对比了RAG与GraphRAG在智能搜索中的表现,发现动态推理可缩小两者差距。
Do We Still Need GraphRAG? Benchmarking RAG and GraphRAG for Agentic Search Systems
- 构建统一基准RAGSearch,评估动态多轮检索下的RAG与GraphRAG性能
- 动态推理使普通RAG性能接近GraphRAG,尤其在强化学习设置下
- 图结构仍更适合复杂多跳推理,尤其当预处理成本分摊后
检索增强生成(RAG)及其图结构扩展(GraphRAG)通过将大语言模型(LLM)的生成过程锚定于外部知识,有效提升了推理能力。然而,现有RAG和GraphRAG系统大多采用静态或单次检索,即在一次传入固定文档集。相比之下,新兴的智能体搜索系统支持动态、多轮检索与序列决策,结合原始RAG已展现显著提升,其交互隐式构建结构。这引发一个核心问题:智能体搜索能否弥补缺乏显式图结构的不足,从而降低对昂贵GraphRAG流水线的需求?为此,我们提出RAGSearch,一个统一基准,用于评估密集RAG与代表性GraphRAG方法作为智能体搜索中的检索基础设施。该基准涵盖训练自由与训练依赖的智能体推理,覆盖多个问答基准。为确保公平可复现比较,我们标准化了LLM主干、检索预算与推理协议,并报告完整测试集结果。除答案准确率外,还报告离线预处理成本、在线推理效率与稳定性。结果显示,智能体搜索显著提升密集RAG性能,并缩小其与GraphRAG的差距,尤其在基于强化学习的设置中。然而,对于复杂多跳推理,GraphRAG仍具优势,其在离线成本分摊后表现出更稳定的智能体搜索行为。这些发现明确了显式图结构与智能体搜索的互补作用,并为现代智能体RAG系统的检索设计提供了实践指导。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) and its graph-based extensions (GraphRAG) are effective paradigms for improving large language model (LLM) reasoning by grounding generation in external knowledge. However, most existing RAG and GraphRAG systems operate under static or one-shot retrieval, where a fixed set of documents is provided to the LLM in a single pass. In contrast, recent agentic search systems enable dynamic, multi-round retrieval and sequential decision-making during inference, and have shown strong gains when combined with vanilla RAG by introducing implicit structure through interaction. This progress raises a fundamental question: can agentic search compensate for the absence of explicit graph structure, reducing the need for costly GraphRAG pipelines? To answer this question, we introduce RAGSearch, a unified benchmark that evaluates dense RAG and representative GraphRAG methods as retrieval infrastructures under agentic search. RAGSearch covers both training-free and training-based agentic inference across multiple question answering benchmarks. To ensure fair and reproducible comparison, we standardize the LLM backbone, retrieval budgets, and inference protocols, and report results on full test sets. Beyond answer accuracy, we report offline preprocessing cost, online inference efficiency, and stability. Our results show that agentic search substantially improves dense RAG and narrows the performance gap to GraphRAG, particularly in RL-based settings. Nevertheless, GraphRAG remains advantageous for complex multi-hop reasoning, exhibiting more stable agentic search behavior when its offline cost is amortized. Together, these findings clarify the complementary roles of explicit graph structure and agentic search, and provide practical guidance on retrieval design for modern agentic RAG systems.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。