Editorial
Editor’s Note: This is part of a series on Search and AI derived from the EIS webinar series AI and Search: Navigating the Future of Business Transformation.
When a company executive recently asked ChatGPT to analyze several meeting transcripts, the AI confidently promised results within an hour. When the executive returned, the AI apologized for the delay, assuring "just 15 more minutes."
This cycle repeated a dozen times — each time the AI invented a new deadline with complete confidence, demonstrating how even sophisticated AI systems can consistently present false information convincingly.
The other simple data point of word count was incorrectly stated multiple times — even when instructed to “double check.” When presented with the correct word count, the GPT admitted it was incorrect and presented yet another incorrect response.
This real-world example highlights a critical challenge organizations face as they deploy AI assistants: How can we ensure these powerful systems provide accurate, trustworthy responses rather than convincing fabrications? Recent research from Stanford's AI lab shows that standard large language models (LLMs) can produce incorrect information in over 20% of responses, even while expressing high confidence.
The Growing Need for Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG)
As organizations race to adopt generative AI capabilities, many are discovering that off-the-shelf large language models like ChatGPT aren't enough. While these models demonstrate impressive general knowledge, they lack critical understanding of an organization's proprietary information, processes and domain expertise.
"When I ask companies about their understanding of RAG, many say zero," noted Trey Grainger in a recent Earley Information Science Webinar series.
A recent Wall Street Journal article highlighted how companies are moving beyond simple chatbots to more sophisticated approaches that combine LLMs with enterprise data sources. This shift reflects growing recognition of RAG's importance in maintaining accuracy and trust in AI systems.
Understanding RAG Through Real-World Context
Trey Grainger offered an illuminating analogy: "Think of RAG like having a brilliant research assistant with multiple PhDs in language and communication. This assistant has exceptional skills in understanding questions, analyzing information and crafting clear responses. However — and this is crucial — they can only use specific 'books' (information sources) you provide. They can't make up facts or pull from general knowledge."
"A search engine is a cache of data," Grainger explained. "When you think of Google and the web, Google is a cache of the entire Internet. You don't need Google. You could literally crawl the entire web and spend hundreds of years trying to find the page with the information you want. Or you can spend milliseconds asking Google and it's a cache that brings you back the top results ranked."
Understanding RAG requires grasping three key components working in harmony:
- Query Processing: The LLM interprets user questions with sophisticated natural language understanding.
- Information Retrieval: The system searches organizational knowledge bases using advanced algorithms.
- Response Generation: The LLM crafts coherent answers using only retrieved information.
This process ensures responses are both contextually appropriate and factually grounded in verified organizational knowledge.
Related Article: What Is Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG)?
The Challenge With Traditional AI
Traditional large language models like ChatGPT face several critical limitations in enterprise settings:
1. Knowledge Gaps
- No access to your organization's proprietary information
- Lack of understanding about your specific processes
- Missing latest developments past training cutoff (though recent models are enabling real time search of the internet)
- Inability to access secure internal systems
Patrick Hoeffel illustrated this with a simple example: "An LLM can give you a great lunch menu for a whole month and tell you what you could serve, but it can't tell you what is on your lunch menu this week inside the company. It just doesn't have that information"
2. Accuracy and Trust Issues
- Without grounding in verified sources, AI systems can:
- Generate plausible but incorrect responses
- Fail to provide reliable citations
- Mix factual and fabricated information
- Express high confidence in wrong answers
A study conducted by Earley Information Science, “Powerful tools for personalization: Using LLM based agents, knowledge graphs and customer signals to connect with users," found that with metadata-enriched embeddings, an LLM achieved 83% accuracy in answering questions from a knowledge source, compared to just 53% without proper metadata structure.
3. Security Concerns
In the webinar series, Sanjay Mehta emphasized a crucial security consideration: "If you train the models on private data, when someone asks the model later a question, the model may leak your private data in a way that could be a security nightmare." Organizations must ensure:
- Protection of sensitive information
- Proper access controls
- Compliance with regulations
- Separation of public and private data
The Power of Metadata in RAG Systems
A critical yet often overlooked aspect of RAG implementation is the role of metadata in improving accuracy. Without metadata at the component level, it's going to be very difficult to find a piece of nuanced content, for example, the troubleshooting steps for a piece of complex equipment throwing an error code. Research demonstrated the dramatic impact of proper metadata:
Metadata Benefits
- Improves context understanding
- Enables precise retrieval
- Supports personalization
- Facilitates compliance
- Enhances security filtering
Conference
Sep
16
HR Tech Conference Las Vegas 2025
Register
Conference
Oct
27
Gartner HR Symposium/Xpo Orlando 2025
Register
Related Article: The Need for Quality Assurance in the AI Rush
The Critical Role of Information Architecture
For RAG to work effectively, organizations need proper information architecture (IA) foundations. As articulated in IT Professional from the IEEE “There's no AI without IA.”
