Mustafa Sertaç Türkel, Fatma Nur Korkmaz, Ahmet Tuğrul Bayrakcs.CL cs.AI
Retrieval-Augmented Generation conditions a language model on chunks retrieved from a document collection. Its accuracy is therefore limited by the chunking and embedding stages that determine what can be retrieved. We compare Turkish document question answering across three chunking strategies (fixed-length, semantic, and layout-aware Docling), five embedding models, and two LLMs, over three documents with contrasting layouts. Every configuration answers the same question set, which allows component effects to be separated by paired testing rather than inferred from separate benchmarks. The fully crossed design yields 9{,}000 graded question-answer evaluations, each scored by an independent judge model, and component comparisons are tested by paired McNemar tests under Holm correction. The three leading embedding models are statistically indistinguishable, so language specialization yields no measurable retrieval advantage. The faster LLM is not the more accurate one. The preferred configuration depends on content type, since layout-aware chunking helps table-heavy documents far more than text-heavy ones.
Removing the left context from a causal language model reveals a useful kind of boundary: an edge where the model processes the same right-hand tokens with little change. We turn this observation into prefix-removal probing and introduce Right Reset (RR), which measures preservation of the right-hand hidden-state trajectory. A dynamic program converts RR edge scores into variable-length chunks. On flattened text formed by concatenating topically similar records after deleting their separators and layout, RR recovers 47.7% of the original records as clean units, versus 25.9% for a BGE embedding boundary, the strongest tested conventional baseline without task-specific model training. The gain persists after rendering and OCR. Passive scores from the same Qwen3-4B layer and direct prompting of a same-scale instruction model perform substantially worse on flattened records. Across six language models, RR-selected cuts also undergo consistently less local output disruption than unselected candidate edges. An observed-token likelihood-ratio readout is competitive in some architectures, indicating that the central contribution is the intervention: context dependence itself can provide a boundary signal when surface structure is weak.
Phuong Le Huy, Nam H. Nguyen, Quan V. Dangcs.CL cs.LG
Common chunking strategies in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems often create redundant chunks. These redundant chunks make the vector database bigger and slow down retrieval. A common fix is cosine-similarity thresholding. This method reduces each chunk to a single vector, then compares vectors using a similarity score. But a single vector can lose the fine-grained, token-level detail needed to tell a true duplicate apart from a chunk that just shares the same topic. We propose Cross-Attention Calibrated Deduplication (CACD). CACD checks each new chunk against an in-memory pool of chunks already kept, using a cross-encoder instead of a single pooled vector. This keeps token-level detail all the way to the final comparison. CACD combines three parts: the cross-encoder comparison itself, a New Information Score (NIS) that measures how much of a chunk is not explained by a candidate already kept, and a majority vote across several candidates rather than a single best match. NIS is calculated from the attention entropy of the cross-encoder. We tested CACD against five existing filtering methods, nine chunking strategies, and 18 configurations, all on the full SQuAD 1.1 validation set. In our experiments, CACD removes 9.75% of chunks on average. This drop rate is close to other semantic-level methods, and much higher than exact-match filters, which barely remove anything. In these experiments, CACD also processes each configuration in 51.0 seconds on average, about 27% faster than the strongest baseline, NERExact (69.6s), and about 7x faster than cosine-similarity filtering (356.7s). These results come from a single dataset, so we present them as an early comparison, not a general claim. Code for the baseline evaluation and for CACD is available at https://github.com/lehuyphuong/rag_bench and https://github.com/lehuyphuong/cacd_dedup.
Scene Text Recognition (STR) models are trained almost exclusively on word crops of at most 25 characters, yet real deployments (signage, product labels, dense captions) require reading much longer text. This paper diagnoses that failure and then closes it. The diagnosis separates out-of-length failure into two simultaneously extrapolating axes (the encoder's width axis and the decoder's time axis) and shows that encoder width, not decoder length, is the dominant failure mode. Representation-side fixes bring only partial relief: training-free rotary rescalings recover at most 2-4 points of character error rate (CER), and a weighted fine-tuning recipe recovers 6-8 points while improving standard-benchmark accuracy, yet word accuracy on the Long Text Benchmark (LTB) stays near zero, because the residual gap lies in the decoding mechanism rather than the representation. We then close that gap at inference time, on an unmodified word-level checkpoint: the long image is sliced into overlapping crops at the model's training width, each decoded independently and in-distribution, and the reads stitched by geometry-anchored edit-distance alignment. This procedure reaches 42.79-43.05% bucket-average word accuracy on LTB across two base checkpoints, matching the published state of the art (41.57%) and beating it by 11-12 points on the hardest bucket, at wall-clock parity with plain decoding; applied unchanged to the public PARSeq checkpoint it reaches 47.11%. Once chunking is applied fine-tuning no longer helps: the decoding-side fix alone matches purpose-built architectures. We release the diagnosis harness and implementation.
