Chunk Recomputation under Real Document Revisions: Measuring Update Cost and Retrieval Quality of Fixed, Recursive, and Content-Defined Chunking

We present the first large-scale, cross-domain evaluation of document chunking strategies for dense retrieval, addressing a critical but underexplored aspect of retrieval-augmented systems. In our study, 36 segmentation methods spanning fixed-size, semantic, structure-aware, hierarchical, adaptive, and LLM-assisted approaches are benchmarked across six diverse knowledge domains using five different embedding models. Retrieval performance is assessed using graded relevance scores from a state-of-the-art LLM evaluator, with Normalised DCG@5 as the primary metric (complemented by Hit@5 and MRR). Our experiments show that content-aware chunking significantly improves retrieval effectiveness over naive fixed-length splitting. The top-performing strategy, Paragraph Group Chunking, achieved the highest overall accuracy (mean nDCG@50.459) and substantially better top-rank hit rates (Precision@124%, Hit@559%). In contrast, simple fixed-size character chunking as baselines performed poorly (nDCG@5 < 0.244, Precision@12-3%). We observe pronounced domain-specific differences: dynamic token sizing is strongest in biology, physics and health, while paragraph grouping is strongest in legal and maths. Larger embedding models yield higher absolute scores but remain sensitive to suboptimal segmentation, indicating that better chunking and large embeddings provide complementary benefits. In addition to accuracy gains, we quantify the efficiency trade-offs of advanced chunking. Producing more, smaller chunks can increase index size and latency. Consequently, we identify methods (like dynamic chunking) that approach an optimal balance of effectiveness and efficiency. These findings establish chunking as a vital lever for improving retrieval performance and reliability.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems use the question-answering capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) to access information outside their parameters. We evaluate if cluster-based semantic chunking improves retrieval and answer quality compared to fixed-size and recursive chunking evaluating on long, structured academic theses using the Retrieval Augmented Generation Assessment (RAGAs) framework. RAGAs based faithfulness shows limited reliability in this setup. Performance on fixed versus document specific questions varied substantially, likely related to the formatting of documents and preprocessing. Under the tested configuration, cluster-based chunking did not outperform simpler strategies.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems depend critically on document chunking quality for retrieving relevant context. Fixed chunking segments documents into uniform units irrespective of semantics or user intent, producing a precision-recall trade-off unresolvable by tuning chunk size alone. Semantic and agentic methods partially address these limitations but do not integrate user queries at the chunking stage. We present Query-Adaptive Semantic Chunking (QASC), which dynamically constructs chunks by integrating queries into segmentation through three mechanisms: cosine similarity scoring between sentence and query embeddings to identify seed sentences, contextual window expansion around seeds to preserve coherence, and chunk-level score aggregation to ensure holistic relevance. We evaluate QASC on 100 technical documents across 200 queries spanning four types, comparing against fixed chunking at five granularities, recursive splitting, semantic chunking, and agentic chunking. QASC achieves an F1-score of 0.85, a relative improvement of 18-27% over fixed chunking and 8-12% over semantic and agentic alternatives. Ablation studies confirm each component contributes meaningfully. Human evaluation by three annotators (Cohen kappa = 0.82) corroborates that QASC produces more relevant and coherent chunks than existing methods.