Reasoning graphs answer the questions vector RAG can’t
Vector RAG answers “what.” The questions engineers actually ask, like why a service was built this way or what led to a refactor, take causal, multi-hop traversal across a reasoning graph.
Vector RAG answers “what.” The questions engineers actually ask, like why a service was built this way or what led to a refactor, take causal, multi-hop traversal across a reasoning graph.
Coming soonBoth connect entities. Only one records why an edge exists. That difference decides which questions the graph can answer.
Coming soonSearch returns matches. Engineering questions need the decision chain behind a match. That calls for a reasoning layer.
Coming soonSingle-hop similarity tops out at “what.” We built a reproducible suite to measure how far traversal reaches toward “why.”
Coming soonEdges like decided-in, scoped-by, implemented-by, and authored-by turn scattered artifacts into a graph that answers lineage questions.
Coming soonA departed engineer’s decisions stay connected to the systems they shaped. The graph preserves decision context across handoffs and team changes.
Coming soonSimilarity points to a likely entry node. Traversal follows typed relations to reconstruct the surrounding decision context.
Coming soonCosine distance cannot find the proxy constraint that killed WebSockets. The edge that answers “why” was never semantically close.
Coming soonReal context is scattered across tools that never agreed on a schema. Normalizing them into typed nodes is most of the work.
