but i agree, the problem with these RAG models & even deep research is like they are just seeing the trees (more like leafs) not the forest. You get a sense they are just looking at individual chunks and trying to mix them. Thats why they often cite papers in odd ways, not wrong per se but weird.
i dont think it is an unsolvable problem. Up to now, people were trying mostly on Q&A type tasks, but as they move towards longer report generation, the problems can be reduced by a combination of careful handcrafted workflows + agent reasoning
Hence my view people typically undergraduates who don't know what a good literature review look like shouldn't even use these tools.. particularly untutored...
Also depends on whether you're making decisions based on the info for you, or whether you're trying to change clinical practice. The latter must meet a higher standard!
Comments