ParliamentRAG is a topic-dependent authority model that estimates each speaker's authority as a function of the current query, combining interpretable components such as profession, education, and previous interventions that addresses risks of dominance of the most frequent speakers, inability to weight speakers according to topical expertise, and citation misattribution in politically sensitive text.
Abstract
Parliamentary proceedings are a primary record of democratic deliberation, yet their volume and fragmentation make multi-perspective access difficult for citizens, journalists, and researchers. Applying Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) to parliamentary transcripts introduces three specific risks: dominance of the most frequent speakers, inability to weight speakers according to topical expertise, and citation misattribution in politically sensitive text. We present ParliamentRAG, a RAG system for the Italian Chamber of Deputies that addresses these risks jointly. Its core contribution is a topic-dependent authority model that estimates each speaker's authority as a function of the current query, combining interpretable components such as profession, education, and previous interventions. Given a user query, the system retrieves relevant speech chunks, identifies topic-relevant experts across parliamentary groups, and generates a summary synthesizing their perspectives, accompanied by supporting quotations. ParliamentRAG is evaluated against Google NotebookLM on 15 policy topics via a two-level protocol combining automated metrics and blind A/B human evaluation by six domain experts. The system achieves higher coverage across political groups (0.97 vs. 0.95), perfect quotation faithfulness (1.00 vs. 0.95), and stronger expert preferences on source-related dimensions, while NotebookLM remains stronger on prose-oriented dimensions.
It is argued that LLM-based AI systems answer political questions for hundreds of millions of people is a set of policies over whom to answer, what to say, and whether to engage at all, conditional on the topic and what the system knows about the user.
Online communities are valued not only for answers, but for the diversity of experiences and perspectives they contain. Generative search increasingly mediates access to this discourse, yet little is known about which community voices survive retrieval and synthesis. We audit Reddit Answers using 10,000 queries from 20...
Agam Goyal, Wang Claire, Eshwar Chandrasekharan· 0 citations
Large language models (LLMs) are rapidly becoming an interface between citizens and political information. They are often regarded as"a better Google."While this analogy might work for some instances, it is unintuitively problematic for democratic politics. A search engine retrieves human-authored documents, while a la...
Overall, it is found that no model has a clear preference, nor a clear preference for a party, but that this depends on the specific issue or task the user asks about.
B. Bruinsma, Annika Fredén, Paul Röttger et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.