Clarify-Then-Search is a benchmark that tests whether large language models can ask clarification questions to improve the usefulness of deep search results. It uses 518 real-world query pairs from Baidu, where each intent query is paired with an underspecified version. The evaluation involves a clarifier asking up to three questions, a user answerer providing only explicit information, and a rewriter generating a new query that is then searched; performance is measured by a weighted nugget-recall score.
By Deqiang Huang, Jingbo Zhou, Xinjiang Lu, Tong Xu, Hua Wu, Enhong Chen
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
arXiv:2608.24079v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: A shared search-and-recommendation index must score new items from features alone because search has no exploration slot. In a public log covering bo...
By Theodore Rogers, Joe Standerfer, Dmitrii Timoshenko, Haoxue Li, Zuhaib Akhtar, Soyoung Yang
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
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
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: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)
The paper presents a method for fine‑tuning a large language model (LLM) recommender to generate personalized, non‑harmful explanations for its recommendations. By training two LLM‑judge reward models and using constrained GRPO, the authors achieve a significant increase in the PASS rate for all three criteria, from 0.649 to 0.956 on their own judges and from 0.677 to 0.931 on an independent judge. The fine‑tuned model maintains its original recommendation performance, demonstrating that LLM‑based recommenders can be adapted to complex tasks without loss of effectiveness.
By Jiashu He, Emma Yanyang Kong, JJ Tan, David Fagnan
arXiv:2511. 08378v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Session-based recommendation (SBR) aims to predict anonymous users' next interaction based on their interaction sessions.
By Xiao Wang, Ke Qin, Dongyang Zhang, Xiurui Xie, Shuang Liang
arXiv:2607. 27172v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Traditional search systems are optimized to retrieve items that strictly match a query, often prioritizing precision over recall.
By Ji Xin, Xiao Xiao, Ishan Bhatt, Vinesh Gudla, Trace Levinson, Raochuan Fan, Shishir Kumar Prasad, Prakash Putta, Tejaswi Tenneti
Recommender systems increasingly face a choice among heterogeneous agents -- collaborative filters, sequential models, content-based retrievers, and LLM-based rerankers -- yet no single agent is uniformly best. We study this choice as task-aware agent ranking under cost constraints using RouteRec, a framework that compares request-level hard selection with item-level learned aggregation over four traditional recommender agents and one LLM reranker agent.
Q2D-Web is a new large‑scale benchmark for agentic Retrieval‑Augmented Generation (RAG) systems, featuring a 190 million‑document web corpus and 70 k machine‑reformulated search queries in ten languages. It supplies three sets of relevance judgments—agent citations, production rankings, and a combined set enriched with LLM‑based labels—to evaluate first‑stage retrievers. Experiments on 13 retrievers show consistent ranking across judgment sets but significant variation across domains, languages, and query types, and demonstrate that a carefully sampled sub‑corpus can approximate full‑corpus evaluation with minimal loss in Recall@1000.