Utilizing large language models for integrating document-level contextual semantic into pseudo-relevance feedback
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pseudo-Relevance Feedback (PRF) is a key technique in information retrieval (IR). Traditional implementations rely on statistical information, such as term frequency, for precise matching and relevance assessment. However, these methods struggle to fully capture the deep semantic integrity of query terms, especially in handling polysemy, high semantic relevance, and long-document comprehension. To address these challenges, this paper innovatively proposes a large language model-assisted PRF probabilistic model. The model first employs a precise matching algorithm to evaluate and determine the term-level weights, and then uses a large language model to encode the contextual relationships within the query and feedback documents, thereby accurately acquiring the global semantic weights of terms relevant to the query at the document level. By adjusting a balancing factor to allocate weights between these two components, the model comprehensively selects expanded terms for constructing a new query representation and executing query expansion (QE). This model not only facilitates approximate matching through the integration of global semantic features of documents but also effectively combines with the precise matching information of traditional PRF models, enabling a comprehensive and accurate optimization of queries from a broader perspective. To validate effectiveness, extensive empirical analyses on five TREC datasets assess performance across key metrics such as MAP, P@10, NDCG, and MRR. Experimental results show significant improvements over baseline models. Comparative analyses and case studies confirm that the expanded terms maintain high semantic relevance and consistency with the original query while preserving diversity and effectively capturing global document semantics, establishing an efficient QE mechanism.
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 | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".