arXiv AI

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.

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 AI
Aug 18

Dear Algo: A Precision-First Agentic Intent Layer for Unified Search and Recommendation

arXiv:2608. 15877v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Search and recommendation serve a shared discovery objective but encode intent differently.

By Rui Wang, Jiazhou Wang, Zheng Wei, Chenglin Lu, Fangcheng Sun, Ivy Sun, Jin Sun, Hui Geng, Lillian Zhang, Chao Yang, Lei Chen, Shahin Sefati, Reem Helou, Joe Zhou, Babak Shakibi, Yiyi Pan, Bi Xue, Hong Yan, Shujian Bu
arXiv Machine Learning
6d ago

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
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 15

Efficient Rationale-based Retrieval: On-policy Distillation from Generative Rerankers based on JEPA

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
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jul 10

RouteRec: Strict Evaluation of Recommender-Agent Selection and Aggregation

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.