Discover how Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) is transforming AI by combining the power of large language models with real-time knowledge retrieval. Learn the architecture, implementation strategies, and best practices in plain English.
You ask ChatGPT about your company's Q4 earnings. It confidently responds with completely made-up numbers. You ask about documentation from last week—it has no idea it exists. The AI is brilliant, but it's working from outdated knowledge and can't access your private data. What if you could give it access to the information it needs, exactly when it needs it?
Before building, experiment with chunking strategies using our Chunking Optimizer. Learn best practices with our RAG Chunking Guide, and design prompts with the Prompt Designer—all 100% client-side.
Explore RAG Tools →Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) is a technique that gives AI models access to external knowledge bases so they can provide accurate, up-to-date answers grounded in real information. Think of it as giving an AI assistant a searchable library of documents.
Here's the non-technical explanation: Instead of an AI model trying to answer questions from memory alone (which leads to hallucinations and outdated information), RAG systems retrieve relevant information from a database first, then use that information to generate an accurate answer.
Without RAG: You ask a librarian a question. They answer from memory, which might be outdated or wrong.
With RAG: You ask the same question. The librarian searches the library's catalog, finds relevant books, reads the key passages, and then answers your question based on what they just read. The answer is accurate, current, and cites sources.
Large Language Models (LLMs) like GPT-4 and Claude are trained on massive datasets, but they have fundamental limitations:
Models are trained on data up to a specific date. GPT-4's knowledge stops in April 2023. Ask about events from last month? It has no idea.
User: "What were our company's Q4 2024 sales figures?"
LLM without RAG: "I don't have access to real-time data or your company's internal information. My knowledge was last updated in April 2023."
When LLMs don't know the answer, they often make things up with confidence. This is called hallucination, and it's a major problem for production systems.
User: "What's our company's vacation policy for remote workers?"
LLM without RAG: "Your company typically offers 15 days of PTO annually..." (completely fabricated)
LLMs can't access your company's documentation, customer data, internal wikis, or any private information. They only know what they were trained on—public internet data.
RAG systems follow a simple three-step workflow: Retrieve → Augment → Generate
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ RAG SYSTEM PIPELINE │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
User Question: "What is our company's remote work policy?"
↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ STEP 1: RETRIEVE (Find Relevant Information) │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 1. Convert question to embedding (vector) │
│ 2. Search vector database for similar embeddings │
│ 3. Retrieve top 3-5 most relevant document chunks │
│ │
│ Retrieved Chunks: │
│ → "Remote employees are entitled to flexible hours..." │
│ → "All employees must use VPN when accessing..." │
│ → "Work-from-home equipment reimbursement up to $500..." │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ STEP 2: AUGMENT (Combine Question + Retrieved Docs) │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Build prompt with: │
│ - Original user question │
│ - Retrieved document chunks │
│ - Instructions (answer using only provided context) │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ STEP 3: GENERATE (AI Creates Answer from Context) │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ LLM receives augmented prompt and generates response │
│ │
│ Response: │
│ "According to our company policy, remote employees │
│ have flexible hours and are eligible for up to $500 │
│ in equipment reimbursement. All remote access requires │
│ VPN connection for security." │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘When a user asks a question, the RAG system searches its knowledge base for relevant information. But how does it search? This is where embeddings and vector databases come in.
Embeddings are numerical representations of text that capture semantic meaning. Similar concepts have similar embeddings, even if the words are different.
Example: "puppy" and "dog" have similar embeddings, even though the words are different, because they mean similar things.
Here's the retrieval process:
Once relevant documents are retrieved, the RAG system builds a prompt that combines:
You are a helpful assistant. Answer the user's question using ONLY the information provided in the context below. If the answer is not in the context, say "I don't have that information." CONTEXT: --- Document 1: Remote employees are entitled to flexible work hours between 6 AM and 10 PM in their local timezone... Document 2: All employees working remotely must connect via the company VPN when accessing internal systems... Document 3: Work-from-home equipment reimbursement is available up to $500 per year for items such as desks, chairs, monitors... --- USER QUESTION: What is our company's remote work policy? ANSWER:
The augmented prompt (question + retrieved context + instructions) is sent to the LLM. The model generates an answer based on the provided context. Because the context is included, the answer is accurate and grounded in real information rather than hallucinated.
