The paper introduces DEPT, a method that trains a single decoder-only large language model to both expand queries and encode documents for retrieval. By preserving document embeddings close to their initial cached values while allowing gradients to flow through the generator, DEPT stabilizes retrieval targets and enables efficient index reuse and online hard‑negative mining. Experiments on the BEIR benchmark with Qwen3‑4B‑Instruct‑2507 and LLaMA‑3.2‑3B‑Instruct show that DEPT outperforms training‑free, independently trained, and staged unified baselines, with ablations confirming the benefits of preservation, whitening, end‑to‑end expansion training, and online negatives.
By Jingyuan Wang, Richong Zhang, Zhijie Nie, Mingxin Li, Yanzhao Zhang
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
arXiv:2407. 10486v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Query-focused summarization (QFS) aims to produce summaries that answer particular questions of interest, enabling greater user control and personalization.
By Jie Cao, Dian Jiao, Yang Dai, Rolan Yan, Wenqiao Zhang, Siliang Tang
As retrieval systems scale, high-quality reranking becomes increasingly important. However, most existing rerankers, whether encoder-based or decoder-based, jointly encode the query and passage, tightly coupling their computation and limiting deployment efficiency as well as flexibility.
arXiv:2606. 02814v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Neural retrievers are trained to estimate query-document relevance from annotated query-document pairs.
By Francisco Valentini, Edgar Altszyler, Martin Fajcik
arXiv:2608. 20281v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models often fail to answer questions about a bounded document collection when the source documents are not retrieved at inference time.
By Qian Kou, Xiaofeng Shi, Xiaosong Qiu, Hua Zhou
arXiv:2607. 24799v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models tend to hallucinate when answering domain-specific ques tions from scientific documents without prior fine-tuning.
By Alexandru-Andrei Sauc\u{a}, Ana-Luiza Rusnac
arXiv:2606. 29706v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Telecom question answering (QA) is a challenging setting for retrieval-augmented generation (RAG): evidence is fragmented across standards, papers, encyclopedic resources, and web documents, and answers often hinge on technical tables, equations, and specialized protocol language.
By Heshan Fernando, Quan Xiao, Yan Xin, Tianyi Chen
arXiv:2607. 11933v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Cross-encoders achieve high reranking accuracy in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) pipelines but impose quadratic inference costs that limit real-time deployment.
By Shreeya Dasa Lakshminath, Shubhan S
arXiv:2608.22767v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Long-term language-model agents accumulate memories across interactions, but their retrievers typically do not accumulate retrieval experience. Semanti...
By Qi Feng, Chris Ding, Jicong Fan
arXiv:2604. 02091v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Rerankers play a pivotal role in refining retrieval results for Retrieval-Augmented Generation.
By Yuhang Wu, Xiangqing Shen, Fanfan Wang, Cangqi Zhou, Zhen Wu, Xinyu Dai, Rui Xia
The paper introduces the concept of LLM‑specific utility, defining it as the performance gain a target large language model (LLM) achieves when provided with a passage compared to answering without evidence. A benchmark of utilitarian passages is built for four LLMs (Qwen3‑8B/14B/32B and Llama 3.1‑8B) across three QA datasets, revealing that each model benefits most from its own tailored evidence and that evidence optimized for other models is consistently suboptimal. The authors also create SpecUBench, a benchmark for LLM‑specific utility judgment, and show that current utility‑aware retrieval methods largely capture model‑agnostic usefulness, struggling to estimate LLM‑specific utility.
"whyItMatters":"The study demonstrates that retrieval‑augmented generation must consider model‑specific evidence selection to truly improve LLM performance, highlighting a gap in existing utility‑aware methods."
By Hengran Zhang, Keping Bi, Jiafeng Guo, Jiaming Zhang, Shuaiqiang Wang, Dawei Yin, Xueqi Cheng