Skip to content

docs(retrieval): correct "no per-strategy weight multipliers" after RECALL_STRATEGY_BOOSTS (#1974) - #1991

Merged
nicoloboschi merged 1 commit into
vectorize-io:mainfrom
r266-tech:docs-retrieval-strategy-boosts
Jun 5, 2026
Merged

docs(retrieval): correct "no per-strategy weight multipliers" after RECALL_STRATEGY_BOOSTS (#1974)#1991
nicoloboschi merged 1 commit into
vectorize-io:mainfrom
r266-tech:docs-retrieval-strategy-boosts

Conversation

@r266-tech

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

retrieval.md states absolutely:

All four strategies are weighted equally. There are no per-strategy weight multipliers — importance comes from rank position, not the source.

#1974 added HINDSIGHT_API_RECALL_STRATEGY_BOOSTS (named low/medium/high per-source boosts), so that claim is now factually wrong for someone tuning retrieval — exactly this page's audience.

This corrects it without breaking the RRF explanation:

  • the equal-weight statement is scoped to RRF fusion itself (the RRF math is unchanged — still equal-weight by rank)
  • readers are pointed to HINDSIGHT_API_RECALL_STRATEGY_BOOSTS, noting the boost is a separate stage (before the reranker pre-filter cap, and again after reranking — matching configuration.md's description)
  • a one-line note at the pre-filter cap explains boosted sources are more likely to survive the HINDSIGHT_API_RERANKER_MAX_CANDIDATES cut

Canonical retrieval.md + regenerated skills mirror (scripts/generate-docs-skill.sh). Docs only.

…STS (vectorize-io#1974)

vectorize-io#1974 added HINDSIGHT_API_RECALL_STRATEGY_BOOSTS (named low/medium/high
per-source boosts), making retrieval.md's absolute claim 'There are no
per-strategy weight multipliers' factually wrong. Scope the equal-weight
statement to RRF fusion itself, point readers to the boost knob, and note
at the pre-filter cap stage that boosted sources are more likely to survive.
Regenerated the skills mirror.

@nicoloboschi nicoloboschi left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@nicoloboschi
nicoloboschi merged commit 087a729 into vectorize-io:main Jun 5, 2026
63 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants