Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 cited by

RAR-b: Reasoning as Retrieval Benchmark

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 2404.06347 v2 pith:JNS2JVFP submitted 2024-04-09 cs.CL cs.IR

classification cs.CLcs.IR
keywords tasksmodelsreasoningabilitiesembeddingrar-bretrievallanguage
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Semantic textual similartiy (STS) and information retrieval tasks (IR) tasks have been the two major avenues to record the progress of embedding models in the past few years. Under the emerging Retrieval-augmented Generation (RAG) paradigm, we envision the need to evaluate next-level language understanding abilities of embedding models, and take a conscious look at the reasoning abilities stored in them. Addressing this, we pose the question: Can retrievers solve reasoning problems? By transforming reasoning tasks into retrieval tasks, we find that without specifically trained for reasoning-level language understanding, current state-of-the-art retriever models may still be far from being competent for playing the role of assisting LLMs, especially in reasoning-intensive tasks. Moreover, albeit trained to be aware of instructions, instruction-aware IR models are often better off without instructions in inference time for reasoning tasks, posing an overlooked retriever-LLM behavioral gap for the research community to align. However, recent decoder-based embedding models show great promise in narrowing the gap, highlighting the pathway for embedding models to achieve reasoning-level language understanding. We also show that, although current off-the-shelf re-ranker models fail on these tasks, injecting reasoning abilities into them through fine-tuning still appears easier than doing so to bi-encoders, and we are able to achieve state-of-the-art performance across all tasks by fine-tuning a reranking model. We release Reasoning as Retrieval Benchmark (RAR-b), a holistic suite of tasks and settings to evaluate the reasoning abilities stored in retriever models. RAR-b is available at https://github.com/gowitheflow-1998/RAR-b.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

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

  1. With Argus Eyes: Assessing Retrieval Gaps via Uncertainty Scoring to Detect and Remedy Retrieval Blind Spots

    cs.IR 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    An entity-level Retrieval Probability Score exposes systematic blind spots in dense retrievers, predicts them from embedding geometry, and targeted Wikipedia-context augmentation of flagged entities raises nDCG@5/10 o...

  2. RaDeR: Reasoning-aware Dense Retrieval Models

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A math-trained dense retriever and reranker, built from MCTS reasoning trajectories and self-reflection, outperforms strong baselines on reasoning-intensive retrieval benchmarks and beats BM25 on chain-of-thought queries.

  3. Reading Between the Frames: Interpreting Implicit and Non-literal Meaning in Social Media Videos

    cs.CL 2026-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A new video benchmark, DrivelHub+, shows that current video-language models can describe what happens in social media clips but largely fail to infer the implicit humour, irony, or cultural meaning.

  4. MIRB: Mathematical Information Retrieval Benchmark

    cs.IR 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    MIRB, a unified benchmark of four math retrieval tasks across 12 datasets, shows current retrieval models score far lower on premise retrieval than on semantic retrieval, and cross-encoder rerankers often hurt.

  5. Exploring Reasoning-Infused Text Embedding with Large Language Models for Zero-Shot Dense Retrieval

    cs.CL 2025-08 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Reasoning-infused text embedding, which prepends LLM-generated reasoning to queries before embedding, improves zero-shot dense retrieval on BRIGHT.

Pith tools