arXiv Machine Learning

The Recall Ceiling of LLM Recommendation Reranking

The paper examines LLM-based recommendation rerankers that are often evaluated under an oracle protocol, which guarantees the ground-truth item is present in the scored set. Across Amazon datasets, this protocol overestimates realistic NDCG@10 by 92–95% because realistic retrieval only covers 2–19% of relevant items at K=100, creating a recall ceiling that limits any closed-candidate reranker's top‑k NDCG. The authors find that various optimisation strategies—including prompt engineering, model scaling, sequential models, supervised neural rerankers, LoRA fine‑tuning, hybrid retrieval, score‑aware prompting, and LLM+CF fusion—do not significantly improve over a collaborative‑filtering baseline under realistic retrieval, and they propose a Recall‑Aware Evaluation Protocol (RAEP) to better assess rerankers in low‑recall regimes.

arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 30

Diagnosing and Mitigating Retrieval Bottlenecks in LLM-Based Cold-Start Recommendation

arXiv:2606. 29947v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as rerankers in recommender systems, with the expectation that semantic understanding will help in cold-start and long-tail regimes.

By Zhe Dong (University of Maine at Presque Isle), Fang Qin (Stanford University), Manish Shah (Independent Researcher), Yicheng Wang (Independent Researcher)
arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 27

Less can be More: Relieving RAG Bottlenecks via Evidence Frontloading and Pressure-Adaptive Budgeting

The paper introduces “PACE”, a training‑free framework that tackles bottlenecks in Retrieval‑Augmented Generation by frontloading evidence and adaptively budgeting reranking. It first reorders candidate documents based on marginal evidence coverage—prioritizing query‑relevant, complementary, and chain‑forming documents—providing a $(1-1/e)$ approximation guarantee. Then it dynamically adjusts the reranking budget according to the relative pressure of the reranker and the language model, improving evidence recall and reducing p95 latency in multi‑hop QA workloads.

By Weibin Cai, Reza Zafarani
arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 28

Keeping the Index Open: The Recommendation-Side Cost of Shared Search and Recommendation

The paper investigates the trade‑off of using a shared search‑and‑recommendation index that scores new items purely from features, thereby keeping the index open to unseen items. Experiments on public logs show that a feature‑based tower can match warm‑item performance (Recall@20 0.9595 vs 0.9510) and a lexical baseline, while a full‑catalog check is inconclusive. The study also quantifies the cost of this openness on recommendation quality across several baselines, revealing that exact full‑softmax training improves recall but is impractical at catalog scale.

By Theodore Rogers, Joe Standerfer, Dmitrii Timoshenko, Haoxue Li, Zuhaib Akhtar, Soyoung Yang
Hugging Face Trending Papers
6d ago

From Interests to Semantic IDs: Retrieval-Grounded Credit Assignment for Generative Recommendation

The paper introduces a retrieval‑grounded credit‑assignment method for generative recommenders that use Semantic IDs (SIDs). By structuring each autoregressive trace into a history summary, a set of interest hypotheses, and a final SID, a frozen retriever verifies each hypothesis as a catalog query. Rewards are assigned at the hypothesis level when any query retrieves the target within the top‑K, allowing distinct updates for rollouts that share the same SID reward and improving SID recommendation performance on Amazon Reviews datasets.

arXiv AI
6d ago

From Interests to Semantic IDs: Retrieval-Grounded Credit Assignment for Generative Recommendation

The paper proposes a retrieval‑grounded credit‑assignment method for generative recommenders that use Semantic IDs (SIDs). By structuring each generated trace into a history summary, a set of interest hypotheses, and a final SID, and then verifying each hypothesis with a frozen retriever, the method assigns reward at the hypothesis level rather than only at the final SID. Experiments on Amazon Reviews datasets show consistent improvements in SID recommendation, and an oracle analysis on Video Games data demonstrates that selecting target‑relevant queries among generated interests boosts recall and ranking.

By Mengdan Zhu, Yufan Zhao, Yao Zhao, Sophie Di, Tao Di, Yulan Yan, Sridhar Iyer, Liang Zhao
arXiv AI
Sep 1

Efficient GPU Retrieval for Semantic Search

The paper introduces a GPU‑optimized retrieval framework for LinkedIn’s semantic search, partitioning embeddings into eight category‑supervised segments and applying a min/median aggregation rule aligned with the existing relevance policy. A lightweight Stage‑1 scorer generates high‑recall candidates, while a two‑stage GPU architecture—FP8 coarse ranking followed by FP16 re‑ranking—boosts throughput and recall, achieving 99.6‑99.8% of full‑FP16 recall at over 500 QPS per shard. In A/B testing, the system raises exploratory‑query Precision@10 from 63.7% to 79.0% and navigational Precision@1 from 65.5% to 74.7%, with human evaluation confirming the improvement.

By Dhritiman Das, Chujie Zheng, Ronak Kaoshik, Pratik Dixit, Vishal Shah, Yanbo Li, Jiahao Xu, Manika Agarwal, Chinmay Naik, Lingyu Zhang, Chetan Bhole, Chirag Bhanuprasad Mehta, Meng Zheng, Puneet Singh Ahluwalia, Shirisha Singh, Ping Jin, Manas Apte, Gokulraj Mohanasundaram, Tugrul Bingol, Raghavan Muthuregunathan, Fedor Borisyuk
arXiv AI
Aug 13

CAR: Query-Guided Confidence-Aware Reranking for Retrieval-Augmented Generation

arXiv:2605. 04495v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) relies on evidence ranking to determine what information is exposed to the generator, yet existing retrieval and reranking methods primarily estimate query--document relevance.

By Zhipeng Song, Yizhi Zhou, Xiangyu Kong, Jiulong Jiao, Xuezhou Ye, Chunqi Gao, Xueqing Shi, Yu Wang, Yuhang Zhou, Heng Qi
arXiv AI
Sep 2

Retrieval, Scoring, and Decoding Shape Performance and Stability in LLM-based Conversational Recommendation

The study evaluates large language models (LLMs) as rerankers in conversational movie recommendation, comparing proprietary, open-weight, and fine-tuned LLMs against collaborative-filtering and sequential baselines on the ReDial benchmark. Results show that the best proprietary LLM achieves an NDCG@10 of 0.1497 with a shared semantic candidate pool, outperforming non-LLM baselines, while open-weight LLMs do not surpass a tuned shallow autoencoder under the same protocol. The analysis also highlights that reranker performance is highly sensitive to candidate generation, pool size, scoring policy, and decoding temperature, suggesting these factors should be reported as standard evaluation fields.

By Ante Kapetanovic, Tomislav Duricic, Andro Mercep, Emanuel Lacic