Injecting the score of the first-stage retriever as text improves BERT-based re-rankers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper we propose a novel approach for combining first-stage lexical retrieval models and Transformer-based re-rankers: we inject the relevance score of the lexical model as a token into the input of the cross-encoder re-ranker. It was shown in prior work that interpolation between the relevance score of lexical and Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) based re-rankers may not consistently result in higher effectiveness. Our idea is motivated by the finding that BERT models can capture numeric information. We compare several representations of the Best Match 25 (BM25) and Dense Passage Retrieval (DPR) scores and inject them as text in the input of four different cross-encoders. Since knowledge distillation, i.e., teacher-student training, proved to be highly effective for cross-encoder re-rankers, we additionally analyze the effect of injecting the relevance score into the student model while training the model by three larger teacher models. Evaluation on the MSMARCO Passage collection and the TREC DL collections shows that the proposed method significantly improves over all cross-encoder re-rankers as well as the common interpolation methods. We show that the improvement is consistent for all query types. We also find an improvement in exact matching capabilities over both the first-stage rankers and the cross-encoders. Our findings indicate that cross-encoder re-rankers can efficiently be improved without additional computational burden or extra steps in the pipeline by adding the output of the first-stage ranker to the model input. This effect is robust for different models and query types.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".