RAG Systems1 code example
⚡ +100 XP

Chunking Strategies

1

Why Chunking Matters

Chunking is the most impactful decision in RAG quality. Chunks that are too small lose context; chunks that are too large dilute relevance and waste context window space. Rule of thumb: chunks should be semantically self-contained — a reader should understand the chunk without needing surrounding context.

2

Fixed-Size Chunking

Split every N characters or tokens, with optional overlap. Pros: Simple, predictable, fast. Cons: Splits sentences and paragraphs mid-thought. Chunk size guidelines: • 128–256 tokens: High precision retrieval, less context per chunk • 512–1024 tokens: Better context, slightly less precise retrieval • Use 10–20% overlap between chunks to avoid losing information at boundaries

3

Recursive Character Splitting

Tries to split on natural boundaries in priority order: paragraphs → sentences → words → characters. The most practical approach for general documents.

4

Semantic Chunking

Embeds sentences and groups them by semantic similarity. Creates chunks where each chunk covers one topic. Higher quality but slower and more complex.

5

Chunking Methods Compared

💡

For PDFs: use unstructured.io to extract text preserving structure, then apply RecursiveCharacterTextSplitter. For code: use language-aware splitting (split on functions/classes).

Finished reading? Mark it complete to earn your XP.