Key elements include:
Knowledge Architecture
- Domain models define key concepts and relationships — the big picture organizing principles of the enterprise
- Taxonomies enable consistent classification — metadata require controlled vocabularies when tagging content
- Ontologies mapping relationships between concepts — “services for product” or "solutions for problem,” for example
- Knowledge graphs connecting information assets — enabling multiple entry points to complex information ecosystems
Content Architecture
- Clear content types and metadata models — defining “is-ness” and “about-ness” — what a content item is (SOW, proposal, product detail page) and how to tell them apart (the piles you would put them in if you had 100 or 10000 pieces of that kind of content)
- Component content management — the ability to manage pieces of content to enable personalization or question answering systems
- Semantic chunking of long-form content — breaking large monolithic pdfs or docs such as product manuals running hundreds of pages into chunks that can answer specific questions such as installation or trouble shooting questions
- Quality standards and governance — the ability to monitor compliance with metadata tagging, for example, and to make intentional, well-vetted changes as business needs change, such as adding a new category or product to the taxonomy
Integration Architecture
- API management — how an organization controls and monitors access to the various APIs involved in a RAG system, including the LLM APIs (like OpenAI's), vector database APIs and internal knowledge base APIs. This ensures secure, efficient communication between components
- Authentication systems — the mechanisms that verify and control who can access different parts of the RAG system. This includes user authentication, service-to-service authentication and managing access tokens for various APIs and data sources
- Cache optimization — strategies for storing frequently accessed information (like common queries or embeddings) to reduce latency and API costs. This includes determining what to cache, for how long and when to invalidate cache entries
- Load balancing — distribution of requests across multiple servers or services to prevent overload and ensure consistent performance. This is especially important when dealing with high volumes of RAG queries or multiple concurrent users
- Performance monitoring — systems for tracking key metrics like response times, API usage, cache hit rates and system resource utilization. This helps identify bottlenecks and opportunities for optimization
User Context
- Role-based access and personalization — controls what information different users can access based on their roles (e.g., technician vs. manager) and adapts responses based on their expertise level, permissions and preferences
- Journey mapping and task analysis — understanding and documenting the sequence of tasks users perform and what information they need at each step. For example, a field technician's journey might move from diagnosis to repair to documentation, with different information needs at each stage
- Digital body language tracking — monitoring user interactions like search queries, clicked results, time spent on content and navigation patterns to better understand their context and intent. This helps improve future responses and recommendations
- Security and privacy controls — mechanisms to protect sensitive data, including data masking, audit logs, compliance controls and ensuring users only see information they're authorized to access based on regulations and company policies
Related Article: 3 Steps to Securely Leverage AI
Technical Implementation Considerations
Organizations implementing RAG must address several technical challenges:
Vector Database Selection
- Embedding model compatibility — ensuring the vector database works well with your chosen embedding models (like OpenAI's, Hugging Face's or custom models) and can handle the vector dimensions and formats they produce
- Scalability requirements — the database's ability to grow with your needs, including handling increasing numbers of documents, concurrent users and vector searches while maintaining performance. This includes both vertical (bigger servers) and horizontal (more servers) scaling
- Update frequency needs — how often your content needs to be updated and whether the database can handle real-time updates, batch processing or both. This includes considering reindexing time and the ability to update embeddings without system downtime
- Query performance demands — the speed and efficiency requirements for vector similarity searches, including response time expectations, ability to handle complex queries and support for hybrid searches (combining vector and keyword searches)
- Security capabilities — built-in security features like encryption at rest, secure access controls, audit logging and compliance with data privacy requirements. This includes both protecting the vector data itself and controlling access to the search capabilities
Chunking Strategy
- Optimal chunk size determination — finding the right size for content segments that balances context preservation with LLM token limits. Too large chunks waste tokens, too small chunks lose context. This includes considering sentence and paragraph boundaries for natural breaks
