arXiv subjects

Keping Bi

Publications and source records attributed to Keping Bi.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Can LLM Rerankers Predict Their Own Ranking Performance?

Retrieval effectiveness varies substantially across queries, making it important to estimate ranking quality before relevance judgments are available. Query performance prediction (QPP) addresses this need, but most existing methods rely on external predictors after retrieval or reranking. In this paper, we study \textit{reranker-internal QPP}: can an LLM reranker estimate the quality of the ranking it has just produced? We investigate both training-free and training-based approaches. For training-free estimation, we examine metric-specific self-consistency across sampled rankings and verbalized confidence produced directly by the reranker. Experiments on TREC Deep Learning 2019--2022 with four LLMs show that self-consistency is competitive with the state-of-the-art (SOTA) approach and better calibrated in almost all settings, while direct verbalized confidence is severely overconfident. To improve verbalized confidence, we propose two supervised methods, Verb-Num and Verb-List, which enable LLM rerankers to produce calibrated ranking-quality estimates with only a few additional output tokens.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2026

Attention Grounded Enhancement for Visual Document Retrieval

Visual document retrieval requires understanding heterogeneous and multi-modal content to satisfy implicit information needs. Recent advances use screenshot-based document encoding with fine-grained late interaction to encode holistic information and capture nuanced alignments, significantly improving retrieval performance. However, retrievers are still trained with coarse global relevance labels, without revealing which regions support the match. As a result, retrievers tend to rely on surface-level cues and struggle to capture implicit semantic connections, hindering their ability to handle non-extractive queries.To improve fine-grained relevance modeling, we propose a Attention-Grounded REtriever Enhancement (AGREE) framework. AGREE leverages cross-modal attention from multimodal large language models (MLLMs) as proxy supervision to guide the retriever in identifying relevant document regions. Specifically, AGREE extracts attention maps from the MLLM that highlight which document regions are attended to based on the query. These attention scores serve as local, region-level relevance signals. During training, AGREE combines local signals with the global document-level relevance label to jointly optimize the retriever. This dual-level supervision enables the model to learn not only whether documents match, but also which content drives relevance. Experiments on the challenging visual document retrieval benchmark, ViDoRe V2, show that AGREE significantly outperforms the global-supervision-only baseline by 12.82\% and 5.03\% in terms of average nDCG@1 and nDCG@5. Quantitative and qualitative analyses further demonstrate that AGREE promotes deeper alignment between query terms and document regions, moving beyond surface-level matching toward more accurate and interpretable retrieval. Our code is available at: https://github.com/VickiCui/AGREE.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2026

Estimating Commonsense Plausibility through Semantic Shifts

Commonsense plausibility estimation is critical for evaluating language models (LMs), yet existing generative approaches--reliant on likelihoods or verbalized judgments--struggle with fine-grained discrimination. In this paper, we propose ComPaSS, a novel discriminative framework that quantifies commonsense plausibility by measuring semantic shifts when augmenting sentences with commonsense-related information. Plausible augmentations induce minimal shifts in semantics, while implausible ones result in substantial deviations. Evaluations on two types of fine-grained commonsense plausibility estimation tasks across different backbones, including LLMs and vision-language models (VLMs), show that ComPaSS consistently outperforms baselines. It demonstrates the advantage of discriminative approaches over generative methods in fine-grained commonsense plausibility evaluation. Experiments also show that (1) VLMs yield superior performance to LMs, when integrated with ComPaSS, on vision-grounded commonsense tasks. (2) contrastive pre-training sharpens backbone models' ability to capture semantic nuances, thereby further enhancing ComPaSS.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Compressing then Matching: An Efficient Pre-training Paradigm for Multimodal Embedding

Multimodal Large Language Models advance multimodal representation learning by acquiring transferable semantic embeddings, thereby substantially enhancing performance across a range of vision-language tasks, including cross-modal retrieval, clustering, and classification. An effective embedding is expected to comprehensively preserve the semantic content of the input while simultaneously emphasizing features that are discriminative for downstream tasks. Recent approaches demonstrate that MLLMs can be adapted into competitive embedding models via large-scale contrastive learning, enabling the simultaneous optimization of two complementary objectives. We argue that the two aforementioned objectives can be decoupled: a comprehensive understanding of the input enables the embedding model to achieve superior performance on downstream tasks via contrastive learning. In this paper, we propose CoMa, a compressed pre-training phase, which serves as a warm-up stage for contrastive learning. Experiments demonstrate that with only a small amount of pre-training data, we can transform an MLLM into a competitive embedding model. CoMa achieves new state-of-the-art results among MLLMs of comparable size on the MMEB, realizing optimization in both efficiency and effectiveness. Our project is available at https://github.com/Trustworthy-Information-Access/CoMa.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2026

