179 questions
No questions match those filters.
What are the three generations of multimodal RAG encodi...
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 plansGeneration one, extract-and-caption, runs a vision-language model over every image or table, embeds the resulting caption with an ordinary text embedder, and retrieves as pure text. It’s a lossy funnel: whatever the caption doesn’t mention becomes permanently unretrievable no matter how good downstream reranking is — a query for an exact cell value in a table can fail even though the number sits unambiguously on the page.
Generation two, a joint shared embedding space (CLIP-style), removes the captioning bottleneck by embedding image and text into one space via contrastive training, so similarity is a direct dot product with no lossy intermediate text. The cost shows up elsewhere: CLIP’s contrastive objective only ever supervises one pooled image vector against one pooled caption vector per pair, so nothing forces word-to-region correspondence, producing well-documented position bias (whatever a caption mentions first dominates retrieval regardless of query relevance) and demographic bias, plus a practical headache where similarity score distributions differ by modality, so one global relevance threshold misfires across a mixed corpus.
Generation three, document-as-image (ColPali-style), skips extraction and text entirely, encoding raw page patches directly — preserving exact layout and numeric precision that both prior generations could destroy — at a real storage cost, often an order of magnitude more than a single vector per page. The right engineering answer isn’t picking one generation for an entire corpus; it’s segmenting by content type, reserving the expensive document-as-image approach for layout- and number-heavy slices while keeping a shared embedding space for the plain-prose majority.