0

On the impact of retrieved content representations in RAG Pipelines

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) supplements a language model's input with retrieved documents, yet most RAG pipelines inherit retrieval components designed for human readers.

Year
2026
Hosting
Full text hostedCC-BY-4.0

Cite

Notes

Only stored in your browser.

Attribution

Abstract & full text
arxiv.org/abs/2605.30790CC-BY-4.0
TL;DR
Semantic Scholar
Attribution policy →

Abstract

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) supplements a language model's input with retrieved documents, yet most RAG pipelines inherit retrieval components designed for human readers. How retrieved content should be represented when the consumer is a large language model (LLM) rather than a human is less well understood. Recent work has proposed transformations of retrieved content and identified properties that affect generation, but each examines a single transformation or property in isolation, leaving open which features of a document's representation matter most. We address this with a controlled comparison: holding retrieval fixed, we vary only the representation of retrieved documents, comparing an original baseline against thirteen transformations spanning selection, summarisation, and reformulation, in query-dependent and query-independent variants. Across these fourteen representations we measure question-answering accuracy for four generators, and for each representation we also measure answer retention: whether a known answer-bearing document still supports its answer after transformation. We find that answer retention is the primary determinant of generator accuracy; notably, when retention is high, a representation's wording, structure, length, and query-dependence have limited effect. This suggests that accuracy gains attributed to specific mechanisms in prior work may be partly explained by how well those mechanisms preserve answer-bearing content, an attribution that cannot be settled without controlling for retention.