Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces ParliamentRAG, a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) system tailored for the Italian Chamber of Deputies that mitigates risks associated with speaker dominance, expertise weighting, and citation accuracy in parliamentary transcripts. By employing a topic-dependent authority model that evaluates speaker authority based on query context, the system retrieves relevant speeches and synthesizes expert perspectives with precise quotations. Evaluated against Google NotebookLM, ParliamentRAG demonstrates superior coverage across political groups and perfect quotation faithfulness, highlighting its effectiveness in enhancing multi-perspective access to parliamentary proceedings.
Authority-aware retrieval in parliamentary transcripts leads to a 0.97 coverage rate across political groups and perfect quotation accuracy, setting a new standard for multi-view RAG systems.
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.
