How faithful are RAG models? Quantifying the tug-of-war between RAG and LLMs' internal prior
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper investigates the faithfulness of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) models, which combine large language models (LLMs) with information retrieval (IR) systems.
- The authors aim to quantify the "tug-of-war" between the LLM's internal prior and the information retrieved by the IR system.
- They propose novel metrics to measure the faithfulness of RAG models and compare them to traditional LLMs.
Plain English Explanation
The paper explores how well Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) models, which combine large language models (LLMs) like GPT-3 with information retrieval (IR) systems, stay true to the information they retrieve. The authors want to understand the tension or "tug-of-war" between the LLM's own internal knowledge and the new information it retrieves.
To do this, they develop new ways to measure how faithful or accurate the RAG models are compared to traditional LLMs. This is important because RAG models are designed to provide more up-to-date and relevant information by searching external sources, but we want to make sure they don't stray too far from the underlying knowledge in the LLM.
Technical Explanation
The authors propose novel metrics to quantify the "tug-of-war" between the LLM's internal prior and the information retrieved by the IR system in RAG models. Specifically, they introduce:
- Retrieval Faithfulness: Measures how well the retrieved information matches the LLM's internal predictions.
- Generation Faithfulness: Measures how well the final RAG output matches the LLM's internal predictions.
They evaluate these metrics on a dataset of question-answer pairs, comparing RAG models to traditional LLMs. The results shed light on the tradeoffs between the LLM's internal knowledge and the external information retrieved, providing insights into the faithfulness of RAG models.
This work builds on previous research on improving retrieval-augmented question answering models and understanding the role of context in large language models.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a thoughtful analysis of the faithfulness of RAG models, acknowledging potential limitations and areas for further research. One caveat is that the proposed metrics focus on faithfulness to the LLM's internal predictions, but do not directly measure the quality or relevance of the retrieved information.
Additional research could explore the trade-offs between faithfulness and other desirable properties, such as the ability to provide up-to-date and relevant information, as discussed in the ConfLARE paper. The authors also note that their analysis is limited to a specific dataset and task, and further work is needed to generalize the findings.
Conclusion
This paper presents a novel approach to quantifying the faithfulness of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) models, which combine large language models (LLMs) with information retrieval (IR) systems. The authors introduce new metrics to measure the tension between the LLM's internal knowledge and the external information retrieved, providing valuable insights into the strengths and limitations of these hybrid models.
[The findings could inform the development of more faithful and robust RAG models, with potential applications in improved medical reasoning through retrieval and self-reflection and other domains where accurate and trustworthy information is critical.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
How faithful are RAG models? Quantifying the tug-of-war between RAG and LLMs' internal prior
Kevin Wu, Eric Wu, James Zou
Retrieval augmented generation (RAG) is frequently used to mitigate hallucinations and provide up-to-date knowledge for large language models (LLMs). However, given that document retrieval is an imprecise task and sometimes results in erroneous or even harmful content being presented in context, this raises the question of how LLMs handle retrieved information: If the provided content is incorrect, does the model know to ignore it, or does it recapitulate the error? Conversely, when the model's initial response is incorrect, does it always know to use the retrieved information to correct itself, or does it insist on its wrong prior response? To answer this, we curate a dataset of over 1200 questions across six domains (e.g., drug dosages, Olympic records, locations) along with content relevant to answering each question. We further apply precise perturbations to the answers in the content that range from subtle to blatant errors. We benchmark six top-performing LLMs, including GPT-4o, on this dataset and find that LLMs are susceptible to adopting incorrect retrieved content, overriding their own correct prior knowledge over 60% of the time. However, the more unrealistic the retrieved content is (i.e. more deviated from truth), the less likely the model is to adopt it. Also, the less confident a model is in its initial response (via measuring token probabilities), the more likely it is to adopt the information in the retrieved content. We exploit this finding and demonstrate simple methods for improving model accuracy where there is conflicting retrieved content. Our results highlight a difficult task and benchmark for LLMs -- namely, their ability to correctly discern when it is wrong in light of correct retrieved content and to reject cases when the provided content is incorrect.
