Rolf Jagerman

Zhen Qin, Rolf Jagerman, Kai Hui et al. · deepmind

Ranking documents using Large Language Models (LLMs) by directly feeding the query and candidate documents into the prompt is an interesting and practical problem. However, researchers have found it difficult to outperform fine-tuned baseline rankers on benchmark datasets. We analyze pointwise and listwise ranking prompts used by existing methods and argue that off-the-shelf LLMs do not fully understand these challenging ranking formulations. In this paper, we propose to significantly reduce the burden on LLMs by using a new technique called Pairwise Ranking Prompting (PRP). Our results are the first in the literature to achieve state-of-the-art ranking performance on standard benchmarks using moderate-sized open-sourced LLMs. On TREC-DL 2019&2020, PRP based on the Flan-UL2 model with 20B parameters performs favorably with the previous best approach in the literature, which is based on the blackbox commercial GPT-4 that has 50x (estimated) model size, while outperforming other LLM-based solutions, such as InstructGPT which has 175B parameters, by over 10% for all ranking metrics. By using the same prompt template on seven BEIR tasks, PRP outperforms supervised baselines and outperforms the blackbox commercial ChatGPT solution by 4.2% and pointwise LLM-based solutions by more than 10% on average NDCG@10. Furthermore, we propose several variants of PRP to improve efficiency and show that it is possible to achieve competitive results even with linear complexity.

Honglei Zhuang, Zhen Qin, Rolf Jagerman et al. · deepmind

Recently, substantial progress has been made in text ranking based on pretrained language models such as BERT. However, there are limited studies on how to leverage more powerful sequence-to-sequence models such as T5. Existing attempts usually formulate text ranking as classification and rely on postprocessing to obtain a ranked list. In this paper, we propose RankT5 and study two T5-based ranking model structures, an encoder-decoder and an encoder-only one, so that they not only can directly output ranking scores for each query-document pair, but also can be fine-tuned with "pairwise" or "listwise" ranking losses to optimize ranking performances. Our experiments show that the proposed models with ranking losses can achieve substantial ranking performance gains on different public text ranking data sets. Moreover, when fine-tuned with listwise ranking losses, the ranking model appears to have better zero-shot ranking performance on out-of-domain data sets compared to the model fine-tuned with classification losses.

Minghan Li, Honglei Zhuang, Kai Hui et al. · deepmind

Query expansion has been widely used to improve the search results of first-stage retrievers, yet its influence on second-stage, cross-encoder rankers remains under-explored. A recent work of Weller et al. [44] shows that current expansion techniques benefit weaker models such as DPR and BM25 but harm stronger rankers such as MonoT5. In this paper, we re-examine this conclusion and raise the following question: Can query expansion improve generalization of strong cross-encoder rankers? To answer this question, we first apply popular query expansion methods to state-of-the-art cross-encoder rankers and verify the deteriorated zero-shot performance. We identify two vital steps for cross-encoders in the experiment: high-quality keyword generation and minimal-disruptive query modification. We show that it is possible to improve the generalization of a strong neural ranker, by prompt engineering and aggregating the ranking results of each expanded query via fusion. Specifically, we first call an instruction-following language model to generate keywords through a reasoning chain. Leveraging self-consistency and reciprocal rank weighting, we further combine the ranking results of each expanded query dynamically. Experiments on BEIR and TREC Deep Learning 2019/2020 show that the nDCG@10 scores of both MonoT5 and RankT5 following these steps are improved, which points out a direction for applying query expansion to strong cross-encoder rankers.

Gheorghe Comanici, Eric Bieber, Mike Schaekermann et al. · amazon-science, baidu

In this report, we introduce the Gemini 2.X model family: Gemini 2.5 Pro and Gemini 2.5 Flash, as well as our earlier Gemini 2.0 Flash and Flash-Lite models. Gemini 2.5 Pro is our most capable model yet, achieving SoTA performance on frontier coding and reasoning benchmarks. In addition to its incredible coding and reasoning skills, Gemini 2.5 Pro is a thinking model that excels at multimodal understanding and it is now able to process up to 3 hours of video content. Its unique combination of long context, multimodal and reasoning capabilities can be combined to unlock new agentic workflows. Gemini 2.5 Flash provides excellent reasoning abilities at a fraction of the compute and latency requirements and Gemini 2.0 Flash and Flash-Lite provide high performance at low latency and cost. Taken together, the Gemini 2.X model generation spans the full Pareto frontier of model capability vs cost, allowing users to explore the boundaries of what is possible with complex agentic problem solving.

