Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Task-Aware Specialization for Efficient and Robust Dense Retrieval for Open-Domain Question Answering

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 2210.05156 v2 pith:GXEJZ3GF submitted 2022-10-11 cs.CL

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

Given its effectiveness on knowledge-intensive natural language processing tasks, dense retrieval models have become increasingly popular. Specifically, the de-facto architecture for open-domain question answering uses two isomorphic encoders that are initialized from the same pretrained model but separately parameterized for questions and passages. This bi-encoder architecture is parameter-inefficient in that there is no parameter sharing between encoders. Further, recent studies show that such dense retrievers underperform BM25 in various settings. We thus propose a new architecture, Task-aware Specialization for dense Retrieval (TASER), which enables parameter sharing by interleaving shared and specialized blocks in a single encoder. Our experiments on five question answering datasets show that TASER can achieve superior accuracy, surpassing BM25, while using about 60% of the parameters as bi-encoder dense retrievers. In out-of-domain evaluations, TASER is also empirically more robust than bi-encoder dense retrievers. Our code is available at https://github.com/microsoft/taser.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID 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. A Multi-Task Evaluation of LLMs' Processing of Academic Text Input

    cs.CL 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    The abstract reports Gemini underperforms on four academic text tasks, but the attached full text is an unrelated biomedical retrieval paper, leaving the claims unverifiable.

Pith tools