Poor results with GraphRAG setup on Azure (worse than semantic search) #2080
Replies: 2 comments 2 replies
|
Have a look at the inputs docs for some tips on getting metadata such as the title repeated in your chunks. This generally helps quite a bit with answer quality. https://microsoft.github.io/graphrag/index/inputs/ |
|
One thing that might explain this: GraphRAG's knowledge graph extraction is only as reliable as the sources going in. If the documents contain conflicting information, the graph merges it silently and the answers reflect that noise. I hit the same wall and ended up building a layer that tracks source conflicts explicitly before anything reaches the retrieval stage — confidence drops mechanically when sources disagree, so the system at least tells you when it's uncertain rather than sounding confident when it isn't. Happy to share more if it's useful: https://github.com/raa82/tekmerdb |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Hi Maintainers,
I’ve recently started experimenting with GraphRAG because our traditional semantic search results have been quite poor. I followed the workflow from the documentation with a few adjustments (see details below).
After running the indexing, I noticed that it created blob files and three vector indexes on Azure:
Code snippet settings.yaml:
The issue is that my responses are actually worse than what I got with semantic search:
Note: I used a many .txt files for the embedding
I’ve looked around online, but most tutorials show how to run GraphRAG locally, not with Azure. I’m not sure where in my setup I might have gone wrong.
Code snippet (query):
👉 Any guidance on what might be causing this (wrong embeddings, chunking setup, or something else in my workflow) would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance!
All reactions