Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) represents a significant advancement in artificial intelligence combining a retrieval phase with a generative phase, with the latter typically being powered by Large Language Models (LLMs). Common wisdom and practices in RAG involve using "instructed" LLMs, which are fine-tuned with supervised training to enhance their ability to follow instructions and are aligned with human preferences using state-of-the-art techniques.However, contrary to this popular belief, our study demonstrates that base models outperform their instructed counterparts in RAG tasks by 20% on average under our experimental settings. This finding challenges the prevailing assumptions about the superiority of instructed LLMs in RAG applications. Further investigations reveal a more complex situation, questioning fundamental aspects of RAG and suggesting the need for broader discussions on the topic; or, as Fromm would have it, "Seldom is a glance at the statistics enough to understand the meaning of the figures".
A Tale of Trust and Accuracy: Base vs. Instruct LLMs in RAG Systems / Cuconasu, F., Trappolini, G., Tonellotto, N., Silvestri, F.. - (2026). (ACL 2026 - Workshop on Multilingual Report Generation via Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG4Reports) San Diego; USA ) [10.18653/v1/2026.rag4reports-1.3].
A Tale of Trust and Accuracy: Base vs. Instruct LLMs in RAG Systems
Florin Cuconasu
Primo
;Giovanni Trappolini;Nicola Tonellotto;Fabrizio Silvestri
2026
Abstract
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) represents a significant advancement in artificial intelligence combining a retrieval phase with a generative phase, with the latter typically being powered by Large Language Models (LLMs). Common wisdom and practices in RAG involve using "instructed" LLMs, which are fine-tuned with supervised training to enhance their ability to follow instructions and are aligned with human preferences using state-of-the-art techniques.However, contrary to this popular belief, our study demonstrates that base models outperform their instructed counterparts in RAG tasks by 20% on average under our experimental settings. This finding challenges the prevailing assumptions about the superiority of instructed LLMs in RAG applications. Further investigations reveal a more complex situation, questioning fundamental aspects of RAG and suggesting the need for broader discussions on the topic; or, as Fromm would have it, "Seldom is a glance at the statistics enough to understand the meaning of the figures".| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Cuconasu_A-Tale-of_2026.pdf
accesso aperto
Note: DOI: 10.18653/v1/2026.rag4reports-1.3
Tipologia:
Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza:
Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione
373.43 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
373.43 kB | Adobe PDF |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


