Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Enhancing RAG with Active Learning on Conversation Records: Reject Incapables and Answer Capables

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2502.09073 v1 pith:YSZHYH7P submitted 2025-02-13 cs.CL

Enhancing RAG with Active Learning on Conversation Records: Reject Incapables and Answer Capables

classification cs.CL
keywords activelearningllmsconversationdatasetsannotationdevelopdistance
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is a key technique for leveraging external knowledge and reducing hallucinations in large language models (LLMs). However, RAG still struggles to fully prevent hallucinated responses. To address this, it is essential to identify samples prone to hallucination or guide LLMs toward correct responses, which experts then annotate to develop high-quality datasets for refining LLMs. However, the growing scarcity of such datasets makes their creation challenging. This paper proposes using the vast amount of conversations from widespread LLM usage to build these datasets, training LLMs to avoid hallucination-prone questions while accurately responding to manageable ones. Given the impracticality of expert-annotating all conversation records, the paper introduces AL4RAG, which uses active learning to select the most suitable conversation samples for annotation, optimizing performance within an annotation budget. Additionally, recognizing that traditional active learning methods are not fully compatible with RAG due to unsuitable distance metrics, we develop a novel sample distance measurement for RAG active learning. Extensive experiments show that our method consistently outperforms baselines across multiple metrics.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.