179 questions
No questions match those filters.
What are the top reasons a RAG system hallucinates, and...
This is one of the questions in the full AI/ML interview bank. Pro unlocks all 1789 questions; Premium includes the same bank plus the highest daily Practice limit.
See plansHallucination in RAG almost always traces back to one of five root causes, and the instinct to blame the generation model first is usually wrong — retrieval failure is responsible for the largest share of cases. Wrong chunks retrieved means the model is doing its best with irrelevant context; the fix is on the retrieval side — hybrid search, reranking, better chunking — not the prompt.
A genuine knowledge gap is different: the answer simply isn’t anywhere in the corpus, and the model fills the void with something plausible-sounding. The fix is a similarity-score floor below which the system returns “not found in the knowledge base” instead of forcing a generation. Lost-in-the-middle is a third cause — the right chunk was retrieved but buried in a low-attention position, addressed by ordering chunks with the strongest matches at the start and end of context.
The remaining two are process issues rather than retrieval issues: weak grounding instructions that let the model quietly blend retrieved context with its own training knowledge (fixed with an explicit “answer only from what’s provided” instruction), and stale or contradictory documents sitting in the index side by side, which freshness metadata and superseded-document flags address. The debugging discipline that matters most: check what was actually retrieved before assuming the generation step is at fault.