The paper presents a system for matching job candidates to vacancies that provides interpretable evidence rather than a single relevance score. It uses a two‑stage approach: an LLM‑based labeler refined through recruiter feedback and a distilled bi‑encoder that runs online on CPU. The model, trained on 168,772 labeled pairs, achieves 95.79% agreement with recruiter‑recorded decisions on a production‑feedback subset.
arXiv:2609.23307v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This paper presents a comparative evaluation of dense embedding models for semantic candidate-job matching in high-volume staffing workflows. Incomin...
The paper reviews the evolution of AI recruitment systems from simple profile matching to complex, multi‑stage workflows that retrieve evidence, compare candidates, and execute actions. It analyzes 40 representative works, highlighting transitions from similarity to reciprocal suitability, from single models to compound workflows, and from offline predictions to evidence‑aligned evaluation. The authors identify persistent gaps—such as confounded behavioral labels, limited data validity, and lack of privacy assessment—and propose a staged mapping for defensible evaluation and an agenda for auditable, evidence‑grounded systems.
The paper reviews the evolution of AI recruitment systems from simple profile matching to complex, multi‑stage workflows that retrieve evidence, compare candidates, and execute actions. It organizes 40 representative works, highlighting transitions from similarity to reciprocal suitability, from single models to compound workflows, and from offline prediction to evidence‑aligned evaluation. The authors identify persistent gaps such as confounded behavioral labels, limited data validity, hidden pipeline failures, and a lack of privacy assessment, and propose a staged mapping for defensible evaluation and an agenda for evidence‑grounded, auditable systems.
Resume screeners must infer job-relevant competence from resumes whose presentation can vary substantially in wording, structure, stylistic polish, and document extraction quality. Ideally, such surfa...
arXiv:2609.16517v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Resume screeners must infer job-relevant competence from resumes whose presentation can vary substantially in wording, structure, stylistic polish, a...
The paper introduces a scalable product‑linking system that uses a retrieve‑then‑match cascade. First, a lightweight text cross‑encoder auto‑resolves the majority of merchant‑catalog product pairs with high precision, while an agentic multimodal vision‑language model handles the remaining ambiguous cases by inspecting images and performing web searches. This approach balances computational cost and accuracy, improving overall link coverage from 68% to 77% without requiring fine‑tuning of the agent.
arXiv:2607. 24845v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have been applied to sequential recommendation by formulating it as a natural language task.
arXiv:2608. 10385v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as relevance assessors in information retrieval (IR) evaluation, raising questions about how assessor framing affects judgment reliability and downstream system comparison.
arXiv:2608.21792v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Document classification in regulated industries is constrained by data residency, limited cold-start labels, scarce review capacity, and costly model-g...
The paper proposes a scalable, automated method for auditing candidate‑job matching systems for demographic bias. It employs large‑language‑model agents to generate neutral resumes, injects controlled demographic variations, ranks candidates with a fine‑tuned embedding model, and evaluates nine fairness metrics across counterfactual, group‑fairness, and merit‑aware families, producing a composite risk report. Experiments on a small corpus show that single‑score audits miss nuanced issues, underscoring the need for multi‑metric evaluation and LLM‑generated audits as a low‑cost complement to human reviews.
The paper introduces LongJudgeBench, a benchmark designed to evaluate large language models (LLMs) acting as judges for long-form text generation. It highlights that long-form evaluation requires complex, document-level assessments beyond simple length, such as organization, coverage, depth, consistency, and scenario-specific quality. Experiments show a significant reliability gap among current LLM judges, indicating instability across scenarios and limited effectiveness of rubrics or references.
arXiv:2607. 24688v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Entity matching identifies records that refer to the same real-world entity.