Embedding models convert text into numerical vectors. Popular options:
| Embedding Model | Dimensions | Cost | Best For |
|---|---|---|---|
| OpenAI text-embedding-3-small | 1536 | $0.02/1M tokens | General purpose, cost-effective |
| OpenAI text-embedding-3-large | 3072 | $0.13/1M tokens | Higher accuracy, semantic search |
| Cohere Embed v3 | 1024 | $0.10/1M tokens | Multilingual, compression |
| Open-source (sentence-transformers) | 384-768 | Free (self-hosted) | Privacy, full control |
Vector databases store embeddings and enable fast similarity search. Think of them as specialized databases optimized for finding "things that are similar" rather than exact matches.
Chunking is the process of splitting large documents into smaller segments. This is critical because:
Use our Chunking Optimizer to test different chunk sizes and overlap strategies on your documents. See how chunking affects retrieval quality before building your RAG system. Read our comprehensive RAG Chunking Guide for implementation details.
Try Chunking Optimizer →Vector databases use specialized algorithms to find similar embeddings quickly:
Measures the angle between vectors. Values range from -1 to 1, where 1 means identical semantic meaning. Most common metric for text embeddings.
Fast approximate nearest neighbor search. Used by Pinecone, Weaviate, and Qdrant. Excellent balance of speed and accuracy.
Partitions vector space into regions, then searches only relevant regions. Used by FAISS. Great for massive datasets (millions of vectors).
Developers often ask: "Should I use RAG or fine-tune my model?" Here's the breakdown:
| Factor | RAG | Fine-Tuning |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | Low (embedding + storage + retrieval) | High ($1,000-$10,000+ per training run) |
| Update frequency | Real-time (add new docs anytime) | Requires retraining (weeks/months) |
| Transparency | High (cite source documents) | Low (black box, no citations) |
| Data volume needed | Any amount (works with 10 docs or 10M) | High (1,000+ quality examples minimum) |
| Latency | Slightly higher (retrieval + generation) | Lower (generation only) |
| Best for | Knowledge bases, docs, Q&A, current info | Specialized behavior, domain language, style |
| Flexibility | Switch base models anytime | Locked to specific model version |
Many production systems use RAG + Fine-Tuning together. Fine-tune the base model to understand your domain and output format, then use RAG to retrieve current information. This combines the best of both worlds: specialized behavior plus access to updated knowledge.
Index support documentation, FAQs, and previous ticket resolutions. Chatbot retrieves relevant articles and generates helpful responses with citations to documentation.
Example: Zendesk, Intercom, and customer support platforms using RAG to auto-suggest answers
Make internal wikis, Confluence pages, Notion docs, and Google Drive searchable via natural language. Employees ask questions and get accurate answers with source links.
Example: "What's our expense reimbursement policy for international travel?" returns policy doc excerpts
Index codebase, README files, API docs, and internal engineering guides. Developers ask questions about APIs, libraries, and implementation patterns.
Example: GitHub Copilot Chat uses RAG to answer questions about repositories and codebases
Search legal contracts, regulatory documents, case law, and compliance guidelines. Provides answers with exact citations required for audit trails.
Example: Harvey AI uses RAG to help lawyers research case law and draft contracts
Index medical journals, drug databases, clinical guidelines, and patient records (HIPAA-compliant). Doctors and researchers query medical knowledge with source attribution.
Example: UpToDate and medical AI assistants using RAG for evidence-based medicine
Index news articles, blog posts, and content libraries. Users search conversationally and get summarized results from multiple sources.
Example: Perplexity AI uses RAG to search the web and synthesize answers with citations
Ready to build? Here's a complete walkthrough using Python, OpenAI embeddings, Chroma vector database, and GPT-4.
