Multi-Stage Conversational Passage Retrieval: An Approach to Fusing Term Importance Estimation and Neural Query Rewriting
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conversational search plays a vital role in conversational information seeking. As queries in information seeking dialogues are ambiguous for traditional ad hoc information retrieval (IR) systems due to the coreference and omission resolution problems inherent in natural language dialogue, resolving these ambiguities is crucial. In this article, we tackle conversational passage retrieval, an important component of conversational search, by addressing query ambiguities with query reformulation integrated into a multi-stage ad hoc IR system. Specifically, we propose two conversational query reformulation (CQR) methods: (1) term importance estimation and (2) neural query rewriting. For the former, we expand conversational queries using important terms extracted from the conversational context with frequency-based signals. For the latter, we reformulate conversational queries into natural, stand-alone, human-understandable queries with a pretrained sequence-to-sequence model. Detailed analyses of the two CQR methods are provided quantitatively and qualitatively, explaining their advantages, disadvantages, and distinct behaviors. Moreover, to leverage the strengths of both CQR methods, we propose combining their output with reciprocal rank fusion, yielding state-of-the-art retrieval effectiveness, 30% improvement in terms of NDCG@3 compared to the best submission of Text REtrieval Conference (TREC) Conversational Assistant Track (CAsT) 2019.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it