Ensure reliable, on-target Gen-AI responses
Protect intellectual property and ensure compliance
Safely navigate GenAI: Detect and avoid off-topic conversations
Keep interactions tasteful, filter NSFW content
Secure company data: Detect and anonymize sensitive info
Shield data from smart LLM SQL queries
Detect and filter out malicious input for prompt integrity
Safeguard LLM: Keep model instructions confidential
Explore LLM interactions for user engagement insights
Track costs, queries, and tokens for budget control
Tailored production ML dashboards to monitor key metrics
Real-time ML monitoring to detect drifts and monitor predictions
Direct Data Connectors: Monitor and observe billions of predictions
Root Cause Analysis to gain actionable insights and explore model predictions
LLM Observability for your ML: Monitor, troubleshoot and enhance efficiency
Explainable AI to understand, ensure trust, and communicate predictions
Tailored Aporia Observe for your models: Integrate any model in minutes
Integrate Aporia to every LLM and tool in the market
Empower tabular models with Aporia
Streamline AI Act compliance with Aporia Guardrails and Observe
Unlock potential in CV & NLP models
A team of Cybersecurity, Compliance, and AI Experts that ensures Aporia users top-tier protection
Optimize LLM & GenAI apps for peak performance
Your go-to resource for Aporia insights and guides
Integrate Aporia to your LLM as a Proxy with Guardrail Policies
Integrate Aporia with Your Firewall for AI Tool Security
Easily Integrate and Monitor ML Models in Production
Define ML Observability Resources as Code with SDK
Learn about AI control from our experts
Your dictionary for AI terminology.
Step-by-step guides to master AI
Dive into our GitHub projects and examples
Unlock AI secrets with our eBooks
Elevate your GenAI and LLM knwoledge
Navigate the core of ML observability
Metrics, feature importance and more
Think about searching for documents in a vast digital library. You’re looking for information on a specific topic. In RAG LLMs, the system does more than just search for text that matches your query. It actually digs into the deeper context of the documents and finds the information that’s most relevant to your topic. That’s where embeddings come into play. They help the system understand and retrieve the most suitable information for you.
A regular text search, like that performed by Solr, operates on literal text matches. It’s efficient but can miss nuanced or contextually relevant documents that don’t contain exact search terms. Embeddings, however, represent documents as vectors in a high-dimensional space, capturing semantic relationships beyond mere word presence.
In the context of a large corpus, the challenge is to identify the broadest set of relevant document chunks within the finite context window of an LLM. Embeddings excel here, enabling the system to identify and retrieve content that a literal text search might overlook.
Embedding types: In the context of RAG LLMs, various types of embeddings can be utilized, such as Word2Vec, GloVe, or BERT embeddings. Each of these has unique characteristics. For instance, Word2Vec captures semantic relationships based on word co-occurrences, while BERT embeddings, derived from transformer models, are contextually richer, capturing the nuances of word meanings based on surrounding text.
Chunking algorithms: The process of breaking down documents into semantically cohesive chunks is pivotal in RAG LLMs. Algorithms like Sentence-BERT can be used to generate embeddings for individual sentences, facilitating the identification of semantically dense chunks. The choice of algorithm significantly influences the granularity and relevance of the information retrieved.
The process of chunking in vector databases involves segmenting documents into portions that are semantically cohesive, ensuring that each chunk encapsulates a complete idea or concept. This is different from regular text search, where the focus is more on keywords and specific text fragments.
It’s a common misconception that embeddings are directly fed into LLMs as part of the prompt. In reality, embeddings serve as an intermediate step. They guide the retrieval of text chunks from the database, which is then converted back into a readable format and combined with the original user prompt. This enriched prompt is what’s actually fed into the LLM.
The LLM doesn’t process the embeddings directly. Instead, it works with the enriched text, leveraging its own encoding mechanisms to interpret this information.
Integrating RAG into an LLM isn’t just a matter of wrapping an existing model in a new layer. In RAG systems that use GPT-4 as the LLM model, the architecture of the LLM itself is not modified. Instead, a vector layer is added in front, augmenting the prompts, which allows the model to handle enriched prompts effectively by interpreting the additional context and integrating it seamlessly with the user’s original query.
RAG systems are inherently complex due to several factors:
In summary, embeddings play a crucial role in RAG LLMs, enabling a more nuanced and contextually rich retrieval of information. The integration of embeddings into LLMs is not just a matter of compression or skipping steps in processing; it’s about enhancing the model’s ability to comprehend and respond to complex queries. Implementing RAG involves architectural adjustments to the LLM and a deep understanding of the challenges associated with relevance search, context window limitations, and effective chunking strategies.
Feel free to reach out to us with any questions.