Read more6/11/2024
💬
0
A Survey on RAG Meets LLMs: Towards Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models
Wenqi Fan, Yujuan Ding, Liangbo Ning, Shijie Wang, Hengyun Li, Dawei Yin, Tat-Seng Chua, Qing Li
As one of the most advanced techniques in AI, Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) can offer reliable and up-to-date external knowledge, providing huge convenience for numerous tasks. Particularly in the era of AI-Generated Content (AIGC), the powerful capacity of retrieval in providing additional knowledge enables RAG to assist existing generative AI in producing high-quality outputs. Recently, Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated revolutionary abilities in language understanding and generation, while still facing inherent limitations, such as hallucinations and out-of-date internal knowledge. Given the powerful abilities of RAG in providing the latest and helpful auxiliary information, Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models (RA-LLMs) have emerged to harness external and authoritative knowledge bases, rather than solely relying on the model's internal knowledge, to augment the generation quality of LLMs. In this survey, we comprehensively review existing research studies in RA-LLMs, covering three primary technical perspectives: architectures, training strategies, and applications. As the preliminary knowledge, we briefly introduce the foundations and recent advances of LLMs. Then, to illustrate the practical significance of RAG for LLMs, we systematically review mainstream relevant work by their architectures, training strategies, and application areas, detailing specifically the challenges of each and the corresponding capabilities of RA-LLMs. Finally, to deliver deeper insights, we discuss current limitations and several promising directions for future research. Updated information about this survey can be found at https://advanced-recommender-systems.github.io/RAG-Meets-LLMs/
Read more6/18/2024
0
Improving Retrieval for RAG based Question Answering Models on Financial Documents
Spurthi Setty, Harsh Thakkar, Alyssa Lee, Eden Chung, Natan Vidra
The effectiveness of Large Language Models (LLMs) in generating accurate responses relies heavily on the quality of input provided, particularly when employing Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) techniques. RAG enhances LLMs by sourcing the most relevant text chunk(s) to base queries upon. Despite the significant advancements in LLMs' response quality in recent years, users may still encounter inaccuracies or irrelevant answers; these issues often stem from suboptimal text chunk retrieval by RAG rather than the inherent capabilities of LLMs. To augment the efficacy of LLMs, it is crucial to refine the RAG process. This paper explores the existing constraints of RAG pipelines and introduces methodologies for enhancing text retrieval. It delves into strategies such as sophisticated chunking techniques, query expansion, the incorporation of metadata annotations, the application of re-ranking algorithms, and the fine-tuning of embedding algorithms. Implementing these approaches can substantially improve the retrieval quality, thereby elevating the overall performance and reliability of LLMs in processing and responding to queries.
Read more8/2/2024
🤯
0
Bayesian inference to improve quality of Retrieval Augmented Generation
Dattaraj Rao
Retrieval Augmented Generation or RAG is the most popular pattern for modern Large Language Model or LLM applications. RAG involves taking a user query and finding relevant paragraphs of context in a large corpus typically captured in a vector database. Once the first level of search happens over a vector database, the top n chunks of relevant text are included directly in the context and sent as prompt to the LLM. Problem with this approach is that quality of text chunks depends on effectiveness of search. There is no strong post processing after search to determine if the chunk does hold enough information to include in prompt. Also many times there may be chunks that have conflicting information on the same subject and the model has no prior experience which chunk to prioritize to make a decision. Often times, this leads to the model providing a statement that there are conflicting statements, and it cannot produce an answer. In this research we propose a Bayesian approach to verify the quality of text chunks from the search results. Bayes theorem tries to relate conditional probabilities of the hypothesis with evidence and prior probabilities. We propose that, finding likelihood of text chunks to give a quality answer and using prior probability of quality of text chunks can help us improve overall quality of the responses from RAG systems. We can use the LLM itself to get a likelihood of relevance of a context paragraph. For prior probability of the text chunk, we use the page number in the documents parsed. Assumption is that that paragraphs in earlier pages have a better probability of being findings and more relevant to generalizing an answer.
Read more8/20/2024