Valentin J. J. Kreileder, Johannes Reisinger, Andreas Fischercs.IR cs.AI cs.CL
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems use the question-answering capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) to access information outside their parameters. We evaluate if cluster-based semantic chunking improves retrieval and answer quality compared to fixed-size and recursive chunking evaluating on long, structured academic theses using the Retrieval Augmented Generation Assessment (RAGAs) framework. RAGAs based faithfulness shows limited reliability in this setup. Performance on fixed versus document specific questions varied substantially, likely related to the formatting of documents and preprocessing. Under the tested configuration, cluster-based chunking did not outperform simpler strategies.
Fixed-length chunking in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) often leads to boundary fragmentation, where critical evidence is split across segments, degrading retrieval recall. While static windowing and parent retrieval improve recall, they introduce significant token overhead. We propose SCAR (Semantic Continuity-Aware Retrieval), an adaptive retrieval policy that selectively expands neighboring chunks by weighing query-neighbor relevance against a structural continuity penalty. SCAR uses a relative expansion threshold tied to each retrieved chunk's own query-relevance, yielding an approximately scale-invariant decision rule that transfers across embedding models without recalibration. Across four diverse corpora (RFC, GDPR, a 10-K report, and a Merger agreement; N=320 queries; 160 boundary-fragmented), SCAR achieves 92.8% recall on boundary-fragmented queries with only 7.84 chunks, a 22.9% reduction compared to static windowing (10.16 chunks). Paired bootstrap tests (B=10,000) confirm the chunk reduction is highly significant (p<0.0001, Cohen's d=-1.49, large effect), with a small recall difference (Cohen's d=-0.33). The policy transfers across three embedding models (text-embedding-3-large, BGE-large-en-v1.5, zembed-1) using the same single hyperparameter setting, and downstream RAGAS evaluation on the 10-K corpus confirms SCAR preserves generation faithfulness while reducing context tokens by 27.1%.
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems are vulnerable to corpus poisoning attacks that manipulate downstream model outputs through malicious knowledge injection. Existing studies mainly evaluate poisoning under simplified retrieval settings, overlooking practical RAG pipelines involving document chunking, dense retrieval, reranking, and grounded generation. In this paper, we revisit corpus poisoning under realistic multi-stage retrieval pipelines and show that many existing attacks substantially degrade after reranking despite achieving high retrieval-stage relevance. We identify retrieval granularity mismatch as a key reason for this failure: document-level adversarial signals are often fragmented during chunking, while rerankers favor locally coherent and answer-bearing passages rather than globally optimized semantic similarity. Based on this observation, we propose Chunk-aware and Rerank-Consistent Poisoning (CRCP), a poisoning framework that jointly optimizes retrieval relevance, reranker consistency, and chunk-boundary robustness. CRCP explicitly models chunking transformations during optimization to generate locally self-contained adversarial passages that remain effective under varying chunking configurations. Experiments on standard RAG benchmarks with multiple retrievers and rerankers show that existing poisoning methods are highly sensitive to chunk size and reranking strategies, whereas CRCP achieves substantially higher attack success rates and stronger robustness across realistic retrieval pipelines. Our findings highlight an important realism gap in current RAG security evaluation and suggest that poisoning in modern RAG systems should be studied as a multi-stage retrieval consistency problem rather than a retrieval-only problem.
German Garrido-Lestache Belinchon, Hugo Garrido-Lestache Belinchoncs.IR cs.AI cs.CL
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems have emerged as a powerful process for allowing large language models (LLMs) to retrieve relevant information to use as source material during text generation. A critical yet under-explored component of these systems is the granularity at which source documents are segmented into retrievable chunks. The size of these chunks has the potential to significantly influence generation quality, contextual correctness, retrieval precision, and computational efficiency. Despite its importance, chunk size is often selected without proper evaluation of its impact on generation quality. Smaller chunks, such as individual sentences, may allow for precise retrieval by narrowing the focus of each chunk. However, they contain less information, which may limit the model's ability to generate coherent responses. Larger chunks, such as entire chapters, contain lots of broad information that may improve correctness, but also introduce additional noise and increase computational cost. Because larger chunks contain more information, the number of chunks returned to the model must also be considered. This paper evaluates how chunk size, along with the number of retrieved segments, influences generation quality and retrieval effectiveness. By comparing these configurations, this study seeks to better understand how document segmentation affects the performance and efficiency of Retrieval-Augmented Generation systems. segmentation affects the performance and efficiency of Retrieval-Augmented Generation systems.