- Context preservation methods — techniques to maintain meaning and relevance when breaking up documents, such as overlapping chunks, keeping headers with content and preserving relationships between related information. This ensures the LLM has enough context to generate accurate responses
- Metadata retention — maintaining important document attributes (like source, date, author, product model) with each chunk to provide critical context for retrieval and response generation. This helps maintain traceability and relevance
- Cross-reference maintenance — preserving connections between related chunks, such as linking parts of a technical manual or keeping track of prerequisite information. This helps the system retrieve all relevant information for complex queries
- Version control — Managing different versions of chunks as source documents are updated, ensuring outdated information is properly archived or removed, and maintaining a history of content changes. This includes tracking which version of a chunk was used for specific responses
Retrieval Optimization
- Hybrid search approaches — combining multiple search methods, such as using both vector similarity and keyword matching, to improve result quality. This often involves using traditional search techniques alongside vector search to capture both semantic meaning and exact matches
- Re-ranking algorithms — methods to refine initial search results by applying additional criteria or algorithms to improve relevance. This might include considering factors like document freshness, user context or previous interactions to adjust the final ordering of results
- Relevance tuning — adjusting search parameters and weights to optimize how well retrieved results match user intent. This includes fine-tuning similarity thresholds, balancing different ranking factors and incorporating user feedback to improve accuracy
- Query expansion — techniques to broaden or clarify the original query by adding related terms or context. This might include adding synonyms, related concepts or breaking complex queries into sub-queries to improve retrieval coverage
- Response filtering — methods to remove irrelevant or inappropriate content from search results before they reach the LLM. This includes filtering out outdated information, applying security rules and ensuring content matches user authorization levels
Implementation Best Practices
1. Start With Use Cases
Organizations must begin by:
- Documenting specific business problems to solve
- Defining clear success metrics
- Identifying required data sources
- Mapping user journeys and contexts
2. Prepare Your Data
Success requires:
- Auditing content quality and coverage
- Cleaning and standardizing data
- Applying consistent metadata
- Breaking long documents into meaningful chunks
3. Choose the Right Technology
Key considerations include:
- Selecting appropriate vector databases
- Implementing security controls
- Configuring retrieval algorithms
- Testing different LLM models
4. Monitor and Optimize
Continuous improvement requires:
- Tracking accuracy and relevance
- Gathering user feedback
- Monitoring for hallucinations
- Improving training data
Advanced Metrics and Performance Analysis
Organizations need comprehensive measurement frameworks:
Technical Performance
- Query latency
- Embedding quality
- Retrieval precision
- Generation coherence
- Security compliance
User Experience
- Task completion rates
- Time to answer
- Error reduction
- User satisfaction
- Adoption metrics
Business Impact
- Cost savings
- Productivity gains
- Knowledge accessibility
- Support efficiency
- Risk reduction
Related Article: Making Self-Service Generative AI Data Safer
Emerging Trends and Future Directions
The RAG landscape continues to evolve rapidly:
Technical Advances
- Multimodal RAG capabilities
- Improved context understanding
- Real-time data processing
- Automated metadata generation
- Enhanced security protocols
Implementation Trends
- Industry-specific RAG solutions
- Hybrid deployment models
- Edge computing integration
- Federated learning approaches
- Custom LLM development
Future Capabilities
Research indicates several promising developments on the horizon.
- Self-improving retrieval systems
- Advanced context modeling
- Automated metadata enrichment
- Enhanced security frameworks
- Improved hallucination detection
Conclusion
RAG represents a crucial bridge between powerful general-purpose AI and enterprise-specific knowledge needs. Success requires careful attention to information architecture, content quality and user context.
Organizations that implement RAG effectively can expect:
- More accurate AI responses
- Better protected sensitive information
- Improved knowledge control
- Scaled expertise
- Enhanced user experiences
The key is starting with clear use cases, investing in proper content preparation and maintaining strong governance processes. With these elements in place, RAG can transform how organizations leverage AI while maintaining accuracy and trust.
Patrick Hoeffel — managing partner at PH Partners, Sanjay Mehta — principal architect at Earley Information Science, and Trey Grainger — author and founder of Searchkernal contributed to this article.
Learn how you can join our contributor community.
