There are several key limitations in our analyses. First, RAG systems can be deployed to many more domains than can be covered by our analyses. However, we hope that our study ixix domains paints an initial picture of the nature of RAG systems. Second, to make our experiments tractable, our question-generation process is strictly fact-based and does not require multi-step logic, document synthesis, or other higher-level reasoning. Third, the perturbations we produce are based on our priors for what would constitute a reasonable or unreasonable range of values. In a natural setting, we would imagine more discrete types of errors (eg. typos, ambiguities, missing information, etc.) which are harder to simulate. We also perform evaluations on GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 because the OpenAI API allows for access to token-wise log probabilities along with the responses. As a consequence, we are limited against performing more comprehensive evaluations on models such as Gemini and Claude because the APIs for these models do not provide access to such information.