An Iterative Utility Judgment Framework Inspired by Philosophical Relevance via LLMs

Relevance and utility are two frequently used measures to evaluate the effectiveness of an information retrieval (IR) system. Relevance emphasizes the aboutness of a result to a query, while utility refers to the result's usefulness or value to an information seeker. In retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), high-utility results should be prioritized to feed to LLMs due to their limited input bandwidth. Re-examining RAG's three core components-relevance ranking derived from retrieval models, utility judgments, and answer generation-aligns with Schutz's philosophical system of relevances, which encompasses three types of relevance representing different levels of human cognition that enhance each other. These three RAG components also reflect three cognitive levels for LLMs in question-answering. Therefore, we propose an Iterative utiliTy judgmEnt fraMework (ITEM) to promote each step in RAG. We conducted extensive experiments on retrieval (TREC DL, WebAP), utility judgment task (GTI-NQ), and factoid question-answering (NQ) datasets. Experimental results demonstrate improvements of ITEM in utility judgments, ranking, and answer generation upon representative baselines.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2026

Beyond Relevance: Utility-Centric Retrieval in the LLM Era

Information retrieval systems have traditionally optimized for topical relevance-the degree to which retrieved documents match a query. However, relevance only approximates a deeper goal: utility, namely, whether retrieved information helps accomplish a user's underlying task. The emergence of retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) fundamentally changes this paradigm. Retrieved documents are no longer consumed directly by users but instead serve as evidence for large language models (LLMs) that produce answers. As a result, retrieval effectiveness must be evaluated by its contribution to generation quality rather than by relevance-based ranking metrics alone. This tutorial argues that retrieval objectives are evolving from relevance-centric optimization toward LLM-centric utility. We present a unified framework covering LLM-agnostic versus LLM-specific utility, context-independent versus context-dependent utility, and the connection with LLM information needs and agentic RAG. By synthesizing recent advances, the tutorial provides conceptual foundations and practical guidance for designing retrieval systems aligned with the requirements of LLM-based information access.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2026

How Long Reasoning Chains Influence LLMs' Judgment of Answer Factuality

Large language models (LLMs) has been widely adopted as a scalable surrogate for human evaluation, yet such judges remain imperfect and susceptible to surface-level biases. One possible reason is that these judges lack sufficient information in assessing answer correctness. With the rise of reasoning-capable models, exposing a generator's reasoning content to the judge provides richer information and is a natural candidate for improving judgment accuracy. However, its actual impact on judge behavior remains understudied. In this paper, we systematically investigate how access to reasoning chains affects LLM-based judgment across factual question answering (QA) and mathematical reasoning benchmarks. We find that weak judges are easily swayed by reasoning presence, frequently accepting incorrect answers accompanied by fluent reasoning, while strong judges can partially leverage reasoning as informative evidence. Nevertheless, even strong judges are misled by seemingly high-quality reasoning chains. Controlled experiments further reveal that both fluency and factuality of reasoning chains are critical signals driving judge decisions. These findings highlight the need for more robust LLM judges that can distinguish genuine reasoning quality from superficial fluency when evaluating modern reasoning models.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Data, Not Model: Explaining Bias toward LLM Texts in Neural Retrievers

Recent studies show that neural retrievers often display source bias, favoring passages generated by LLMs over human-written ones, even when both are semantically similar. This bias has been considered an inherent flaw of retrievers, raising concerns about the fairness and reliability of modern information access systems. Our work challenges this view by showing that source bias stems from supervision in retrieval datasets rather than the models themselves. We found that non-semantic differences, like fluency and term specificity, exist between positive and negative documents, mirroring differences between LLM and human texts. In the embedding space, the bias direction from negatives to positives aligns with the direction from human-written to LLM-generated texts. We theoretically show that retrievers inevitably absorb the artifact imbalances in the training data during contrastive learning, which leads to their preferences over LLM texts. To mitigate the effect, we propose two approaches: 1) reducing artifact differences in training data and 2) adjusting LLM text vectors by removing their projection on the bias vector. Both methods substantially reduce source bias. We hope our study alleviates some concerns regarding LLM-generated texts in information access systems.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2026

