Open-RAG: Enhanced Retrieval Augmented Reasoning with Open-Source Large Language Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) has been shown to enhance the factual accuracy of Large Language Models (LLMs) by providing external evidence, but existing methods often suffer from limited reasoning capabilities (e.g., multi-hop complexities) in effectively using such evidence, particularly when using open-source LLMs. To mitigate this gap, in this paper, we introduce a novel framework, Open-RAG, designed to enhance reasoning capabilities in RAG with open-source LLMs. Our framework transforms an arbitrary dense LLM into a parameter-efficient sparse mixture of experts (MoE) model capable of handling complex reasoning tasks, including both single- and multi-hop queries. Open-RAG uniquely trains the model to navigate challenging distractors that appear relevant but are misleading. By combining the constructive learning and architectural transformation, Open-RAG leverages latent learning, dynamically selecting relevant experts and integrating external knowledge effectively for more accurate and contextually relevant responses. Additionally, we propose a hybrid adaptive retrieval method to determine retrieval necessity and balance the trade-off between performance gain and inference speed. Experimental results show that Open-RAG outperforms state-of-the-art LLMs and RAG models in various knowledge-intensive tasks. Our method based on Llama2-7B sets new benchmarks, surpassing ChatGPT-RAG and Self-RAG. For example, in multi-hop HotpotQA, it achieves an EM score of 63.3, compared to RAG 2.0's 54 and Command R+'s 60.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.009 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".