Skip to content

Session 8: Multi-Modal & Advanced RAG Variants - Test Solutions

📝 Multiple Choice Test - Session 8

Question 1: What is the fundamental difference between MRAG 1.0 and MRAG 2.0 systems?
A) MRAG 2.0 processes data faster than MRAG 1.0
B) MRAG 1.0 uses lossy translation while MRAG 2.0 preserves semantic integrity ✅
C) MRAG 2.0 requires less computational resources
D) MRAG 1.0 handles more modalities than MRAG 2.0

Explanation: The fundamental difference is that MRAG 1.0 systems convert all multimodal content to text through lossy translation (losing 60-90% of information), while MRAG 2.0 systems preserve semantic integrity by maintaining original multimodal data throughout the processing pipeline. This represents a paradigm shift from information loss to semantic preservation using Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs).

Question 2: What distinguishes MRAG 3.0 from MRAG 2.0 systems?
A) Better storage efficiency
B) Autonomous decision-making and dynamic reasoning capabilities ✅
C) Support for more file formats
D) Faster processing speed

Explanation: MRAG 3.0 represents the current frontier with autonomous systems that dynamically reason about multimodal content and intelligently plan their processing strategies. While MRAG 2.0 preserves semantic integrity, MRAG 3.0 adds autonomous intelligence including intelligent query parsing, dynamic strategy selection, self-correcting reasoning, and integration with Session 7's cognitive reasoning capabilities.

Question 3: In RRF, what does the parameter 'k' control?
A) The number of query variants generated
B) The smoothing factor that reduces the impact of rank position ✅
C) The maximum number of results to return
D) The similarity threshold for documents

Explanation: The 'k' parameter in RRF (typically 60) is a smoothing factor in the formula 1/(k + rank). It reduces the impact of exact rank positions, making the fusion more robust to variations in ranking quality across different retrieval methods.

Question 4: What is the key benefit of weighted ensemble approaches over simple voting?
A) Faster computation
B) Lower memory usage
C) Better handling of system reliability differences ✅
D) Simpler implementation

Explanation: Weighted ensembles can assign higher weights to more reliable or better-performing RAG systems, ensuring that high-quality responses have greater influence on the final output. This leads to better overall performance compared to treating all systems equally.

Question 5: What is the most critical requirement for legal RAG systems?
A) Fast response time
B) Accurate citation validation and precedent analysis ✅
C) Large knowledge base size
D) Simple user interface

Explanation: Legal RAG systems must provide accurate citations and proper precedent analysis because legal professionals rely on precise references to cases, statutes, and regulations. Inaccurate citations could lead to serious professional and legal consequences.

Question 6: Why do medical RAG systems require safety pre-screening?
A) To improve response speed
B) To prevent potential harm from medical misinformation ✅
C) To reduce computational costs
D) To simplify the user interface

Explanation: Medical information can directly impact health outcomes, making safety pre-screening essential to prevent the generation of potentially harmful medical advice, drug interaction warnings, or diagnostic suggestions that could endanger patients.

Question 7: How does ColBERT's late interaction differ from traditional dense retrieval?
A) It uses sparse embeddings instead of dense ones
B) It computes token-level interactions between queries and documents ✅
C) It requires less computational power
D) It only works with short documents

Explanation: ColBERT performs late interaction by computing detailed token-level similarity scores between each query token and document token, then aggregating these interactions. This provides more nuanced matching compared to traditional dense retrieval that compares single vectors.

Question 8: What is the primary benefit of progressing from MRAG 1.0 through MRAG 3.0?
A) Reduced computational costs
B) Simpler implementation requirements
C) Elimination of information loss and addition of autonomous intelligence ✅
D) Compatibility with legacy systems

Explanation: The MRAG evolution progression provides transformative benefits: MRAG 1.0 → 2.0 eliminates information loss through true multimodal processing (95%+ retention vs. 20%), while MRAG 2.0 → 3.0 adds autonomous intelligence with dynamic reasoning, self-correction, and cognitive capabilities. This complete transformation goes from lossy translation to autonomous multimodal intelligence.

Back to Test: Session 8 Test Questions →