Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 cited by

RAG and RAU: A Survey on Retrieval-Augmented Language Model in Natural Language Processing

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2404.19543 v2 pith:RZIGYO4D submitted 2024-04-30 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords languageralmssurveyretrieval-augmentedapplicationsmodelsfuturegithub
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have catalyzed significant advancements in Natural Language Processing (NLP), yet they encounter challenges such as hallucination and the need for domain-specific knowledge. To mitigate these, recent methodologies have integrated information retrieved from external resources with LLMs, substantially enhancing their performance across NLP tasks. This survey paper addresses the absence of a comprehensive overview on Retrieval-Augmented Language Models (RALMs), both Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) and Retrieval-Augmented Understanding (RAU), providing an in-depth examination of their paradigm, evolution, taxonomy, and applications. The paper discusses the essential components of RALMs, including Retrievers, Language Models, and Augmentations, and how their interactions lead to diverse model structures and applications. RALMs demonstrate utility in a spectrum of tasks, from translation and dialogue systems to knowledge-intensive applications. The survey includes several evaluation methods of RALMs, emphasizing the importance of robustness, accuracy, and relevance in their assessment. It also acknowledges the limitations of RALMs, particularly in retrieval quality and computational efficiency, offering directions for future research. In conclusion, this survey aims to offer a structured insight into RALMs, their potential, and the avenues for their future development in NLP. The paper is supplemented with a Github Repository containing the surveyed works and resources for further study: https://github.com/2471023025/RALM_Survey.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. KERAG_R: Knowledge-Enhanced Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Recommendation

    cs.IR 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    KERAG_R improves LLM-based top-k recommendation by using a GAT to select relevant KG triples and incorporating them into instruction-tuned prompts, reporting gains over ten baselines on three datasets.

  2. How Significant Are the Real Performance Gains? An Unbiased Evaluation Framework for GraphRAG

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new GraphRAG evaluation framework using graph-grounded questions and bias-correction yields much smaller win rates than earlier reports, casting doubt on reported GraphRAG gains.

  3. DoctorRAG: Medical RAG Fusing Knowledge with Patient Analogy through Textual Gradients

    cs.CL 2025-05 reject novelty 6.0 of 10

    Combining knowledge retrieval, analogous patient case retrieval, and iterative textual-gradient refinement improves medical RAG accuracy across Chinese, English, and French benchmarks.

  4. PIER: Physics-Informed Environmental Retrieval for Time-Series Modeling

    cs.LG 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    PIER augments embedding-based retrieval for lake modeling with a physics-aware stream scored by local verifiers, improving water temperature and dissolved oxygen prediction across 356 lakes.

  5. RAGOps: Operating and Managing Retrieval-Augmented Generation Pipelines

    cs.SE 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    RAGOps frames RAG operations as the intertwined management of a query processing pipeline and a data lifecycle, with design considerations, challenges, and two anecdotal use cases.

Pith tools