# A Systems-Level Analysis of Sensitivity, Robustness, and Stability in Retrieval-Augmented Generation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.28337 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.28337/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in RAG robustness and adaptive retrieval, one of 15 directions in Retrieval-augmented generation.
- Builds on 10 of its 11 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 29 May 2026.

## Placed in

- Retrieval-augmented generation / [RAG robustness and adaptive retrieval](https://mlsanity.com/rag/rag-robustness-and-adaptive-retrieval/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 10 of 10)

- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.11401/) (2020)
- [Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.10084/) (2019)
- [Dense Passage Retrieval for Open-Domain Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.04906/) (2020)
- [Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contexts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.03172/) (2023)
- [Scaling Instruction-Finetuned Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.11416/) (2022)
- [Billion-scale similarity search with GPUs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1702.08734/) (2017)
- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Large Language Models: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.10997/) (2023)
- [ARES: An Automated Evaluation Framework for Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.09476/) (2023)
- [DynamicRAG: Leveraging Outputs of Large Language Model as Feedback for Dynamic Reranking in Retrieval-Augmented Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.07233/) (2025)
- [Rethinking the Reranker: Boundary-Aware Evidence Selection for Robust Retrieval-Augmented Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.03689/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems are often evaluated using final answer accuracy, even though their failures can originate from preprocessing, retrieval, context packing, or generation. This paper presents a controlled empirical study of RAG sensitivity, robustness, and stability across 56 experimental runs. We evaluate how chunk size, retrieval depth (top k), embedding-based reranking, probabilistic retrieval noise, and repeated seeded runs affect retrieval, context packing, and generation behavior. Using a fixed 500-question QA subset mapped to 20,958 unique corpus contexts, we analyze both final answer metrics and intermediate failure modes. Across these experiments, retrieval-oriented metrics improved under broader retrieval settings, while downstream exact-match and F1 scores often behaved non-monotonically. We also observe preprocessing-induced answer loss under smaller chunk sizes, progressive degradation under retrieval corruption, and higher observed variance in broader retrieval regimes. These findings suggest that RAG evaluation should include sensitivity, robustness, stability, and multi-stage failure analysis rather than relying only on final answer accuracy.