching with a local model, you check out for yourself.