Retrieval-Augmented Generation Must Move Beyond Factual Grounding to Represent Diverse Opinions
Abstract
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems are built on an unexamined assumption - that queries have correct answers and retrieval should converge toward them. This position paper argues that this creates a factual bias where RAG systems optimize for reducing epistemic uncertainty while ignoring the aleatoric uncertainty, inherent in opinion-rich content. The consequences go beyond technical limitations- due to risk of minority voice erasure and risk of opinion manipulation. To address this, we formalize opinion-aware retrieval through uncertainty quantification and derive a unified objective using the Wasserstein distance. As an existence proof, we present Opinion-Aware RAG (O-RAG), which enriches documents with LLM-extracted, entity-linked opinion metadata before indexing. Across e-commerce seller forums and public hotel reviews, O-RAG reduces Wasserstein distance to corpus-level sentiment distributions by 18-48%, and human evaluators preferred its responses 79.2% of the time. We close with a research agenda for opinion-aware RAG.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Knowledge Management Perspective of Generative Artificial Intelligence
- Navigating Generative Artificial Intelligence Promises and Perils for Knowledge and Creative Work
- Characterizing the evolving research on enterprise content management
- Large language models and multimodal foundation models for precision oncology
- From Generative AI to Extended Reality: Multidisciplinary Perspectives on the Challenges, Opportunities, and Future of Educational Computing
- Generative Artificial Intelligence: A New Engine for Advancing Environmental Science and Engineering
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.