AuthorityBench: Benchmarking LLM Authority Perception for Reliable Retrieval-Augmented Generation

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) enhances Large Language Models (LLMs) with external knowledge but remains vulnerable to low-authority sources that can propagate misinformation. We investigate whether LLMs can perceive information authority - a capability extending beyond semantic understanding. To address this, we introduce AuthorityBench, a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating LLM authority perception comprising three datasets: DomainAuth (10K web domains with PageRank-based authority), EntityAuth (22K entities with popularity-based authority), and RAGAuth (120 queries with documents of varying authority for downstream evaluation). We evaluate five LLMs using three judging methods (PointJudge, PairJudge, ListJudge) across multiple output formats. Results show that ListJudge and PairJudge with PointScore output achieve the strongest correlation with ground-truth authority, while ListJudge offers optimal cost-effectiveness. Notably, incorporating webpage text consistently degrades judgment performance, suggesting authority is distinct from textual style. Downstream experiments on RAG demonstrate that authority-guided filtering largely improves answer accuracy, validating the practical importance of authority perception for reliable knowledge retrieval. Code and benchmark are available at: https://github.com/Trustworthy-Information-Access/AuthorityBench.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2026

Annotation-Efficient Universal Honesty Alignment

Honesty alignment-the ability of large language models (LLMs) to recognize their knowledge boundaries and express calibrated confidence-is essential for trustworthy deployment. Existing methods either rely on training-free confidence estimation (e.g., token probabilities, self-consistency) or training-based calibration with correctness annotations. While effective, achieving universal honesty alignment with training-based calibration requires costly, large-scale labeling. To support annotation-efficient training, we introduce Elicitation-Then-Calibration (EliCal), a two-stage framework that first elicits internal confidence using inexpensive self-consistency supervision, then calibrates this confidence with a small set of correctness annotations. To support a large-scale study, we release HonestyBench, a benchmark covering ten free-form QA datasets with 560k training and 70k evaluation instances annotated with correctness and self-consistency signals. Experiments show that EliCal achieves near-optimal alignment with only 1k correctness annotations (0.18% of full supervision) and better alignment performance on unseen MMLU tasks than the calibration-only baseline, offering a scalable solution toward universal honesty alignment in LLMs.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Reconstructing Content with Collaborative Attention for Universal Multimodal Representation Learning

Multimodal embedding models, rooted in multimodal large language models (MLLMs), have yielded significant performance improvements across diverse tasks such as retrieval and classification. However, most existing approaches rely heavily on large-scale contrastive learning, with limited exploration of how the architectural and training paradigms of MLLMs affect embedding quality. While effective for generation, the causal attention and next-token prediction paradigm of MLLMs does not explicitly encourage the formation of globally compact representations, limiting their effectiveness as multimodal embedding backbones. To address this, we propose CoCoA, a Content reconstruction pre-training paradigm based on Collaborative Attention for multimodal embedding optimization. Specifically, we restructure the attention flow and introduce an EOS-based reconstruction task, encouraging the model to reconstruct input from the corresponding embeddings. This drives the multimodal model to compress the semantic information of the input into the token, laying the foundations for subsequent contrastive learning. Extensive experiments on MMEB-V1 demonstrate that CoCoA built upon Qwen2-VL and Qwen2.5-VL significantly improves embedding quality. Results validate that content reconstruction serves as an effective strategy to maximize the value of existing data, enabling multimodal embedding models generate compact and informative representations, raising their performance ceiling.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2026

