179 questions
No questions match those filters.
What are the common ways a RAG system actually fails on...
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 plansSeven failure modes recur across production RAG systems, and they matter because they look identical from the outside — a wrong answer — while needing entirely different fixes. Wrong chunks retrieved traces back to embedding quality or chunking strategy, and the fix is better embeddings, hybrid search, or reranking. Right chunks retrieved but a wrong answer anyway means the LLM misread or ignored good context, which calls for stronger prompting or a more capable model, not a retrieval fix. Outdated information means the knowledge base wasn’t kept in sync with its source, calling for automated ingestion and version tracking rather than a one-off manual fix.
Missing information means a document was never ingested or was chunked in a way that made a section unretrievable, which coverage audits catch. Context overflow — too many chunks stuffed into one prompt — gets solved by reranking down to fewer, more relevant chunks and compression, not by retrieving even more. Hallucination despite having the right context in hand is a generation-side problem, addressed with faithfulness checks and enforced citations. And latency spikes point to caching, smaller models for simple queries, or pre-computed embeddings. The actual skill here isn’t memorizing the list — it’s diagnosing correctly which of the seven you’re looking at before reaching for a fix, the way you’d check retrieved chunks first, then the chunk content, before blaming the model.