REVIEW 2 cited by
NevIR: Negation in Neural Information Retrieval
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Negation is a common everyday phenomena and has been a consistent area of weakness for language models (LMs). Although the Information Retrieval (IR) community has adopted LMs as the backbone of modern IR architectures, there has been little to no research in understanding how negation impacts neural IR. We therefore construct a straightforward benchmark on this theme: asking IR models to rank two documents that differ only by negation. We show that the results vary widely according to the type of IR architecture: cross-encoders perform best, followed by late-interaction models, and in last place are bi-encoder and sparse neural architectures. We find that most information retrieval models (including SOTA ones) do not consider negation, performing the same or worse than a random ranking. We show that although the obvious approach of continued fine-tuning on a dataset of contrastive documents containing negations increases performance (as does model size), there is still a large gap between machine and human performance.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
CRISP: Clustering Multi-Vector Representations for Denoising and Pruning
CRISP, a multi-vector retriever trained end-to-end with k-means centroids as its representation, matches or beats the unpruned model at 2.9x document compression and loses only 3.6% NDCG@10 at 11x compression on BEIR.
-
Constructing Set-Compositional and Negated Representations for First-Stage Ranking
Vector operations on learned sparse representations compose union, intersection, and negation queries without fine-tuning, and adding negative term weights to SPLADE improves negation handling.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.