Training Dense Retrievers with Multiple Positive Passages

Modern knowledge-intensive systems, such as retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), rely on effective retrievers to establish the performance ceiling for downstream modules. However, retriever training has been bottlenecked by sparse, single-positive annotations, which lead to false-negative noise and suboptimal supervision. While the advent of large language models (LLMs) makes it feasible to collect comprehensive multi-positive relevance labels at scale, the optimal strategy for incorporating these dense signals into training remains poorly understood. In this paper, we present a systematic study of multi-positive optimization objectives for retriever training. We unify representative objectives, including Joint Likelihood (JointLH), Summed Marginal Likelihood (SumMargLH), and Log-Sum-Exp Pairwise (LSEPair) loss, under a shared contrastive learning framework. Our theoretical analysis characterizes their distinct gradient behaviors, revealing how each allocates probability mass across positive document sets. Empirically, we conduct extensive evaluations on Natural Questions, MS MARCO, and the BEIR benchmark across two realistic regimes: homogeneous LLM-annotated data and heterogeneous mixtures of human and LLM labels. Our results show that LSEPair consistently achieves superior robustness and performance across settings, while JointLH and SumMargLH exhibit high sensitivity to the quality of positives. Furthermore, we find that the simple strategy of random sampling (Rand1LH) serves as a reliable baseline. By aligning theoretical insights with empirical findings, we provide practical design principles for leveraging dense, LLM-augmented supervision to enhance retriever effectiveness.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2026

Bagging-Based Model Merging for Robust General Text Embeddings

General-purpose text embedding models underpin a wide range of NLP and information retrieval applications, and are typically trained on large-scale multi-task corpora to encourage broad generalization. However, it remains unclear how different multi-task training strategies compare in practice, and how to efficiently adapt embedding models as new domains and data types continually emerge. In this work, we present a systematic study of multi-task training for text embeddings from two perspectives: data scheduling and model merging. We compare batch-level shuffling, sequential training variants, two-stage training, and multiple merging granularities, and find that simple batch-level shuffling consistently yields the strongest overall performance, suggesting that task conflicts are limited and training datasets are largely complementary. Despite its effectiveness, batch-level shuffling exhibits two practical limitations: suboptimal out-of-domain (OOD) generalization and poor suitability for incremental learning due to expensive full retraining. To address these issues, we propose Bagging-based rObust mOdel Merging (BOOM), which trains multiple embedding models on sampled subsets and merges them into a single model, improving robustness while retaining single-model inference efficiency. Moreover, BOOM naturally supports efficient incremental updates by training lightweight update models on new data with a small historical subset and merging them into the existing model. Experiments across diverse embedding benchmarks demonstrate that BOOM consistently improves both in-domain and OOD performance over full-corpus batch-level shuffling, while substantially reducing training cost in incremental learning settings.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2026

Evaluating and Calibrating LLM Confidence on Questions with Multiple Correct Answers

Confidence calibration is essential for making large language models (LLMs) reliable, yet existing training-free methods have been primarily studied under single-answer question answering. In this paper, we show that these methods break down in the presence of multiple valid answers, where disagreement among equally correct responses leads to systematic underestimation of confidence. To enable a systematic study of this phenomenon, we introduce MACE, a benchmark of 12,000 factual questions spanning six domains with varying numbers of correct answers. Experiments across 15 representative calibration methods and four LLM families (7B-72B) reveal that while accuracy increases with answer cardinality, estimated confidence consistently decreases, causing severe miscalibration for questions with mixed answer counts. To address this issue, we propose Semantic Confidence Aggregation (SCA), which aggregates confidence over multiple high-probability sampled responses. SCA achieves state-of-the-art calibration performance under mixed-answer settings while preserving strong calibration on single-answer questions.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Understanding Parametric Knowledge Injection in Retrieval-Augmented Generation

Context-grounded generation underpins many LLM applications, including long-document question answering (QA), conversational personalization, and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG). However, classic token-based context concatenation is costly for long inputs and can be lost in the middle at extreme context lengths. Recent work explores context parameterization, which encodes context into lightweight trainable parameters (e.g., LoRA adapters) injected into a frozen LLM. Extending this idea to retrieved evidence yields parametric RAG (P-RAG), which incorporates knowledge via parameter updates rather than token-level attention. In this paper, we present a systematic study of this emerging RAG paradigm-parametric knowledge injection. First, we reassess P-RAG under answer-presence accuracy and show that it does not consistently outperform standard token-based RAG (T-RAG), while combining both (PT-RAG) achieves the best overall performance. Second, we introduce a QA benchmark with up-to-date knowledge beyond the LLM's internal memory to enable controlled analysis. Our representational and mechanistic results indicate that parametric representations capture document-level semantics and primarily influence deeper feed-forward computations, providing high-level guidance but limited evidence consolidation. Finally, we evaluate parametric injection under key RAG challenges, demonstrating improved faithfulness under knowledge conflicts, stronger robustness to retrieval noise, and solid generalization to tasks beyond QA. Our findings clarify the strengths and limitations of parametric RAG and provide practical guidance for future retrieval-augmented LLM systems.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2025

