REVIEW 4 cited by
LitSearch: A Retrieval Benchmark for Scientific Literature Search
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
read the original abstract
Literature search questions, such as "Where can I find research on the evaluation of consistency in generated summaries?" pose significant challenges for modern search engines and retrieval systems. These questions often require a deep understanding of research concepts and the ability to reason across entire articles. In this work, we introduce LitSearch, a retrieval benchmark comprising 597 realistic literature search queries about recent ML and NLP papers. LitSearch is constructed using a combination of (1) questions generated by GPT-4 based on paragraphs containing inline citations from research papers and (2) questions manually written by authors about their recently published papers. All LitSearch questions were manually examined or edited by experts to ensure high quality. We extensively benchmark state-of-the-art retrieval models and also evaluate two LLM-based reranking pipelines. We find a significant performance gap between BM25 and state-of-the-art dense retrievers, with a 24.8% absolute difference in recall@5. The LLM-based reranking strategies further improve the best-performing dense retriever by 4.4%. Additionally, commercial search engines and research tools like Google Search perform poorly on LitSearch, lagging behind the best dense retriever by up to 32 recall points. Taken together, these results show that LitSearch is an informative new testbed for retrieval systems while catering to a real-world use case.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
OpenReward: Learning to Reward Long-form Agentic Tasks via Reinforcement Learning
A tool-augmented reward model trained with GRPO on 27K synthetic pairs beats existing reward models on long-form QA judgment and improves downstream alignment.
-
NeuSym-RAG: Hybrid Neural Symbolic Retrieval with Multiview Structuring for PDF Question Answering
NeuSym-RAG combines SQL-based symbolic retrieval with neural vector search in an iterative LLM agent, using multi-view PDF parsing, and reports large gains over simple RAG baselines on full-paper QA.
-
How Far Are AI Scientists from Changing the World?
This survey proposes a four-level capability framework for AI Scientist systems and, using an AI reviewer, finds that current systems produce papers rated well below normal scientific standards.
-
No Stupid Questions: An Analysis of Question Query Generation for Citation Recommendation
LLM-generated questions are sometimes better retrieval queries than extractive keywords for citation recommendation, but selecting the best question at inference time remains largely unsolved.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.