MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409764260 · doi:10.3390/electronics14091744

LLM-Based Query Expansion with Gaussian Kernel Semantic Enhancement for Dense Retrieval

2025· article· en· W4409764260 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Min Pan, Wenrui Xiong, Shuting Zhou, Jinguang Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHubei Provincial Department of Education
KeywordsQuery expansionComputer scienceKernel (algebra)Information retrievalArtificial intelligenceNatural language processingMathematicsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the field of Information Retrieval (IR), user-submitted keyword queries often fail to accurately represent users’ true search intent. With the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence, particularly in natural language processing (NLP), query expansion (QE) based on large language models (LLMs) has emerged as a key strategy for improving retrieval effectiveness. However, such methods often introduce query topic drift, which negatively impacts retrieval accuracy and efficiency. To address this issue, this study proposes an LLM-based QE framework that incorporates a Gaussian kernel-enhanced semantic space for dense retrieval. Specifically, the model first employs LLMs to expand the semantic dimensions of the initial query, generating multiple query representations. Then, by introducing a Gaussian kernel semantic space, it captures deep semantic relationships among these query vectors, refining their semantic distribution to better represent the original query’s intent. Finally, the ColBERTv2 model is utilized to retrieve documents based on the enhanced query representations, enabling precise relevance assessment and improving retrieval performance. To validate the effectiveness of the proposed approach, extensive empirical evaluations were conducted on the MS MARCO passage ranking dataset. The model was systematically assessed using key metrics, including MAP, NDCG@10, MRR@10, and Recall@1000. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed method outperforms existing approaches across multiple metrics, significantly improving retrieval precision while effectively mitigating query drift, offering a novel approach for building efficient QE mechanisms.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score0.522

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronicsSame topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207