Can LLM Annotations Replace User Clicks for Learning to Rank?

Large-scale supervised data is essential for training modern ranking models, but obtaining high-quality human annotations is costly. Click data has been widely used as a low-cost alternative, and with recent advances in large language models (LLMs), LLM-based relevance annotation has emerged as another promising annotation. This paper investigates whether LLM annotations can replace click data for learning to rank (LTR) by conducting a comprehensive comparison across multiple dimensions. Experiments on both a public dataset, TianGong-ST, and an industrial dataset, Baidu-Click, show that click-supervised models perform better on high-frequency queries, while LLM annotation-supervised models are more effective on medium- and low-frequency queries. Further analysis shows that click-supervised models are better at capturing document-level signals such as authority or quality, while LLM annotation-supervised models are more effective at modeling semantic matching between queries and documents and at distinguishing relevant from non-relevant documents. Motivated by these observations, we explore two training strategies -- data scheduling and frequency-aware multi-objective learning -- that integrate both supervision signals. Both approaches enhance ranking performance across queries at all frequency levels, with the latter being more effective. Our code is available at https://github.com/Trustworthy-Information-Access/LLMAnn_Click.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2025

LLM-Specific Utility for Retrieval-Augmented Generation

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is typically optimized for topical relevance, yet its success ultimately depends on whether retrieved passages are useful for a large language model (LLM) to generate correct and complete answers. We argue that such utility is often LLM-specific rather than universal, due to differences in models' knowledge, reasoning, and ability to leverage evidence. We formalize LLM-specific utility as the performance improvement of a target LLM when a passage is provided, compared to answering without evidence. To systematically study LLM-specific utility, we construct a benchmark of LLM-specific gold utilitarian passages for four LLMs (Qwen3-8B/14B/32B and Llama 3.1-8B) on three QA datasets (Natural Questions, TriviaQA, and MS MARCO-FQA). Our analysis shows that utilitarian passages are model-dependent and non-transferable: each LLM performs best with its own utilitarian evidence, while evidence optimized for other LLMs is consistently suboptimal. Human-annotated evidence remains a strong general baseline but does not fully match individual LLM utility needs. We further introduce the LLM-specific utility judgment task and construct the corresponding benchmark, i.e., SpecUBench (LLM-Specific Utility Benchmark). Experiments show that existing utility-aware selection and scoring methods largely capture model-agnostic usefulness and struggle to reliably estimate LLM-specific utility. Overall, our findings highlight the limitations of current utility-aware retrieval and motivate generator-tailored evidence selection for improving RAG. Our code and datasets can be found at https://github.com/Trustworthy-Information-Access/LLM_specific_utility.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Utility-Focused LLM Annotation for Retrieval and Retrieval-Augmented Generation

This paper explores the use of large language models (LLMs) for annotating document utility in training retrieval and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems, aiming to reduce dependence on costly human annotations. We address the gap between retrieval relevance and generative utility by employing LLMs to annotate document utility. To effectively utilize multiple positive samples per query, we introduce a novel loss that maximizes their summed marginal likelihood. Using the Qwen-2.5-32B model, we annotate utility on the MS MARCO dataset and conduct retrieval experiments on MS MARCO and BEIR, as well as RAG experiments on MS MARCO QA, NQ, and HotpotQA. Our results show that LLM-generated annotations enhance out-of-domain retrieval performance and improve RAG outcomes compared to models trained solely on human annotations or downstream QA metrics. Furthermore, combining LLM annotations with just 20% of human labels achieves performance comparable to using full human annotations. Our study offers a comprehensive approach to utilizing LLM annotations for initializing QA systems on new corpora.

cs.IR↗