arXiv AI By Krittanon Kaewtawee, Petmongkon Pornpichitsuwan, Natchaya Temyingyong, Nutnicha Laplamoon, Wachiravit Modecrua, Krittin Pachtrachai, Touchapon Kraisingkorn

InfluMatch: Frontier-Quality KOL Search at 4B-Model Cost

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2607. 05968v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Matching influencers (KOLs) to free-form, multi-part Thai marketing criteria is today served either by keyword search over structured profiles, which misses semantic fit, or by prompting frontier LLMs over every candidate, which is accurate but slow and expensive.

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
6d ago

ZooWork-ShopRanker: An Open, Preference-Aligned E-Commerce Reranker

ZooWork-ShopRanker is a family of open e‑commerce rerankers (0.6B, 4B, and 8B) that align with human shopping preferences by using large language models as preference oracles to generate training pairs. The flagship 8B model serves as a teacher for the smaller 4B and 0.6B models, which are further refined on judged pairs. A new benchmark, ShopRank‑Bench, contains ~10,000 private‑traffic preference pairs and shows that all ZooWork models outperform the strongest open reranker baseline and their own un‑aligned versions.

By Siqiao Xue, Shuxuan Liu, Ning Hu
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 Machine Learning
Aug 28

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 AI
Aug 24

Clarify-Then-Search: A Clarification Benchmark for Deep Search with End-to-End Nugget Restoration

Clarify-Then-Search is a benchmark that tests whether large language models can ask clarification questions to improve the usefulness of deep search results. It uses 518 real-world query pairs from Baidu, where each intent query is paired with an underspecified version. The evaluation involves a clarifier asking up to three questions, a user answerer providing only explicit information, and a rewriter generating a new query that is then searched; performance is measured by a weighted nugget-recall score.

By Deqiang Huang, Jingbo Zhou, Xinjiang Lu, Tong Xu, Hua Wu, Enhong Chen
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 24

The Recall Ceiling of LLM Recommendation Reranking

The paper examines LLM-based recommendation rerankers that are often evaluated under an oracle protocol, which guarantees the ground-truth item is present in the scored set. Across Amazon datasets, this protocol overestimates realistic NDCG@10 by 92–95% because realistic retrieval only covers 2–19% of relevant items at K=100, creating a recall ceiling that limits any closed-candidate reranker's top‑k NDCG. The authors find that various optimisation strategies—including prompt engineering, model scaling, sequential models, supervised neural rerankers, LoRA fine‑tuning, hybrid retrieval, score‑aware prompting, and LLM+CF fusion—do not significantly improve over a collaborative‑filtering baseline under realistic retrieval, and they propose a Recall‑Aware Evaluation Protocol (RAEP) to better assess rerankers in low‑recall regimes.

By Zhaohui Wang