cs.CLMay 10, 2026

Byte-Exact Deduplication in Retrieval-Augmented Generation: A Three-Regime Empirical Analysis Across Public Benchmarks

Authors: Sietse Schelpe

Organizations: Corbenic AI, Inc.

Abstract

This preprint presents an empirical analysis of byte-exact chunk-level deduplication in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) pipelines. We measure context reduction across three distinct operating regimes: clean academic retrieval (0.16% byte reduction on 22.2M BeIR passages), constructed enterprise patterns (24.03% reduction), and multi-turn conversational AI (80.34% reduction). To validate quality preservation, we conducted a cross-vendor 5-judge calibrated panel evaluation across four production APIs (Google Gemini 2.5 Flash, Anthropic Claude Sonnet 4.6, Meta Llama 3.3 70B, and OpenAI GPT-5.1). Applying a five-category human-in-the-loop noise-removal protocol to panel-majority materially different (MAT) pairs, we establish that byte-exact deduplication introduces zero measurable quality regression. Post-audit, all four vendors clear the strict <5% Wilson 95% upper-bound MAT threshold in both the clean and high-redundancy RAG regimes. This work demonstrates that substantial inference compute savings can be achieved deterministically without compromising evaluation-grade model quality.

Explore similar work

Jul 27, 2026cs.CL

Cross-Attention Calibrated Deduplication for Retrieval-Augmented Generation System

Common chunking strategies in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems often create redundant chunks. These redundant chunks make the vector database bigger and slow down retrieval. A common fix is cosine-similarity thresholding. This method reduces each chunk to a single vector, then compares vectors using a similarity score. But a single vector can lose the fine-grained, token-level detail needed to tell a true duplicate apart from a chunk that just shares the same topic. We propose Cross-Attention Calibrated Deduplication (CACD). CACD checks each new chunk against an in-memory pool of chunks already kept, using a cross-encoder instead of a single pooled vector. This keeps token-level detail all the way to the final comparison. CACD combines three parts: the cross-encoder comparison itself, a New Information Score (NIS) that measures how much of a chunk is not explained by a candidate already kept, and a majority vote across several candidates rather than a single best match. NIS is calculated from the attention entropy of the cross-encoder. We tested CACD against five existing filtering methods, nine chunking strategies, and 18 configurations, all on the full SQuAD 1.1 validation set. In our experiments, CACD removes 9.75% of chunks on average. This drop rate is close to other semantic-level methods, and much higher than exact-match filters, which barely remove anything. In these experiments, CACD also processes each configuration in 51.0 seconds on average, about 27% faster than the strongest baseline, NERExact (69.6s), and about 7x faster than cosine-similarity filtering (356.7s). These results come from a single dataset, so we present them as an early comparison, not a general claim. Code for the baseline evaluation and for CACD is available at https://github.com/lehuyphuong/rag_bench and https://github.com/lehuyphuong/cacd_dedup.
Phuong Le Huy, Nam H. Nguyen, Quan V. Dang
May 29, 2026cs.IR

A Systems-Level Analysis of Sensitivity, Robustness, and Stability in Retrieval-Augmented Generation

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems are often evaluated using final answer accuracy, even though their failures can originate from preprocessing, retrieval, context packing, or generation. This paper presents a controlled empirical study of RAG sensitivity, robustness, and stability across 56 experimental runs. We evaluate how chunk size, retrieval depth (top k), embedding-based reranking, probabilistic retrieval noise, and repeated seeded runs affect retrieval, context packing, and generation behavior. Using a fixed 500-question QA subset mapped to 20,958 unique corpus contexts, we analyze both final answer metrics and intermediate failure modes. Across these experiments, retrieval-oriented metrics improved under broader retrieval settings, while downstream exact-match and F1 scores often behaved non-monotonically. We also observe preprocessing-induced answer loss under smaller chunk sizes, progressive degradation under retrieval corruption, and higher observed variance in broader retrieval regimes. These findings suggest that RAG evaluation should include sensitivity, robustness, stability, and multi-stage failure analysis rather than relying only on final answer accuracy.
Bharath Simha Reddy Muthyam
Sep 11, 2026cs.LG

REVA: Reusable Evidence View Aggregation for Context-Efficient RAG Serving

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) improves knowledge-intensive large language model (LLM) applications by conditioning generation on retrieved documents, but longer contexts increase latency, key-value (KV) cache memory, and token cost. Post-retrieval compression can reduce this cost, yet existing compressors often operate independently for each query, rely on auxiliary models or rewriting, and introduce online overhead that can offset the benefit of shorter prompts. We revisit RAG compression from a data-mining perspective by aggregating historical query--document--model interactions into reusable evidence views. We first show that modern compressors have unstable gains over simple truncation and can add substantial inference-time latency. We then propose Reusable Evidence View Aggregation (REVA), a framework that mines the target generator's historical attention traces into a document-keyed, budget-agnostic score store. REVA maps token-level attention to readable word units, aggregates importance across repeated document accesses, and renders budget-specific plain-text views that preserve document order and the standard RAG interface. Across four representative benchmarks and modern LLMs, REVA improves generation quality by 1.0--5.8 points over existing advances, while reducing compression overhead by a factor of 5.3 to 15.6, adding less than 40 ms of latency.
Tuan Nguyen, Qiran Hu, Banruo Liu +3