Mathew Jacob

h-index20
2papers

2 Papers

85.0AIMay 26
Natural Language Query to Configuration for Retrieval Agents

Melissa Z. Pan, Negar Arabzadeh, Mathew Jacob et al.

Modern retrieval agents expose many configuration choices -- LLM, retriever, number of documents, number of hops, and synthesis strategy -- each shaping both answer quality and serving cost. Today, these pipelines are typically hand-tuned once per workload, leaving substantial per-query optimization untapped. We formulate the problem: given a natural-language query and either an accuracy or a budget target, select from a predefined pipeline catalog the configuration that minimizes cost or maximizes accuracy at inference time. We propose **BRANE**, which uses an LLM to convert each query into workload-specific characteristics, then trains a lightweight per-configuration predictor that estimates whether the pipeline will answer the query correctly. At inference time, **BRANE** selects the configuration that maximizes predicted correctness penalized by cost, exposing a tunable cost-quality tradeoff without retraining. Across MuSiQue, BrowseComp-Plus, and FinanceBench, **BRANE** consistently pushes the cost-quality Pareto frontier, matches the best fixed configuration's accuracy at up to 89% lower cost, and outperforms LLM-routing, rule-based, and fine-tuned Qwen3-4B baselines. These results show that per-query configuration of the full retrieval pipeline is a practical alternative to static workload-level tuning.

IRNov 18, 2024
Drowning in Documents: Consequences of Scaling Reranker Inference

Mathew Jacob, Erik Lindgren, Matei Zaharia et al.

Rerankers, typically cross-encoders, are computationally intensive but are frequently used because they are widely assumed to outperform cheaper initial IR systems. We challenge this assumption by measuring reranker performance for full retrieval, not just re-scoring first-stage retrieval. To provide a more robust evaluation, we prioritize strong first-stage retrieval using modern dense embeddings and test rerankers on a variety of carefully chosen, challenging tasks, including internally curated datasets to avoid contamination, and out-of-domain ones. Our empirical results reveal a surprising trend: the best existing rerankers provide initial improvements when scoring progressively more documents, but their effectiveness gradually declines and can even degrade quality beyond a certain limit. We hope that our findings will spur future research to improve reranking.