| [Logical routing](/docs/how_to/routing/#using-a-runnablebranch) | When you can prompt an LLM with rules to decide where to route the input. | Logical routing can use an LLM to reason about the query and choose which datastore is most appropriate. |
| [Semantic routing](/docs/how_to/routing/#using-a-runnablebranch) | When semantic similarity is an effective way to determine where to route the input. | Semantic routing embeds both query and, typically a set of prompts. It then chooses the appropriate prompt based upon similarity. |
| [Logical routing](/docs/how_to/routing/) | When you can prompt an LLM with rules to decide where to route the input. | Logical routing can use an LLM to reason about the query and choose which datastore is most appropriate. |
| [Semantic routing](/docs/how_to/routing/#routing-by-semantic-similarity) | When semantic similarity is an effective way to determine where to route the input. | Semantic routing embeds both query and, typically a set of prompts. It then chooses the appropriate prompt based upon similarity. |
:::tip
@ -961,13 +961,13 @@ Fifth, consider ways to improve the quality of your similarity search itself. Em
There are some additional tricks to improve the quality of your retrieval. Embeddings excel at capturing semantic information, but may struggle with keyword-based queries. Many [vector stores](https://python.langchain.com/v0.2/docs/integrations/retrievers/pinecone_hybrid_search/) offer built-in [hybrid-search](https://docs.pinecone.io/guides/data/understanding-hybrid-search) to combine keyword and semantic similarity, which marries the benefits of both approaches. Furthermore, many vector stores have [maximal marginal relevance](https://python.langchain.com/v0.1/docs/modules/model_io/prompts/example_selectors/mmr/), which attempts to diversify the results of a search to avoid returning similar and redundant documents.
There are some additional tricks to improve the quality of your retrieval. Embeddings excel at capturing semantic information, but may struggle with keyword-based queries. Many [vector stores](/docs/integrations/retrievers/pinecone_hybrid_search/) offer built-in [hybrid-search](https://docs.pinecone.io/guides/data/understanding-hybrid-search) to combine keyword and semantic similarity, which marries the benefits of both approaches. Furthermore, many vector stores have [maximal marginal relevance](https://python.langchain.com/v0.1/docs/modules/model_io/prompts/example_selectors/mmr/), which attempts to diversify the results of a search to avoid returning similar and redundant documents.
| [ColBERT](/docs/integrations/providers/ragatouille/#using-colbert-as-a-reranker) | When higher granularity embeddings are needed. | ColBERT uses contextually influenced embeddings for each token in the document and query to get a granular query-document similarity score. |
| [Hybrid search](/docs/integrations/retrievers/pinecone_hybrid_search/) | When combining keyword-based and semantic similarity. | Hybrid search combines keyword and semantic similarity, marrying the benefits of both approaches. |
| [Maximal Marginal Relevance (MMR)](/docs/integrations/vectorstores/pinecone/#maximal-marginal-relevance-searches) | When needing to diversify search results. | MMR attempts to diversify the results of a search to avoid returning similar and redundant documents. |
| [Maximal Marginal Relevance (MMR)](/docs/integrations/vectorstores/pinecone/#maximal-marginal-relevance-searches) | When needing to diversify search results. | MMR attempts to diversify the results of a search to avoid returning similar and redundant documents. |
:::tip
@ -996,7 +996,7 @@ See our RAG from Scratch video on [RAG-Fusion](https://youtu.be/77qELPbNgxA?feat
**Finally, consider ways to build self-correction into your RAG system.** RAG systems can suffer from low quality retrieval (e.g., if a user question is out of the domain for the index) and / or hallucinations in generation. A naive retrieve-generate pipeline has no ability to detect or self-correct from these kinds of errors. The concept of ["flow engineering"](https://x.com/karpathy/status/1748043513156272416) has been introduced [in the context of code generation](https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.08500): iteratively build an answer to a code question with unit tests to check and self-correct errors. Several works have applied this RAG, such as Self-RAG and Corrective-RAG. In both cases, checks for document relevance, hallucinations, and / or answer quality are performed in the RAG answer generation flow.
We've found that graphs are a great way to reliably express logical flows and have implemented ideas from several of these papers [using LangGraph](https://github.com/langchain-ai/langgraph/tree/main/examples/rag), as shown in the figure below (red - routing, blue - fallback, green - self-correction):
- **Routing:** Adaptive RAG ([paper](https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.14403)). Route questions to different retrieval approaches, as discussed above
- **Routing:** Adaptive RAG ([paper](https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.14403)). Route questions to different retrieval approaches, as discussed above
- **Fallback:** Corrective RAG ([paper](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2401.15884.pdf)). Fallback to web search if docs are not relevant to query
Jacob Lee
4 months ago
committed by
GitHub