RAG: Reliability and Specificity for LLMs
After a day of diving into resources, I think I've got a handle on what Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) actually is. Spoiler alert: it's exactly what it sounds like, but with a few moving parts.
Why RAG ?
RAG is essentially a way to make large language models (LLMs) give better, more accurate answers by letting them look up trusted documents before responding. LLMs are powerful and trained on huge amounts of data, but they can still confidently hallucinate facts. RAG steps in as the reality check, pulling info from trusted sources so the model doesn't embarrass itself. I'm thinking of it as giving a forgetful genius Google access right before they start confidently making things up.
I can understand why this is useful, as it makes RAG particularly valuable for chat-bots or agents that need to work with specific topics or a company's internal data — without the expense and complexity of retraining the entire model.
How It Actually Works ?
The setup is surprisingly straightforward in concept: instead of an LLM answering questions based purely on its training data, I hook it up with specific documents (knowledge source). The system indexes these documents (indexing) so that when I have a query, it retrieves relevant information (retrieval) and feeds that context to the LLM for a more grounded response (generation).
The pipeline can be broken down into three stages:
Knowledge Source → Indexing → Retrieval → Generation
| Stage | Description |
|---|---|
| Knowledge Source | Documents for a RAG system to work with |
| Indexing | Process and store documents in a searchable format (embedding, keywords, graph nodes) |
| Retrieval | Find relevant content based on my queries |
| Generation | Use an LLM to produce an answer using retrieved content |
Simple enough, right? Well, if only things were that straightforward.
The RAG Variants
Apparently, there are multiple ways to implement a RAG system, each with its own approach to the pipeline stages. Here's what I discovered:
| RAG Type | What Changes | Indexing Strategy | Retrieval Logic | Generation Context | Ideal For |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Simple RAG | Minimalist | Flat vector DB (e.g., FAISS) | Retrieve Top-k based on dense similarity | Append all retrieved chunks in prompt | Fast prototyping, basic QA |
| Graph RAG | Structured retrieval | Graph/Tree/Hierarchical indexes | Navigate through nodes or related concepts | Selectively combine context from graph | Complex documents, reasoning tasks |
| Hybrid RAG | Enhanced retrieval | Dense + sparse (BM25 + vectors) | Combine dense and keyword-based results | Similar to Simple RAG, but broader context | High recall, improved coverage |
| Modular RAG | Architectural flexibility | Any combination | Pluggable—user defines strategy | Depends on orchestrated logic | Production systems, experimentation |
The Plan
Why complicate things right out of the gate when I can complicate them gradually like a sensible person? I'm going to start with Simple RAG and work my way up from there. What could go wrong?
References: