3 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
    1. 2. A Schema-RAG system using a Knowledge Graph operates differently:The AI first consults the ontology to understand the question’s components.It finds that Support Ticket is a class linked via a property referencesProduct to the Product class.It discovers that the Product class has a property called productType, and that ‘Connected Service’ is a specific instance of that type.Armed with this understanding of the relationships, it constructs a precise, formal query (SPARQL) to retrieve only the tickets that conform to this logic.

      Congrats you just recreated a pre-existing tab in your existing support ticket system, by vibecoding a sparql query that was likely already in your system's manual even.

    2. Knowledge Graphs provide the semantic context, constraints and explicit relationships that LLMs lack. This enables true reasoning, like navigating a map of your business, instead of just text retrieval.

      knowledge graphs represent semantic context and relationships / constraints. K-graphs are a 1980s thing, I know we added them into the reference architecture for systems of digital twins I cowrote. But have no understanding more recent than the 1990s. - [ ] spend #30mins collecting current state of the art on #knowledgegraphs #pkm

    3. Standard Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) over documents is a good first step, but it fails when faced with complex, cross-domain enterprise questions. It finds text that looks similar, which isn’t the same as finding facts that are related.

      criticism of retrieval augmented generatio (RAG): fails in cross domain settings, finds similar text not relations between facts or meaning