Live data from Hacker News

Meta Superintelligence Labs' first paper is about RAG

paddedinputs.substack.com

151–160 of 283 posts

Re: Meta Superintelligence Labs' first paper is about RAG

#151
post #146

One thing I don't get about the ever-reoccuring RAG discussions and hype men proclaiming "Rag is dead", is that people seem to be talking about wholly different things? My mental model is that what is called RAG can either be: - a predefined document store / document chunk store where every chunk gets a a vector embedding, and a lookup decides what gets pulled into context as to not have to pull whole classes of docu…

no one is saying rag is dead, you're never going to put the whole Internet in the context of the model, & the more you put the more expensive it is.

Lots of people say rag is dead: https://kagi.com/search?q=rag+is+dead&r=au&sh=g52XEb93vx691I...

Re: Meta Superintelligence Labs' first paper is about RAG

#152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Open weights models, not open source. And even their weights are under a specific license not as permissive as apache 2.

Does an “open source” model the way you describe it exist or is it a mythical creature?

Unicorns also don't exist, but we don't change the definition to include horses.

Re: Meta Superintelligence Labs' first paper is about RAG

#153

One thing I don't get about the ever-reoccuring RAG discussions and hype men proclaiming "Rag is dead", is that people seem to be talking about wholly different things? My mental model is that what is called RAG can either be: - a predefined document store / document chunk store where every chunk gets a a vector embedding, and a lookup decides what gets pulled into context as to not have to pull whole classes of docu…

The answer is adaptability.

In both cases for "Question Answering" it's about similarity search but there are two main orthogonal differences between RAG and Non-RAG :

-Knowing the question at the time of index building

-Higher order features : the ability to compare fetched documents with one another and refine the question

Non-RAG, aka multi-layer (non-causal) transformer with infinite context, is the more generic version, fully differentiable meaning you can use machine learning to learn how to Non-RAG better. Each layer of the transformer can use the previous layer to reason and refine the similarity search. (A causal transformer know the question at the time when it is feed the question, and can choose to focus it's attention on different part of the previously computed features of the provided documents but may benefit from having some reflection token, or better : be given the question before being presented the documents (provided you've trained it to answer it like that).)

RAG is an approximation of the generic case to make it faster and cheaper. Usually it breaks end-to-end differentiability by using external tools, so this mean that if you want to use machine learning to learn how to RAG better you will need to use some variant of Reinforcement Learning which is slower to learn things. RAG usually don't know the question at the time of index building, and documents are treated independently of each other, so no (automatic) higher order features (embeddings are fixed).

A third usual approximation, is to feed the output of RAG into Non-RAG, to hopefully get the best of both world. You can learn the Non-RAG given RAG with machine learning (if you train it with some conversations where it used RAG), but the RAG part won't improve by itself.

Non-RAG need to learn so it needs a big training dataset, but fortunately it can pick-up question answer pair in an unsupervised fashion when you feed it the whole web, and you only need a small instruction training and preference optimization dataset to shape it to your need. If performance isn't what you expect in a specific case, you can provide more specific examples and retrain the model until it gets it and you get better performance for the case you were interested in. You can improve the best case but it's hard to improve the worst case.

RAG has more control on what you feed it but content should be in a more structured way. You can prevent worst cases more easily but it's hard to improve good case.

Re: Meta Superintelligence Labs' first paper is about RAG

#154
post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does an “open source” model the way you describe it exist or is it a mythical creature?

Unicorns also don't exist, but we don't change the definition to include horses.

Prove to me that unicorns don't exist, first level arguments only!

Re: Meta Superintelligence Labs' first paper is about RAG

#155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Someone has probably studied this There's even a name for it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law

Thanks for sharing. I did not know this law existed and had a name. I know nothing about nothing but it appears to be the case that the interpretation of metrics for policies assume implicitly the "shape" of the domain. E.g. in RL for games we see a bunch of outlier behavior for policies just gaming the signal. There seems to be 2 types - Specification failure: signal is bad-ish, a completely broken behavior --> loca…

I view Goodhart's law more as a lesson for why we can never achieve a goal by offering specific incentives if we are measuring success by the outcome of the incentives and not by the achievement of the goal.

This is of course inevitable if the goal cannot be directly measured but is composed of many constantly moving variables such as education or public health.

This doesn't mean we shouldn't bother having such goals, it just means we have to be diligent at pivoting the incentives when it becomes evident that secondary effects are being produced at the expense of the desired effect.

Re: Meta Superintelligence Labs' first paper is about RAG

#156
post #62

It's kinda funny, Meta has long had some of the best in the field, but left them untapped. I really think if they just took a step back and stop being so metric focused and let their people freely explore then they'd be winning the AI race. But with this new team, I feel like meta mostly hired the people who are really good at gaming the system. The people that care more about the money than the research. A bit of th…

My theory is that as more people compete, the top candidates become those who are best at gaming the system rather than actually being the best. Someone has probably studied this. My only evidence is job applications for GAFAM and Tinder tho.

This is an interesting theory. I think there is something to it. It is really hard to do good in a competitive environment. Very constrained.

Re: Meta Superintelligence Labs' first paper is about RAG

#157

One thing I don't get about the ever-reoccuring RAG discussions and hype men proclaiming "Rag is dead", is that people seem to be talking about wholly different things? My mental model is that what is called RAG can either be: - a predefined document store / document chunk store where every chunk gets a a vector embedding, and a lookup decides what gets pulled into context as to not have to pull whole classes of docu…

We can't throw in infinite things in the context though.

My impression is that GPT-5 gets confused, not quite right away, but after a couple of pages it has no idea. It doesn't take pages on pages before it forgets things.

Re: Meta Superintelligence Labs' first paper is about RAG

#158
post #149
post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with all of those examples, they are misunderstanding what it means for the metric to break down in the context of the law, but alas. "If you run a different race" lol.

could you explain what you think the difference is? a metric is chosen, people start to game the system by doing things that make the metric improve but the original intent is lost. increasingly specific rules/laws have to be made up to make the metric appear to work, but it becomes a lost cause as more and more creative ways are found to work around the rules.

Exactly, that's the definition. It doesn't apply to timing a 100m race. There's many such situations that are simple enough and with perfect information available where this doesn’t break down and a metric is just a metric and it works great.

Which is not to the detriment of the observation being true in other contexts, all I did was provide a counter example. But the example requires the metric AND the context.

Re: Meta Superintelligence Labs' first paper is about RAG

#159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Open weights models, not open source. And even their weights are under a specific license not as permissive as apache 2.

Does an “open source” model the way you describe it exist or is it a mythical creature?

Apertus by EPFL and ETH Zürich.

Re: Meta Superintelligence Labs' first paper is about RAG

#160

It's kinda funny, Meta has long had some of the best in the field, but left them untapped. I really think if they just took a step back and stop being so metric focused and let their people freely explore then they'd be winning the AI race. But with this new team, I feel like meta mostly hired the people who are really good at gaming the system. The people that care more about the money than the research. A bit of th…

AI progress has slowed down?! By what metric?

Quite the statement for anybody who follows developments (without excluding xAI).

Post reply on HN