Harrie Oosterhuis, Rolf Jagerman, Zhen Qin et al.

Modern retrieval systems do not rely on a single ranking model to construct their rankings. Instead, they generally take a cascading approach where a sequence of ranking models are applied in multiple re-ranking stages. Thereby, they balance the quality of the top-K ranking with computational costs by limiting the number of documents each model re-ranks. However, the cascading approach is not the only way models can interact to form a retrieval system. We propose the concept of compound retrieval systems as a broader class of retrieval systems that apply multiple prediction models. This encapsulates cascading models but also allows other types of interactions than top-K re-ranking. In particular, we enable interactions with large language models (LLMs) which can provide relative relevance comparisons. We focus on the optimization of compound retrieval system design which uniquely involves learning where to apply the component models and how to aggregate their predictions into a final ranking. This work shows how our compound approach can combine the classic BM25 retrieval model with state-of-the-art (pairwise) LLM relevance predictions, while optimizing a given ranking metric and efficiency target. Our experimental results show optimized compound retrieval systems provide better trade-offs between effectiveness and efficiency than cascading approaches, even when applied in a self-supervised manner. With the introduction of compound retrieval systems, we hope to inspire the information retrieval field to more out-of-the-box thinking on how prediction models can interact to form rankings.

Rolf Jagerman, Maarten de Rijke

Counterfactual Learning to Rank (LTR) algorithms learn a ranking model from logged user interactions, often collected using a production system. Employing such an offline learning approach has many benefits compared to an online one, but it is challenging as user feedback often contains high levels of bias. Unbiased LTR uses Inverse Propensity Scoring (IPS) to enable unbiased learning from logged user interactions. One of the major difficulties in applying Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD) approaches to counterfactual learning problems is the large variance introduced by the propensity weights. In this paper we show that the convergence rate of SGD approaches with IPS-weighted gradients suffers from the large variance introduced by the IPS weights: convergence is slow, especially when there are large IPS weights. To overcome this limitation, we propose a novel learning algorithm, called CounterSample, that has provably better convergence than standard IPS-weighted gradient descent methods. We prove that CounterSample converges faster and complement our theoretical findings with empirical results by performing extensive experimentation in a number of biased LTR scenarios -- across optimizers, batch sizes, and different degrees of position bias.

Rolf Jagerman, Ilya Markov, Maarten de Rijke

Contextual bandit problems are a natural fit for many information retrieval tasks, such as learning to rank, text classification, recommendation, etc. However, existing learning methods for contextual bandit problems have one of two drawbacks: they either do not explore the space of all possible document rankings (i.e., actions) and, thus, may miss the optimal ranking, or they present suboptimal rankings to a user and, thus, may harm the user experience. We introduce a new learning method for contextual bandit problems, Safe Exploration Algorithm (SEA), which overcomes the above drawbacks. SEA starts by using a baseline (or production) ranking system (i.e., policy), which does not harm the user experience and, thus, is safe to execute, but has suboptimal performance and, thus, needs to be improved. Then SEA uses counterfactual learning to learn a new policy based on the behavior of the baseline policy. SEA also uses high-confidence off-policy evaluation to estimate the performance of the newly learned policy. Once the performance of the newly learned policy is at least as good as the performance of the baseline policy, SEA starts using the new policy to execute new actions, allowing it to actively explore favorable regions of the action space. This way, SEA never performs worse than the baseline policy and, thus, does not harm the user experience, while still exploring the action space and, thus, being able to find an optimal policy. Our experiments using text classification and document retrieval confirm the above by comparing SEA (and a boundless variant called BSEA) to online and offline learning methods for contextual bandit problems.

Harrie Oosterhuis, Rolf Jagerman, Maarten de Rijke

This tutorial covers and contrasts the two main methodologies in unbiased Learning to Rank (LTR): Counterfactual LTR and Online LTR. There has long been an interest in LTR from user interactions, however, this form of implicit feedback is very biased. In recent years, unbiased LTR methods have been introduced to remove the effect of different types of bias caused by user-behavior in search. For instance, a well addressed type of bias is position bias: the rank at which a document is displayed heavily affects the interactions it receives. Counterfactual LTR methods deal with such types of bias by learning from historical interactions while correcting for the effect of the explicitly modelled biases. Online LTR does not use an explicit user model, in contrast, it learns through an interactive process where randomized results are displayed to the user. Through randomization the effect of different types of bias can be removed from the learning process. Though both methodologies lead to unbiased LTR, their approaches differ considerably, furthermore, so do their theoretical guarantees, empirical results, effects on the user experience during learning, and applicability. Consequently, for practitioners the choice between the two is very substantial. By providing an overview of both approaches and contrasting them, we aim to provide an essential guide to unbiased LTR so as to aid in understanding and choosing between methodologies.

