arXiv AI By Tiancheng Xing, Jerry Li, Yixuan Du, Xiyang Hu

Are LLMs Reliable Rankers? Rank Manipulation via Two-Stage Token Optimization

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2510. 06732v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as rerankers in information retrieval, yet their ranking behavior can be steered by small, natural-sounding prompts.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 2

VerTox: Verifiable Reward-Guided Corpus Poisoning Against Neural Ranking Models

VerTox is a framework that turns corpus poisoning of neural ranking models into a verifiable reward‑guided reinforcement learning problem. By fine‑tuning compact large language models with reward shaping that couples ranking distortion and factual corruption, VerTox generates fluent, low‑perplexity adversarial documents that frequently outrank target items across multiple ranking architectures, including a commercial embedding model. Experiments show near‑perfect attack success and significant degradation of downstream retrieval‑augmented generation performance.

By Zhiqi Huang, Vivek Datla, Zhichao Xu, Puxuan Yu, Vivek Srikumar, Alfy Samuel
arXiv AI
Aug 13

CAR: Query-Guided Confidence-Aware Reranking for Retrieval-Augmented Generation

arXiv:2605. 04495v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) relies on evidence ranking to determine what information is exposed to the generator, yet existing retrieval and reranking methods primarily estimate query--document relevance.

By Zhipeng Song, Yizhi Zhou, Xiangyu Kong, Jiulong Jiao, Xuezhou Ye, Chunqi Gao, Xueqing Shi, Yu Wang, Yuhang Zhou, Heng Qi
arXiv AI
Jun 10

RankLLM: Weighted Ranking of LLMs by Quantifying Question Difficulty

arXiv:2602. 12424v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Benchmarks establish a standardized evaluation framework to systematically assess the performance of large language models (LLMs), facilitating objective comparisons and driving advancements in the field.

By Ziqian Zhang, Xingjian Hu, Yue Huang, Kai Zhang, Ruoxi Chen, Yixin Liu, Qingsong Wen, Kaidi Xu, Xiangliang Zhang, Neil Zhenqiang Gong, Lichao Sun
arXiv AI
Sep 2

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.

By Ante Kapetanovic, Tomislav Duricic, Andro Mercep, Emanuel Lacic