# Install required libraries pip install openai chromadb tiktoken # You'll need an OpenAI API key # Get one at: https://platform.openai.com/api-keys
# sample_documents.py
documents = [
{
"id": "doc1",
"text": "Remote employees are entitled to flexible work hours between 6 AM and 10 PM in their local timezone. Core meeting hours are 10 AM to 3 PM EST.",
"metadata": {"source": "employee_handbook", "section": "remote_work"}
},
{
"id": "doc2",
"text": "All employees working remotely must connect via the company VPN when accessing internal systems, databases, or customer data. VPN credentials are issued by IT.",
"metadata": {"source": "security_policy", "section": "vpn"}
},
{
"id": "doc3",
"text": "Work-from-home equipment reimbursement is available up to $500 per year for items such as desks, chairs, monitors, keyboards, and ergonomic accessories.",
"metadata": {"source": "benefits_guide", "section": "equipment"}
},
{
"id": "doc4",
"text": "Remote employees must attend mandatory all-hands meetings via video conference on the first Monday of each month at 2 PM EST.",
"metadata": {"source": "employee_handbook", "section": "meetings"}
}
]# build_rag_index.py
import openai
import chromadb
from chromadb.config import Settings
# Initialize OpenAI
openai.api_key = "your-api-key-here"
# Initialize Chroma vector database
chroma_client = chromadb.Client(Settings(
chroma_db_impl="duckdb+parquet",
persist_directory="./chroma_db"
))
# Create or get collection
collection = chroma_client.get_or_create_collection(
name="company_docs",
metadata={"description": "Company documentation for RAG"}
)
# Generate embeddings and add to database
def embed_and_store(documents):
for doc in documents:
# Generate embedding using OpenAI
response = openai.embeddings.create(
model="text-embedding-3-small",
input=doc["text"]
)
embedding = response.data[0].embedding
# Store in Chroma
collection.add(
ids=[doc["id"]],
embeddings=[embedding],
documents=[doc["text"]],
metadatas=[doc["metadata"]]
)
print(f"Added {doc['id']} to vector database")
# Run indexing
from sample_documents import documents
embed_and_store(documents)
print("✅ Indexing complete!")# rag_query.py
import openai
import chromadb
from chromadb.config import Settings
openai.api_key = "your-api-key-here"
# Connect to existing Chroma database
chroma_client = chromadb.Client(Settings(
chroma_db_impl="duckdb+parquet",
persist_directory="./chroma_db"
))
collection = chroma_client.get_collection(name="company_docs")
def rag_query(user_question, top_k=3):
"""
RAG pipeline: Retrieve → Augment → Generate
"""
# STEP 1: RETRIEVE
# Generate embedding for user question
question_embedding = openai.embeddings.create(
model="text-embedding-3-small",
input=user_question
).data[0].embedding
# Query vector database for similar documents
results = collection.query(
query_embeddings=[question_embedding],
n_results=top_k
)
retrieved_docs = results['documents'][0]
# STEP 2: AUGMENT
# Build context from retrieved documents
context = "\n\n".join([f"Document {i+1}: {doc}"
for i, doc in enumerate(retrieved_docs)])
# Build augmented prompt
prompt = f"""You are a helpful assistant. Answer the user's question using ONLY the information provided in the context below. If the answer is not in the context, say "I don't have that information."
CONTEXT:
---
{context}
---
USER QUESTION: {user_question}
ANSWER:"""
# STEP 3: GENERATE
# Send to LLM for answer generation
response = openai.chat.completions.create(
model="gpt-4",
messages=[
{"role": "system", "content": "You are a helpful company assistant."},
{"role": "user", "content": prompt}
],
temperature=0
)
answer = response.choices[0].message.content
return {
"question": user_question,
"answer": answer,
"sources": retrieved_docs
}
# Test the RAG system
if __name__ == "__main__":
question = "What is our company's remote work policy?"
result = rag_query(question)
print(f"\n❓ QUESTION: {result['question']}")
print(f"\n✅ ANSWER: {result['answer']}")
print(f"\n📚 SOURCES USED:")
for i, source in enumerate(result['sources'], 1):
print(f" {i}. {source[:100]}...")# Run the RAG query python rag_query.py # Expected output: ❓ QUESTION: What is our company's remote work policy? ✅ ANSWER: According to our company policy, remote employees have flexible work hours between 6 AM and 10 PM in their local timezone, with core meeting hours from 10 AM to 3 PM EST. All remote workers must connect via company VPN when accessing internal systems. Additionally, work-from-home equipment reimbursement is available up to $500 per year for items like desks, chairs, and monitors. 📚 SOURCES USED: 1. Remote employees are entitled to flexible work hours between 6 AM and 10 PM... 2. All employees working remotely must connect via the company VPN... 3. Work-from-home equipment reimbursement is available up to $500 per year...
You've built a working RAG system. The AI answered accurately using retrieved context, didn't hallucinate, and provided source attribution. This is the foundation for production RAG systems used by companies like Notion, Slack, and Intercom.
Poor chunking is the #1 reason RAG systems fail. Spend time experimenting with chunk sizes and overlap strategies.
