avatarDr. Mandar Karhade, MD. PhD.

Summary

The study by Heydar Soudani, Evangelos Kanoulas, and Faegheh Hasibi compares the effectiveness of Fine-Tuning (FT) and Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) in enhancing the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) on low-frequency entities, with FT showing consistent improvements across all popularity spectrums.

Abstract

The research paper investigates the performance of LLMs on low-frequency entities via question answering tasks. The study aims to compare the effectiveness of FT and RAG in customizing LLMs to manage less-frequent or niche entities, particularly in domains lacking rich textual material. The researchers propose an innovative evaluation framework using models like Flan-T5 small for question answering, controlled for domain specificity based on the popularity of entities. The study finds that FT significantly improves performance across various entity popularity levels, particularly within the most and least popular groups. RAG, when coupled with advancements in retrieval and data augmentation techniques, also shows promise in surpassing other methodologies, especially in enhancing response generation. The research suggests that both FT and RAG have roles to play in enhancing the versatility and accuracy of LLMs, with FT shining with consistent performance improvements.

Opinions

  • The study suggests that FT is more effective in enhancing the performance of LLMs on low-frequency entities across all popularity spectrums.
  • RAG is found to be most effective in enhancing response generation, albeit with varying results based on model sizes.
  • The research invites further exploration and encourages AI practitioners to engage with the source material, consider the implications of the findings on their work, and contribute to the broadening understanding of customization techniques for LLMs.
  • The study's conclusions encourage entities pursuing cutting-edge AI applications to rethink their strategies for deploying LLMs, particularly in the context of industry-specific needs where less popular knowledge is prominent.
  • By implementing the strategies proposed in the study, agencies can ensure their LLMs are more robust against the "hallucination" problem and better equipped to handle domain-specific needs.

Fine Tuning vs. Retrieval Augmented Generation

Its your choice, use it wisely

In the dynamic realm of artificial intelligence, Large Language Models (LLMs) such as GPT-3 and BERT have revolutionized many industries. Their profound ability to store and recall vast amounts of factual knowledge has led to significant performance across a multitude of tasks and domains. Nevertheless, challenges arise when these powerful models encounter less-frequent or niche entities, a scenario often found in specialized or domain-specific applications. This issue lies at the core of the study by Heydar Soudani, Evangelos Kanoulas, and Faegheh Hasibi, investigating the effectiveness of Fine-Tuning (FT) and Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) in addressing this pitfall.

Photo by Drew Patrick Miller on Unsplash

The investigation focuses on the performance of LLMs on low-frequency entities via question answering tasks. This blog post will outline the purpose, conclusions, frameworks, institutions, agencies, and guidelines encompassed within the paper, providing insights into the two predominant strategies to enhance LLMs’ performance in such cases.

Purpose and Overview

The study aims to actively compare FT and RAG’s effectiveness on customizing LLMs to manage low-frequency entities, instrumental in domains lacking rich textual material. FT significantly improves performance across various entity popularity levels, particularly within the most and least popular groups. On the other hand, RAG, when coupled with advancements in retrieval and data augmentation techniques, also shows promise in surpassing other methodologies.

Frameworks

Researchers propose an innovative evaluation framework that includes the utilization of models such as Flan-T5 small for question answering, controlled for domain specificity based on the popularity of entities. The institutions backing up this study are Radboud University and the University of Amsterdam, which have laid the academic and technical foundation for this investigative work.

Conclusions

According to the study’s findings, FT stands out, enhancing the performance for entities across all popularity spectrums with the most significant enhancements observed in the most visible and least-visible entities. RAG, on the contrary, has been found to be most effective particularly in enhancing response generation, albeit with varying results based on model sizes. By implementing the strategies proposed in the study, agencies can ensure their LLMs are more robust against the mentioned “hallucination” problem and better equipped to handle domain-specific needs.

The research conducted by Soudani, Kanoulas, and Hasibi is invaluable for those aiming to harness the full potential of LLMs, particularly when dealing with less-popular knowledge domains. The paper suggestively opens doors to profound implications on how AI can be tailored for niche industries and applications, overcoming challenges related to low-frequency concepts.

Through careful experimentation and evaluation, the paper illustrates that both FT and RAG have roles to play in enhancing the versatility and accuracy of LLMs; however, FT shines with consistent performance improvements. As interest in refining pre-trained language models for specific tasks grows, the implications of these findings are far-reaching, affecting how LLMs are customized for better performance in a variety of applications where domain-specific lingo and lesser-known entities predominate.

The research invites further exploration, encouraging AI practitioners to engage with the source material, consider the implications of the findings on their work, and contribute to the broadening understanding of customization techniques for LLMs. Additionally, it serves as a guidepost for future studies looking to explore other facets of LLMs’ limitations and capabilities.

In light of the paper’s conclusions, entities pursuing cutting-edge AI applications should rethink their strategies for deploying LLMs, particularly in the context of industry-specific needs where less popular knowledge is prominent. By taking cues from the advancements in retrieval and data augmentation techniques, they can significantly improve the performance and reliability of these machine learning marvels.

Full article link:

If you have read it until this point — Thank you! You are a hero (and a Nerd ❤)! I try to keep my readers up to date with “interesting happenings in the AI world,” so please 🔔 clap | follow | Subscribe 🔔

Find me on Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/in/mandarkarhade/

Read my other work

Artificial Intelligence
Machine Learning
Data Science
Generative Ai Tools
NLP
Recommended from ReadMedium
avatarChristopher Tao
Do Not Use LLM or Generative AI For These Use Cases

Choose correct AI techniques for the right use case families

7 min read
avatarVishal Rajput
Why GEN AI Boom Is Fading And What’s Next?

Every technology has its hype and cool down period.

15 min read
avatarAhmed Besbes
What Nobody Tells You About RAGs

A deep dive into why RAG doesn’t always work as expected: an overview of the business value, the data, and the technology behind it.

11 min read
avatarKarthik Rajan, Ph.D
Microsoft’s GraphRAG + AutoGen + Ollama + Chainlit = Fully Local & Free Multi-Agent RAG Superbot

This superbot app integrates GraphRAG with AutoGen agents, powered by local LLMs from Ollama, for free & offline embedding & inference.

11 min read
avatarVipra Singh
Building LLM Applications: Advanced RAG (Part 10)

Learn Large Language Models ( LLM ) through the lens of a Retrieval Augmented Generation ( RAG ) Application.

48 min read
avatarResearch Graph
RAG 2.0 is Coming?

A Unified and Collaborative Framework for LLM

6 min read