The Interference Gap: Comparing Retrieval Bounds in Human Memory and RAG Systems

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems depend on the geometric properties of vector representations to retrieve contextually appropriate evidence. When source documents interleave multiple topics within contiguous text, standard vectorization produces embedding spaces in which semantically distinct content occupies overlapping neighborhoods. We term this condition semantic entanglement. We formalize entanglement as a model-relative measure of cross-topic overlap in embedding space and define an Entanglement Index (EI) as a quantitative proxy. We argue that higher EI constrains attainable Top-K retrieval precision under cosine similarity retrieval. To address this, we introduce the Semantic Disentanglement Pipeline (SDP), a four-stage preprocessing framework that restructures documents prior to embedding. We further propose context-conditioned preprocessing, in which document structure is shaped by patterns of operational use, and a continuous feedback mechanism that adapts document structure based on agent performance. We evaluate SDP on a real-world enterprise healthcare knowledge base comprising over 2,000 documents across approximately 25 sub-domains. Top-K retrieval precision improves from approximately 32% under fixed-token chunking to approximately 82% under SDP, while mean EI decreases from 0.71 to 0.14. We do not claim that entanglement fully explains RAG failure, but that it captures a distinct preprocessing failure mode that downstream optimization cannot reliably correct once encoded into the vector space.

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.

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) typically retrieves a fixed number of passages for every query. This is wasteful when the reader already knows the answer, and it can be harmful when irrelevant or partially relevant passages distract the reader. We formulate adaptive RAG as calibrated retrieval-budget allocation: given a query, decide whether to answer closed-book, retrieve a compact context (k=1), retrieve a full context (k=5), or abstain. The contribution is a probability interface rather than a new raw uncertainty signal. We calibrate sequence log-probability and prefix-logit uncertainty signals into probabilities of correctness, then use these probabilities for graded context selection, selective abstention, and explicit latency/token trade-offs. Across core QA experiments on TriviaQA, Natural Questions, and MS MARCO, with auxiliary PopQA motivation and Qwen/Llama family checks, diagnostic out-of-fold calibration improves probability quality dramatically: for sequence log-probability, ECE drops from 0.275 to 0.062 on TriviaQA, 0.643 to 0.009 on NQ, and 0.711 to 0.031 on MS MARCO. Graded retrieval improves full-context and passage-budget frontiers for both our signal and TARG-style prefix entropy/margin, while retrieval-call AUC remains essentially tied with binary gating because k=1 is still a retrieval call. Held-out train/validation/test threshold experiments report deployable operating points. At matched-accuracy frontier operating points, a measured cost model reveals that gating is not universally faster: it increases latency by about 27% on Qwen3-8B but saves about 8% on Qwen3-32B. These results support a nuanced view of adaptive RAG: calibrated confidence is best understood as a reusable interface for allocating retrieval budget under task and system constraints.