Don't just rely on semantic similarity. Use metadata to filter results:
# Query with metadata filtering
results = collection.query(
query_embeddings=[question_embedding],
n_results=5,
where={
"source": "employee_handbook", # Only retrieve from handbook
"last_updated": {"$gt": "2024-01-01"} # Only recent docs
}
)Semantic search (embeddings) is powerful but sometimes misses exact keyword matches. Combine both for best results.
Your RAG prompt critically affects output quality:
Vector similarity retrieves candidates. Re-ranking models score relevance more accurately.
from cohere import Client
# Initialize Cohere for re-ranking
co = Client(api_key="your-cohere-key")
# Re-rank retrieved documents
reranked = co.rerank(
query=user_question,
documents=retrieved_docs,
top_n=3,
model="rerank-english-v2.0"
)
# Use top 3 re-ranked docs in prompt
final_docs = [doc.document for doc in reranked.results]How do you know if your RAG system is working well? Measure these metrics:
| Metric | What It Measures | Target |
|---|---|---|
| Retrieval Precision | % of retrieved docs that are actually relevant | 80%+ |
| Retrieval Recall | % of relevant docs successfully retrieved | 90%+ |
| Answer Accuracy | Correctness of final AI-generated answer | 95%+ |
| Hallucination Rate | % of answers containing fabricated information | <5% |
| Latency (p95) | Time from query to response | <3 seconds |
| User Satisfaction | Thumbs up/down or 1-5 star ratings | 4.0+ avg |
Create 50-100 test questions with known correct answers. Run your RAG system against these questions and measure metrics. Iterate on chunking, retrieval, and prompts until you hit targets.
Pro tip: Use GPT-4 to automatically generate test questions from your documents, then manually verify answers.
Rewrite the user's question in multiple ways to improve retrieval coverage.
# Original query: "remote work policy"
# Expanded queries:
queries = [
"remote work policy",
"work from home guidelines",
"telecommuting rules and requirements",
"distributed team work arrangements"
]
# Retrieve for each query, combine and de-duplicate resultsFor complex questions requiring multiple pieces of information, retrieve iteratively.
Question: "Who is the VP of Engineering and what's their education background?"
Use an LLM to analyze the question and decide which collections to search or what filters to apply.
# User asks: "What was our Q4 2024 revenue?"
# LLM analyzes question and generates:
{
"collection": "financial_reports",
"filters": {
"year": 2024,
"quarter": "Q4",
"type": "revenue"
},
"search_query": "quarterly revenue figures"
}Cause: Poor chunking, weak embeddings, or insufficient metadata
Solution: Experiment with chunk sizes using Chunking Optimizer, add metadata filters, try hybrid search
Cause: Weak prompt instructions, contradictory documents
Solution: Strengthen prompt with "ONLY use provided context," use temperature=0, filter contradictory results
Cause: Large vector database, inefficient indexing
Solution: Use HNSW indexes, implement caching for common queries, pre-filter with metadata before vector search
Cause: Stale documents in vector database
Solution: Implement automated re-indexing pipelines, add "last_updated" metadata, filter by recency
Embedding costs: $0.02-$0.13 per 1M tokens (one-time per document). Vector database: $0-$100/month depending on scale. LLM generation: $0.01-$0.06 per query. For 10,000 monthly queries on 1,000 documents: approximately $50-200/month total.
Yes. Extract text from PDFs using libraries like PyPDF2 or pdfplumber. For images with text, use OCR (Tesseract, Google Vision API). For multimodal RAG (understanding images), use multimodal embedding models like CLIP or OpenAI's vision models.
Use multilingual embedding models like Cohere Embed Multilingual or mBERT. Store language metadata and filter by user language. For queries in different languages, either translate to a common language or use cross-lingual embeddings.
No practical limit. Large documents are chunked into smaller segments. A 1,000-page PDF becomes 2,000-5,000 chunks. Vector databases like Pinecone can handle billions of vectors, so scale is rarely the bottleneck.
RAG is better for large knowledge bases (1,000+ documents) because: 1) It's cheaper (only retrieve relevant docs), 2) Faster (smaller prompts), 3) More accurate (focused context), 4) Dynamic updates (add docs without retraining). Use long context for single-document analysis or when you need the entire document.
Implement access control at the retrieval layer. Store user permissions in metadata, filter results by user role/permissions before sending to LLM. For maximum security, use self-hosted vector databases and private LLM deployments. Never log or cache sensitive queries/responses.
Experiment with chunking strategies, optimize retrieval, and design effective prompts with our AI Studio tools—100% client-side, no API keys required.
Explore RAG Tools →