Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2507.21939

The Curious Case of High-Dimensional Indexing as a File Structure: A Case Study of eCP-FS

Abstract

Modern analytical pipelines routinely deploy multiple deep learning and retrieval models that rely on approximate nearest-neighbor (ANN) indexes to support efficient similarity-based search. While many state-of-the-art ANN-indexes are memory-based (e.g., HNSW and IVF), using multiple ANN indexes creates a competition for limited GPU/CPU memory resources, which in turn necessitates disk-based index structures (e.g., DiskANN or eCP). In typical index implementations, the main component is a complex data structure that is serialized to disk and is read either fully at startup time, for memory-based indexes, or incrementally at query time, for disk-based indexes. To visualize the index structure, or analyze its quality, complex coding is needed that is either embedded in the index implementation or replicates the code that reads the data structure. In this paper, we consider an alternative approach that maps the data structure to a file structure, using a file library, making the index easily readable for any programming language and even human-readable. The disadvantage is that the serialized index is verbose, leading to overhead of searching through the index. The question addressed in this paper is how severe this performance penalty is. To that end, this paper presents eCP-FS, a file-based implementation of eCP, a well-known disk-based ANN index. A comparison with state-of-the-art indexes shows that while eCP-FS is slower, the implementation is nevertheless somewhat competitive even when memory is not constrained. In a memory-constrained scenario, eCP-FS offers a minimal memory footprint, making it ideal for resource-constrained or multi-index environments.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Omar Shahbaz Khan, Gylfi Þór Guðmundsson, Björn Þór Jónsson. 2025-07-29. The Curious Case of High-Dimensional Indexing as a File Structure: A Case Study of eCP-FS. https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.21939

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

WebArxiv: A Reproducible Benchmark for Evaluating Multimodal Web Agents on arXiv Tasks

Foundation models now enable autonomous agents to interact with real-world websites, but existing benchmarks emphasize general-purpose browsing, underrepresent research-oriented environments and scholarly discovery workflows, and often depend on live sites whose changing content and structure undermine reproducibility. arXiv provides a realistic, reproducible, hierarchically structured, information-centric testbed without privacy-sensitive interactions. We introduce WebArxiv, a static-snapshot benchmark comprising 510 time-invariant tasks, each with a unique deterministic ground truth. Its diverse, realistic scholarly tasks go beyond simple information lookup and rule following to emphasize multi-constraint paper retrieval, fine-grained content extraction, and cross-paper comparison. Evaluations of a range of foundation-model-based web agents show that WebArxiv remains challenging. Behavioral analysis reveals that agents over-rely on fixed interaction histories, causing incomplete or repetitive reasoning. We therefore equip agents with a lightweight dynamic-memory mechanism for adaptive retrieval and reasoning over relevant context. The benchmark and code are available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/74E4423BVNW/README.md.

cs.IR

GreekBarRetrieval: A Benchmark for Greek Statutory Retrieval

Statutory retrieval is necessary for citation-grounded legal question answering, but remains underexplored for Greek. We introduce GreekBarRetrieval, a public retrieval benchmark derived from, and complementing GreekBarBench, which did not include retrieval. The new benchmark comprises 283 bar-exam questions, each accompanied by the facts of the case it refers to, and 6,308 candidate statutory articles to retrieve from. Questions and facts are stated in everyday language, but need to be mapped to the formal terminology of statutes and their abstract legal concepts. A further complication is that not all of the case facts are relevant to each question of a case. Experimenting with three BM25 variants and nine dense retrievers, we find that vanilla dense retrieval far outperforms vanilla sparse retrieval in Recall@100. However, LLM-based query reformulation helps BM25 close that gap, while also improving dense retrieval. With a ten-round ReAct-like LLM reformulation loop that we introduce, BM25 improves further in Recall@100 and obtains the best nDCG and MAP scores of all tested retrievers. Query reformulation also outperforms pseudo-relevance feedback, sparse-dense fusion, and English translation.

cs.IR

Parameterized Dense-Sparse Fusion for Hybrid Retrieval: Tuning a Rank-Score Mix on BEIR SciFact with Qdrant

We study a parameterized hybrid ranker that fuses a dense embedding list and a sparse lexical list. The method has a small, explicit parameter vector: a dense prior $α\in [0,1]$, a score-versus-rank mix $λ\in [0,1]$, an RRF smoothing parameter $κ> 0$, optional list-geometry coefficients that move $α$ per query, and a router margin $τ$ that can turn sparse search off. We grid-search those ranges on SciFact train (809 queries) and freeze the chosen values on SciFact test (300). The tuned rank-score mix ($α= 0.8$, $λ= 0.75$, $κ= 20$) reaches 0.753 nDCG@10 and 0.889 recall@10, outperforming dense BGE (0.742 / 0.871) and equal-weight RRF (0.707 nDCG@10) on that test split. A list-conditioned $α$ adds +0.0006 nDCG; a sparse-off router is rejected by the same train split (any $τ$ that skipped approximately 50% of queries lost nDCG). These coefficients are dataset-specific. Equal RRF with the same models does not beat dense on a nine-zip BEIR macro-average (0.479 vs. 0.519 nDCG@10). Repeating the same train-then-freeze sweep independently on all 20 indexed units beats equal RRF on 20/20 and dense on 16/20 (unit-mean nDCG@10 0.467 vs. 0.462 dense vs. 0.420 RRF). Other corpora should reuse the ranges, not a copy of the SciFact point.

cs.IR