Paper detail

Budget-Constrained Online Retrieval-Augmented Generation: The Chunk-as-a-Service Model

Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized the field of natural language processing. However, they exhibit some limitations, including a lack of reliability and transparency: they may hallucinate and fail to provide sources that support the generated output. Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) was introduced to address such limitations in LLMs. One popular implementation, RAG-as-a-Service (RaaS), has shortcomings that hinder its adoption and accessibility. For instance, RaaS pricing is based on the number of submitted prompts, without considering whether the prompts are enriched by relevant chunks, i.e., text segments retrieved from a vector database, or the quality of the utilized chunks (i.e., their degree of relevance). This results in an opaque and less cost-effective payment model. We propose Chunk-as-a-Service (CaaS) as a transparent and cost-effective alternative. CaaS includes two variants: Open-Budget CaaS (OB-CaaS) and Limited-Budget CaaS (LB-CaaS), which is enabled by our ``Utility-Cost Online Selection Algorithm (UCOSA)''. UCOSA further extends the cost-effectiveness and the accessibility of the OB-CaaS variant by enriching, in an online manner, a subset of the submitted prompts based on budget constraints and utility-cost tradeoff. Our experiments demonstrate the efficacy of the proposed UCOSA compared to both offline and relevance-greedy selection baselines. In terms of the performance metric-the number of enriched prompts (NEP) multiplied by the Average Relevance (AR)-UCOSA outperforms random selection by approximately 52% and achieves around 75% of the performance of offline selection methods. Additionally, in terms of budget utilization, LB-CaaS and OB-CaaS achieve higher performance-to-budget ratios of 140% and 86%, respectively, compared to RaaS, indicating their superior efficiency.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.