Rolf Jagerman, Harrie Oosterhuis, Maarten de Rijke

Learning to Rank (LTR) from user interactions is challenging as user feedback often contains high levels of bias and noise. At the moment, two methodologies for dealing with bias prevail in the field of LTR: counterfactual methods that learn from historical data and model user behavior to deal with biases; and online methods that perform interventions to deal with bias but use no explicit user models. For practitioners the decision between either methodology is very important because of its direct impact on end users. Nevertheless, there has never been a direct comparison between these two approaches to unbiased LTR. In this study we provide the first benchmarking of both counterfactual and online LTR methods under different experimental conditions. Our results show that the choice between the methodologies is consequential and depends on the presence of selection bias, and the degree of position bias and interaction noise. In settings with little bias or noise counterfactual methods can obtain the highest ranking performance; however, in other circumstances their optimization can be detrimental to the user experience. Conversely, online methods are very robust to bias and noise but require control over the displayed rankings. Our findings confirm and contradict existing expectations on the impact of model-based and intervention-based methods in LTR, and allow practitioners to make an informed decision between the two methodologies.

Rolf Jagerman, Julia Kiseleva, Maarten de Rijke

List-wise learning to rank methods are considered to be the state-of-the-art. One of the major problems with these methods is that the ambiguous nature of relevance labels in learning to rank data is ignored. Ambiguity of relevance labels refers to the phenomenon that multiple documents may be assigned the same relevance label for a given query, so that no preference order should be learned for those documents. In this paper we propose a novel sampling technique for computing a list-wise loss that can take into account this ambiguity. We show the effectiveness of the proposed method by training a 3-layer deep neural network. We compare our new loss function to two strong baselines: ListNet and ListMLE. We show that our method generalizes better and significantly outperforms other methods on the validation and test sets.

Rolf Jagerman, Carsten Eickhoff, Maarten de Rijke

Topic models such as Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) have been widely used in information retrieval for tasks ranging from smoothing and feedback methods to tools for exploratory search and discovery. However, classical methods for inferring topic models do not scale up to the massive size of today's publicly available Web-scale data sets. The state-of-the-art approaches rely on custom strategies, implementations and hardware to facilitate their asynchronous, communication-intensive workloads. We present APS-LDA, which integrates state-of-the-art topic modeling with cluster computing frameworks such as Spark using a novel asynchronous parameter server. Advantages of this integration include convenient usage of existing data processing pipelines and eliminating the need for disk writes as data can be kept in memory from start to finish. Our goal is not to outperform highly customized implementations, but to propose a general high-performance topic modeling framework that can easily be used in today's data processing pipelines. We compare APS-LDA to the existing Spark LDA implementations and show that our system can, on a 480-core cluster, process up to 135 times more data and 10 times more topics without sacrificing model quality.

Jan Deriu, Rolf Jagerman, Kai-En Tsay

The problem of inpainting involves reconstructing the missing areas of an image. Inpainting has many applications, such as reconstructing old damaged photographs or removing obfuscations from images. In this paper we present the directional diffusion algorithm for inpainting. Typical diffusion algorithms are bad at propagating edges from the image into the unknown masked regions. The directional diffusion algorithm improves on the regular diffusion algorithm by reconstructing edges more accurately. It scores better than regular diffusion when reconstructing images that are obfuscated by a text mask.

Rolf Jagerman, Wendo Sabée, Laurens Versluis et al.

Ever since the introduction of the internet, it has been void of any privacy. The majority of internet traffic currently is and always has been unencrypted. A number of anonymous communication overlay networks exist whose aim it is to provide privacy to its users. However, due to the nature of the internet, there is major difficulty in getting these networks to become both decentralized and anonymous. We list reasons for having anonymous networks, discern the problems in achieving decentralization and sum up the biggest initiatives in the field and their current status. To do so, we use one exemplary network, the Tor network. We explain how Tor works, what vulnerabilities this network currently has, and possible attacks that could be used to violate privacy and anonymity. The Tor network is used as a key comparison network in the main part of the report: a tabular overview of the major anonymous networking technologies in use today.