Comprehensive Comparison of RAG Methods Across Multi-Domain Conversational QA
Klejda Alushi, Jan Strich, Chris Biemann, Martin Semmann

TL;DR
This paper systematically compares various retrieval-augmented generation methods for multi-turn conversational question answering across diverse datasets, revealing that simpler, well-aligned retrieval strategies often outperform complex techniques.
Contribution
It provides the first comprehensive empirical evaluation of RAG methods in multi-turn conversational QA, highlighting the importance of retrieval strategy alignment over complexity.
Findings
Reranking, hybrid BM25, and HyDE outperform vanilla RAG.
Advanced techniques may degrade performance below baseline.
Dataset characteristics and dialogue length significantly affect retrieval effectiveness.
Abstract
Conversational question answering increasingly relies on retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) to ground large language models (LLMs) in external knowledge. Yet, most existing studies evaluate RAG methods in isolation and primarily focus on single-turn settings. This paper addresses the lack of a systematic comparison of RAG methods for multi-turn conversational QA, where dialogue history, coreference, and shifting user intent substantially complicate retrieval. We present a comprehensive empirical study of vanilla and advanced RAG methods across eight diverse conversational QA datasets spanning multiple domains. Using a unified experimental setup, we evaluate retrieval quality and answer generation using generator and retrieval metrics, and analyze how performance evolves across conversation turns. Our results show that robust yet straightforward methods, such as reranking, hybrid BM25,…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
Taxonomy
TopicsTopic Modeling · Speech and dialogue systems · Expert finding and Q&A systems
