arXiv:2603. 20990v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Hard-negative source selection for dense retrieval is usually decided only after fine-tuning and downstream evaluation.
Summary generated by The Flow from the publisher's feed. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2603. 20990v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Hard-negative source selection for dense retrieval is usually decided only after fine-tuning and downstream evaluation.
arXiv:2606. 01304v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Hard negative mining has become the dominant strategy for training retrievers, yet it faces intrinsic limitations: negatives are bounded by corpus availability, selected by retriever score rather than diagnostic value, and increasingly contaminated by false positives as the retriever improves.
arXiv:2608. 02112v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Embedding benchmarks measure standalone model quality, but they do not establish whether a low-cost retriever contributes complementary ranking information once lexical and transformer-based retrieval are already combined.
arXiv:2607. 04733v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) is the standard approach for adapting pretrained language models to downstream domains, yet it often improves target-domain behavior at the cost of degrading pre-existing capabilities.
arXiv:2606. 00262v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: InfoNCE is the standard contrastive learning objective, but its softmax form is not only a computational convenience: it also encodes a statistical assumption about how the top-scoring example is selected.
arXiv:2606. 28359v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Dense embedding retrieval compresses all relevance information into a single inner product, imposing a fundamental geometric limit -- the Voronoi Bottleneck -- on the number of query-document relevance patterns expressible at fixed embedding dimension (d).