MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409365527 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v39i11.33306

RouterRetriever: Routing over a Mixture of Expert Embedding Models

2025· article· en· W4409365527 on OpenAlexaff
Hyunji Lee, Luca Soldaini, Arman Cohan, Minjoon Seo, Kyle Lo

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmbeddingComputer scienceRouting (electronic design automation)Artificial intelligenceComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information retrieval methods often rely on a single embedding model trained on large, general-domain datasets like MSMARCO. While this approach can produce a retriever with reasonable overall performance, they often underperform models trained on domain-specific data when testing on their respective domains. Prior work in information retrieval has tackled this through multi-task training, but the idea of routing over a mixture of domain-specific expert retrievers remains unexplored despite the popularity of such ideas in language model generation research. In this work, we introduce RouterRetriever, a retrieval model that leverages a mixture of domain-specific experts by using a routing mechanism to select the most appropriate expert for each query. RouterRetriever is lightweight and allows easy addition or removal of experts without additional training. Evaluation on the BEIR benchmark demonstrates that RouterRetriever outperforms both models trained on MSMARCO (+2.1 absolute nDCG@10) and multi-task models (+3.2). This is achieved by employing our routing mechanism, which surpasses other routing techniques (+1.8 on average) commonly used in language modeling. Furthermore, the benefit generalizes well to other datasets, even in the absence of a specific expert on the dataset. RouterRetriever is the first work to demonstrate the advantages of routing over a mixture of domain-specific expert embedding models as an alternative to a single, general-purpose embedding model, especially when retrieving from diverse, specialized domains.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.007
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.005

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicComplex Network Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207