Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Don't "Overthink" Passage Reranking: Is Reasoning Truly Necessary?

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 2505.16886 v1 pith:FPJWHTCQ submitted 2025-05-22 cs.IR cs.AIcs.CLcs.LG

Don't "Overthink" Passage Reranking: Is Reasoning Truly Necessary?

classification cs.IR cs.AIcs.CLcs.LG
keywords reasoningrerankersprocessreasonrrpointwiserelevanceaccuracylanguage
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

With the growing success of reasoning models across complex natural language tasks, researchers in the Information Retrieval (IR) community have begun exploring how similar reasoning capabilities can be integrated into passage rerankers built on Large Language Models (LLMs). These methods typically employ an LLM to produce an explicit, step-by-step reasoning process before arriving at a final relevance prediction. But, does reasoning actually improve reranking accuracy? In this paper, we dive deeper into this question, studying the impact of the reasoning process by comparing reasoning-based pointwise rerankers (ReasonRR) to standard, non-reasoning pointwise rerankers (StandardRR) under identical training conditions, and observe that StandardRR generally outperforms ReasonRR. Building on this observation, we then study the importance of reasoning to ReasonRR by disabling its reasoning process (ReasonRR-NoReason), and find that ReasonRR-NoReason is surprisingly more effective than ReasonRR. Examining the cause of this result, our findings reveal that reasoning-based rerankers are limited by the LLM's reasoning process, which pushes it toward polarized relevance scores and thus fails to consider the partial relevance of passages, a key factor for the accuracy of pointwise rerankers.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Prism-Reranker: Beyond Relevance Scoring -- Jointly Producing Contributions and Evidence for Agentic Retrieval

    cs.IR 2026-04 accept novelty 7.0

    Prism-Reranker models output relevance, contribution statements, and evidence passages to support agentic retrieval beyond scalar scoring.

  2. TabRank: Chain-of-Thought Distillation for Table Re-Rankers

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    Conditioning a table reranker on teacher chain-of-thought traces during training, without supervising generation of the traces, improves out-of-distribution table retrieval accuracy over base, naive SFT, and standard ...

  3. Investigating Thinking Behaviours of Reasoning-Based Language Models for Social Bias Mitigation

    cs.CL 2025-10 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Reasoning LLMs aggregate social biases through stereotype repetition and irrelevant information injection in their thinking processes, and a self-review prompt mitigates this on BBQ, StereoSet, and BOLD benchmarks.