Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Mitigating the Position Bias of Transformer Models in Passage Re-Ranking

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2101.06980 v1 pith:RKGNLDYC submitted 2021-01-18 cs.IR cs.CL

classification cs.IRcs.CL
keywords biasmodelsre-rankingdatasetdatasetspositionbiasedpassage
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Supervised machine learning models and their evaluation strongly depends on the quality of the underlying dataset. When we search for a relevant piece of information it may appear anywhere in a given passage. However, we observe a bias in the position of the correct answer in the text in two popular Question Answering datasets used for passage re-ranking. The excessive favoring of earlier positions inside passages is an unwanted artefact. This leads to three common Transformer-based re-ranking models to ignore relevant parts in unseen passages. More concerningly, as the evaluation set is taken from the same biased distribution, the models overfitting to that bias overestimate their true effectiveness. In this work we analyze position bias on datasets, the contextualized representations, and their effect on retrieval results. We propose a debiasing method for retrieval datasets. Our results show that a model trained on a position-biased dataset exhibits a significant decrease in re-ranking effectiveness when evaluated on a debiased dataset. We demonstrate that by mitigating the position bias, Transformer-based re-ranking models are equally effective on a biased and debiased dataset, as well as more effective in a transfer-learning setting between two differently biased datasets.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Augment or Not? A Comparative Study of Pure and Augmented Large Language Model Recommenders

    cs.IR 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A survey and benchmark of LLM recommenders finds that augmenting LLMs with non-LLM techniques (semantic IDs, collaborative signals) generally improves sequential recommendation accuracy on Amazon'23.

Pith tools