artificial intelligence

Risks when implementing retrieval-augmented generation systems

by

reviewed by

Malcolm Burrows

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is an artificial intelligence (AI) system architecture that combines large language models (LLMs), such as GPT-4, with external data retrieval processes.  Unlike traditional AI models, RAG retrieves relevant information in real-time from external databases or document repositories with the aim of generating contextually accurate responses.  These external databases or document repositories are often a company’s private and internal resource tool that becomes shared and connected.[1]

Business use and deployment models of RAG

Businesses typically implement RAG systems to complete tasks such as customer support automation, internal knowledge management, document summarisation, compliance tracking and advanced enterprise search.

Common deployment models include:

  • cloud-based hosting; or
  • on-premise/private hosting.

The standard architecture of RAG systems include:

  • vector databases (transform different forms of data, such as text, images and video, into a common form of simple vector points, connecting based on their relevancy to each other);
  • retrieval mechanisms (identifying relevant documents); and
  • an LLM (synthesising retrieved information into natural language outputs).

RAG integration into enterprise systems, such as Customer Relationship Management (CRM), Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) and Document Management Systems (DMS) is also common.[2]

Prominent RAG tools and frameworks

Frequently utilised RAG frameworks and tools include:

Legal risks and compliance considerations

Depending on how the RAG system is deployed and what the affected systems are used for, businesses need to consider the following legal risks:

  • compliance with the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) (Privacy Act);
  • risks based on the particular industry sector that the business operates in (Sector Based Risks);
  • compliance with organisational information security policies;
  • compliance with the specific business’s contracts with third parties (Contractual Risk);
  • intellectual property infringement;
  • compliance with best practices for the implementation of AI systems in Australia; and
  • compliance with the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) pursuant to Schedule 2 of the Australian Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth).

Privacy Act compliance

APP Entities must ensure compliance with the Privacy Act, disclosure and use of personal information.

Sector Based Risks

The compliance obligations for businesses operating in different sectors can vary greatly.  For example, the compliance obligations on businesses that operate in the health sector will vary wildly from those in the construction sector.

Information security

Deployment of RAG may also introduce cybersecurity vulnerabilities.  Organisations must comply with the Security of Critical Infrastructure Act 2018 (Cth) by implementing appropriate cybersecurity measures and monitoring them.

Compliance with third party contracts

Automated data retrieval should adhere with an organisations’ contracts with third parties to ensure it does not cause a breach of these contracts.  It may be that express permissions and consents must be obtained to address this issue.

Intellectual property infringement

RAG systems may inadvertently incorporate third-party intellectual property (literary and artistic works) that the internal database/resource pool has provided access to, potentially breaching the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth).

Compliance with best practices for implementing AI systems

RAG systems incorporate use of LLMs and therefore, businesses should ensure RAG systems adhere to the AI Ethics Principles and Voluntary AI Safety Standard.  Businesses using RAG systems should also follow the guidance on privacy and the use of commercially available AI products published by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC).  Meanwhile, software developers creating RAG systems can follow the OAIC’s guidance on privacy and developing and training generative AI models.

ACL compliance

Depending on what the RAG software is implemented to do, it is possible that implementation could amount to a false and misleading statement pursuant to section 29(1)(a)-(n) of the ACL or result in misleading and deceptive pursuant to section 18 of the ACL.

Links and further references

Legislation

Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth)

Copyright Act 1968 (Cth)

Privacy Act 1988 (Cth)

Security of Critical Infrastructure Act 2018 (Cth)

Australian AI standards

AI Ethics Principles

Voluntary AI Safety Standard

Australian AI guidance

Guidance on privacy and developing and training generative AI models

Guidance on privacy and the use of commercially available AI products

Proposals paper for introducing mandatory guardrails for AI in high-risk settings

Australian AI checklists

Privacy considerations when developing or training generative AI models

Privacy considerations when selecting a commercially available AI product

Privacy considerations when using commercially available AI products

Further information about AI and RAG systems

If you need advice on risks of implementing RAG systems in your business, please contact us for a confidential and obligation free and discussion:

Doyles Recommended TMT Lawyer 2024

[1] Google Cloud, What is Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), https://cloud.google.com/use-cases/retrieval-augmented-generation.

[2] IBM, What is retrieval-augmented generation, https://research.ibm.com/blog/retrieval-augmented-generation-RAG.


Related insights about AI law

  • Risks when implementing retrieval-augmented generation systems

    Risks when implementing retrieval-augmented generation systems

    Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is an artificial intelligence (AI) system architecture that combines large language models (LLMs), such as GPT-4, with external data retrieval processes.

    Read more …

  • Canva – who owns the artwork created by users?

    Canva – who owns the artwork created by users?

    The general rule about ownership of copyright in a literary or artistic work is that copyright vests in the ‘original author’, as per section 35(2) of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) (Copyright Act).  From there, ownership depends on whether or not the original author is doing the work within the scope of their employment, in…

    Read more …

  • New OAIC guidance on Artificial Intelligence

    New OAIC guidance on Artificial Intelligence

    On 21 October 2024, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) published two (2) new guides on artificial intelligence (AI), purportedly in effort to make privacy compliance easier for business.

    Read more …

  • Artificial Intelligence defined – why no uniform approach?

    Artificial Intelligence defined – why no uniform approach?

    Artificial Intelligence (AI) is commonly thought of as the capacity of computer systems to execute tasks that usually need human intelligence, such as learning, reasoning, and making decisions.[1]  It covers a range of specialised fields, each focusing on different functions.  For example, machine learning allows computers to learn from data, computer vision enables them to…

    Read more …

  • Updated USPTO guidelines on AI assisted inventions

    Updated USPTO guidelines on AI assisted inventions

    In response to the Biden administration’s Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence on 30 October 2023, which outlined policies and principles to promote responsible Artificial Intelligence innovation and competition, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued inventorship guidance for artificial intelligence (AI) assisted inventions.  These…

    Read more …

  • Australian Court: AI can’t be “inventor” in Australian patent

    Australian Court: AI can’t be “inventor” in Australian patent

    The Federal Court of Australia has made a groundbreaking ruling on the patentability of works created by Artificial Intelligence. Explore the implications of this decision and what it could mean for the future of patent law.

    Read more …

  • Is AI recognized as an inventor under the Patents Act 1990?

    Is AI recognized as an inventor under the Patents Act 1990?

    The ruling of Thaler v Commissioner of Patents [2021] FCA 879 has opened the door for artificial intelligence-created inventions to be eligible for patent protection. Learn more about the implications of this groundbreaking decision.

    Read more …

  • Artificial intelligence – introductory thoughts on the legal issues

    Artificial intelligence – introductory thoughts on the legal issues

    Technology lawyers are grappling with the complex legal issues associated with Artificial Intelligence (AI), such as liability, competition, consumer issues, intellectual property, data ownership, security, and privacy. This article explores these topics and examines the approach taken in the European Union.

    Read more …

Send this to a friend