Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2307.16779

Lexically-Accelerated Dense Retrieval

Abstract

Retrieval approaches that score documents based on learned dense vectors (i.e., dense retrieval) rather than lexical signals (i.e., conventional retrieval) are increasingly popular. Their ability to identify related documents that do not necessarily contain the same terms as those appearing in the user's query (thereby improving recall) is one of their key advantages. However, to actually achieve these gains, dense retrieval approaches typically require an exhaustive search over the document collection, making them considerably more expensive at query-time than conventional lexical approaches. Several techniques aim to reduce this computational overhead by approximating the results of a full dense retriever. Although these approaches reasonably approximate the top results, they suffer in terms of recall -- one of the key advantages of dense retrieval. We introduce 'LADR' (Lexically-Accelerated Dense Retrieval), a simple-yet-effective approach that improves the efficiency of existing dense retrieval models without compromising on retrieval effectiveness. LADR uses lexical retrieval techniques to seed a dense retrieval exploration that uses a document proximity graph. We explore two variants of LADR: a proactive approach that expands the search space to the neighbors of all seed documents, and an adaptive approach that selectively searches the documents with the highest estimated relevance in an iterative fashion. Through extensive experiments across a variety of dense retrieval models, we find that LADR establishes a new dense retrieval effectiveness-efficiency Pareto frontier among approximate k nearest neighbor techniques. Further, we find that when tuned to take around 8ms per query in retrieval latency on our hardware, LADR consistently achieves both precision and recall that are on par with an exhaustive search on standard benchmarks.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Hrishikesh Kulkarni, Sean MacAvaney, Nazli Goharian, Ophir Frieder. 2023-07-31. Lexically-Accelerated Dense Retrieval. https://doi.org/10.1145/3539618.3591715

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Do Large Language Models Favor Recent Content? A Study on Recency Bias in LLM-Based Reranking

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in information systems, including being used as second-stage rerankers in information retrieval pipelines, yet their susceptibility to recency bias has received little attention. We investigate whether LLMs implicitly favour newer documents by prepending artificial publication dates to passages in the TREC Deep Learning passage retrieval collections in 2021 (DL21) and 2022 (DL22). Across seven models, GPT-3.5-turbo, GPT-4o, GPT-4, LLaMA-3 8B/70B, and Qwen-2.5 7B/72B, "fresh" passages are consistently promoted, shifting the Top-10's mean publication year forward by up to 4.78 years and moving individual items by as many as 95 ranks in our listwise reranking experiments. Although larger models attenuate the effect, none eliminate it. We also observe that the preference of LLMs between two passages with an identical relevance level can be reversed by up to 25% on average after date injection in our pairwise preference experiments. These findings provide quantitative evidence of a pervasive recency bias in LLMs and highlight the importance of effective bias-mitigation strategies.

cs.IR

UniRec: Cross-stage Multi-Task Fusion with Preference Alignment for Cascaded Recommender Systems

Industrial recommender systems cascade stages with different objectives, feature spaces, and latency constraints. Optimizing pre-ranking and ranking separately induces cross-stage inconsistency: upstream models may filter out items preferred by downstream rankers, while independently tuned downstream fusion can offset upstream improvements. Most existing multi-task fusion methods target the ranking stage alone, and cross-stage methods often align with a downstream-derived score, leaving joint optimization of fusion modules across cascaded stages largely unexplored. We propose UniRec, a Unified Cross-stage Recommendation Fusion model. First, the two fusion agents partially share input embeddings in a single computation graph, allowing gradients from either stage to propagate through the shared representations. Second, a dual-axis preference alignment objective coordinates the two stages: horizontally, a compact aggregation term reorganizes dozens of pairwise objectives over heterogeneous prior signals into bidirectional preference evidence; vertically, a cross-stage consistency term transfers downstream pairwise preferences to the upstream fusion score. Third, we introduce attribute group-relative regularization, which computes relative advantages and normalizes policy updates within each attribute group, ensuring that uniformly promoting all items in a high-reward group provides no additional optimization gain. Offline experiments demonstrate UniRec consistently outperforms single-stage fusion and cross-stage coordination baselines; online A/B experiments show a 0.616% gain in app usage duration. UniRec has been fully deployed on the Kuaishou platform.

cs.IR

Scaling Articulated Rationales for MLLM-based Recommendation

We presented SARA, an industrial framework that transforms sparse articulated user rationales into scalable recommendation signals. Its data engine curates questionnaire responses into SARA-HQ, providing explicit preference supervision for aligning SARA-7B through SFT and Quality-Refining DPO. This alignment extends rationale generation from $86{,}564$ questionnaire-covered authors to the full $10$M-author space. SARA-Ranker translates the generated positive and negative rationales into features for user--author interaction modeling and negative-feedback history modeling, connecting articulated reasons to production ranking. Evaluation on unseen authors demonstrates that SARA-7B generates more specific, relevant, and grounded rationales than the evaluated general-purpose MLLMs. On top of a strong industrial ranking baseline with multimodal features, separate online A/B tests show that positive-rationale integration increases watch time by $0.99\%$, while negative-rationale integration reduces Hate feedback by $8.16\%$. Daily refresh and more than $30$ days of production deployment further demonstrate the operational feasibility of the approach. These findings establish articulated rationales as a useful complement to behavioral and content signals, and demonstrate a practical role for MLLMs in scaling sparse human explanations into preference information that improves industrial recommendation.

cs.IR