The paper introduces TEMPS, a modular temporal branch that enhances semantic retrievers by adding a temporal scoring component. TEMPS resolves anchored temporal expressions into intervals, matches them to Gaussian distributions, and trains an anchor-date-conditioned encoder using grounding supervision without hand‑labeled data. On three temporal benchmarks, TEMPS improves MRR across all tested backbones and raises R@1 from 19.92 to 25.39 on the TS‑Retriever, surpassing prior temporal state‑of‑the‑art methods.
By Mourad Hassani, Julien Romero, Amel Bouzeghoub, Christian Jacquelinet
The paper investigates how scaling hard‑negative training for rerankers can improve industrial legal retrieval systems once embedding recall saturates. On Chinese legal benchmarks, a pipeline that first uses embedding‑mined negatives and then self‑mined negatives yields the best trade‑off, and a 4B‑parameter Stage2 reranker outperforms the native 4B model on STARD, CSAID, and internal datasets. The study demonstrates that evaluating retrieval and reranking stages separately is beneficial for optimizing industrial retrieval performance.
By Yunhan Li, Mingjie Xie, Zeyang Shi, Gengshen Wu, Min Yang
arXiv:2604. 23336v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Unlike traditional fact-based retrieval, rationale-based retrieval typically necessitates cross-encoding of query-document pairs using large language models, incurring substantial computational costs.
By Teng Chen, Sheng Xu, Feixiang Guo, Xiaoyu Wang, Qingqing Gu, Hongyan Li, Luo Ji
The paper investigates which historical examples are most useful for time‑series forecasting by defining predictive relevance as the expected future utility conditioned on inference‑time information. It introduces a two‑stage approach: a normalized‑pattern retriever generates a coarse candidate set, and a lightweight MLP reranks these candidates using future‑supervised relevance while keeping inference strictly past‑only. Experiments on six benchmarks show that this reranker improves pattern retrieval and outperforms a matched‑protocol baseline, revealing that historical relevance is structured, domain‑dependent, and not governed by a single universal retrieval rule.
By Yong-Hoon Choi, Kwang-Hyun Park, Youngjin Cho
arXiv:2606. 01070v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Dense retrievers excel at first-stage candidate generation but lack effective reranking in zero-resource settings.
By Shiyan Liu, Yichen Li
CORE improves compositional reasoning in multimodal language models by distilling a cross‑attentive reranker’s fine‑grained judgments into the embedding model. It generates candidate lists across five compositional matching levels and trains with a Rank‑KL objective to replicate the reranker’s ranking. Experiments on COLA, SUGARCREPE++, and NEGBENCH show CORE‑RERANKER‑8B outperforms Jina‑Reranker by 10.7 points, while CORE‑EMBED‑8B achieves the best overall average among evaluated embeddings, with gains also transferring to the MCMR benchmark without harming COCO or Flickr30K retrieval.
By Tingyu Song, Mingxin Li, Yanzhao Zhang, Dingkun Long, Chu Liu, Pengjun Xie, Yilun Zhao, Shu Wu
Structured Temporal Causality for Interpretable Multivariate Time Series Anomaly Detection introduces OracleAD, an unsupervised framework that encodes each variable’s past into a causal embedding to jointly predict the present and reconstruct the input window. The embeddings are projected via self‑attention into a shared latent space, capturing dynamic spatial relationships that are aligned to a Stable Latent Structure (SLS) representing normal-state relationships. Anomalies are detected through a dual scoring mechanism based on prediction error and deviation from the SLS, allowing fine‑grained diagnosis and root‑cause identification at the variable level.
By Dongchan Cho, Jiho Han, Keumyeong Kang, Minsang Kim, Honggyu Ryu, Namsoon Jung
TSQueryBench is a synthetic benchmark comprising 500 time‑series instances and 10 query types, each paired with correct, partially correct, and incorrect natural‑language explanations. The study evaluates six large language models on explanation generation, ranking, scoring, and anomaly detection, revealing that models often fail to generate numerically correct explanations yet can reliably identify or score correct ones. These findings suggest that rubric‑guided LLM evaluation is more dependable than generation for numerically grounded time‑series reasoning.
By Preetham Sivalingam, Murari Mandal, Dhruv Kumar, Saurabh Deshpande
arXiv:2606. 28359v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Dense embedding retrieval compresses all relevance information into a single inner product, imposing a fundamental geometric limit -- the Voronoi Bottleneck -- on the number of query-document relevance patterns expressible at fixed embedding dimension (d).
By Charith Chandra Sai Balne, Rithwik Maramraju, Siddharth Pratap Singh, Rohit Upadhyay, Aditya Singh, Chittaranjan Tripathy, Yogananda Domlur Seetharama
arXiv:2608.21702v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) grounds LLM generation on retrieved documents, but the standard terminal retrieval stage--dense-vector similarity,...
By Jing Liu, Yongxing Qi, Muchen Jiang, Chengnan Hu, Qingqing Peng, Haoming Wang, Yuqing Wang, Yang Yu, Xu Zhang, Ting Wu
Lychee‑Reranker is a fast, not‑late‑interaction reranker that decouples query and passage computation while preserving expressive relevance modeling. It uses an encoder–decoder architecture: passages are pre‑encoded with Matryoshka embedding pooling, and the decoder jointly processes system/user instructions and query intent, with cross‑attention capturing fine‑grained relevance. The design yields four benefits—offline passage encoding for efficiency, cross‑attention expressiveness, compact Matryoshka pooling, and adjustable test‑time compute—and is available in Nano, Small, and Large sizes (0.27B, 1B, and 4B activated parameters).
By Xinping Zhao, Jiaxin Xu, Ziqi Dai, Xin Zhang, Huiyao Chen, Shouzheng Huang, Xianhao Xiong, Danyu Tang, Xinshuo Hu, Guohong Fu, Meishan Zhang, Baotian Hu
arXiv:2607. 23507v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Choosing the right text embedding model is one of the most consequential -- and most frequently under-examined -- decisions in building a retrieval or search system, yet the model that tops a leaderboard is rarely the best choice for a given deployment.
By Madhav S Baidya