Analytical information needs, such as trend analysis and causal impact assessment, are prevalent across various domains including law, finance, science, and much more. However, existing information retrieval paradigms, whether based on relevance-oriented document ranking or retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) with large language models (LLMs), often struggle to meet the end-to-end requirements of such tasks at the corpus scale. They either emphasize information finding rather than end-to-end problem solving, or simply treat everything as question answering, offering limited control over reasoning, evidence usage, and verifiability. As a result, they struggle to support analytical queries that have diverse utility concepts and high accountability requirements.

Ranking plays a central role in connecting users and providers in Information Retrieval (IR) systems, making provider-side fairness an important challenge. While recent research has begun to address fairness in ranking, most existing approaches adopt an equality-based perspective, aiming to ensure that providers with similar content receive similar exposure. However, it overlooks the diverse needs of real-world providers, whose utility from ranking may depend not only on exposure but also on outcomes like sales or engagement. Consequently, exposure-based fairness may not accurately capture the true utility perceived by different providers with varying priorities. To this end, we introduce an equity-oriented fairness framework that explicitly models each provider's preferences over key outcomes such as exposure and sales, thus evaluating whether a ranking algorithm can fulfill these individualized goals while maintaining overall fairness across providers. Based on this framework, we develop EquityRank, a gradient-based algorithm that jointly optimizes user-side effectiveness and provider-side equity. Extensive offline and online simulations demonstrate that EquityRank offers improved trade-offs between effectiveness and fairness and adapts to heterogeneous provider needs.

Query rewriting is a fundamental technique in information retrieval (IR). It typically employs the retrieval result as relevance feedback to refine the query and thereby addresses the vocabulary mismatch between user queries and relevant documents. Traditional pseudo-relevance feedback (PRF) and its vector-based extension (VPRF) improve retrieval performance by leveraging top-retrieved documents as relevance feedback. However, they are constructed based on two major hypotheses: the relevance assumption (top documents are relevant) and the model assumption (rewriting methods need to be designed specifically for particular model architectures). While recent large language models (LLMs)-based generative relevance feedback (GRF) enables model-free query reformulation, it either suffers from severe LLM hallucination or, again, relies on the relevance assumption to guarantee the effectiveness of rewriting quality. To overcome these limitations, we introduce an assumption-relaxed framework: Generalized Pseudo Relevance Feedback (GPRF), which performs model-free, natural language rewriting based on retrieved documents, not only eliminating the model assumption but also reducing dependence on the relevance assumption. Specifically, we design a utility-oriented training pipeline with reinforcement learning to ensure robustness against noisy feedback. Extensive experiments across multiple benchmarks and retrievers demonstrate that GPRF consistently outperforms strong baselines, establishing it as an effective and generalizable framework for query rewriting.

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) enhances large language models (LLMs) by integrating external knowledge retrieved from a knowledge base. However, its effectiveness is fundamentally constrained by the reliability of both the retriever and the knowledge base (i.e., the retrieval system). In real-world scenarios, imperfections in these components often lead to the retrieval of noisy, irrelevant, or misleading counterfactual information, ultimately undermining the trustworthiness of RAG systems. To address this challenge, we propose Robust Fine-Tuning (RbFT), a method designed to enhance the resilience of LLMs against retrieval defects through two targeted fine-tuning tasks. Experimental results demonstrate that RbFT significantly improves the robustness of RAG systems across diverse retrieval conditions, surpassing existing methods while maintaining high inference efficiency and compatibility with other robustness techniques.

The impressive performance of large language models (LLMs) has attracted considerable attention from the academic and industrial communities. Besides how to construct and train LLMs, how to effectively evaluate and compare the capacity of LLMs has also been well recognized as an important yet difficult problem. Existing paradigms rely on either human annotators or model-based evaluators to evaluate the performance of LLMs on different tasks. However, these paradigms often suffer from high cost, low generalizability, and inherited biases in practice, which make them incapable of supporting the sustainable development of LLMs in the long term. In order to address these issues, inspired by the peer review systems widely used in the academic publication process, we propose a novel framework that can automatically evaluate LLMs through a peer-review process. Specifically, for the evaluation of a specific task, we first construct a small qualification exam to select "reviewers'' from a couple of powerful LLMs. Then, to actually evaluate the "submissions" written by different candidate LLMs, i.e., the evaluatees, we use the reviewer LLMs to rate or compare the submissions. The final ranking of evaluatee LLMs is generated based on the results provided by all reviewers. We conducted extensive experiments on both text summarization and non-factoid question-answering tasks with eleven LLMs including GPT-4. The results demonstrate the existence of biasness when evaluating using a single LLM. Also, our PRE model outperforms all the baselines, illustrating the effectiveness of the peer review mechanism.

In recent years, various dense retrieval methods have been developed to improve the performance of search engines with a vectorized index. However, these approaches require a large pre-computed index and have a limited capacity to memorize all semantics in a document within a single vector. To address these issues, researchers have explored end-to-end generative retrieval models that use a seq-to-seq generative model to directly return identifiers of relevant documents. Although these models have been effective, they are often trained with the MLE method. It only encourages the model to assign a high probability to the relevant document identifier, ignoring the relevance comparisons of other documents. This may lead to performance degradation in ranking tasks, where the core is to compare the relevance between documents. To address this issue, we propose a ranking-oriented generative retrieval model that incorporates relevance signals to better estimate the relative relevance of different documents in ranking tasks. Based upon the analysis of the optimization objectives of dense retrieval and generative retrieval, we propose utilizing dense retrieval to provide relevance feedback for generative retrieval. Under an alternate training framework, the generative retrieval model gradually acquires higher-quality ranking signals to optimize the model. Experimental results show that our approach increasing Recall@1 by 12.9% with respect to the baselines on MS MARCO dataset.

Model-based Information Retrieval (Model-based IR) has gained attention due to advancements in generative language models. Unlike traditional dense retrieval methods relying on dense vector representations of documents, model-based IR leverages language models to retrieve documents by generating their unique discrete identifiers (docids). This approach effectively reduces the requirements to store separate document representations in an index. Most existing model-based IR approaches utilize pre-defined static docids, i.e., these docids are fixed and are not learnable by training on the retrieval tasks. However, these docids are not specifically optimized for retrieval tasks, which makes it difficult to learn semantics and relationships between documents and achieve satisfactory retrieval performance. To address the above limitations, we propose Neural Optimized VOcabularial (NOVO) docids. NOVO docids are unique n-gram sets identifying each document. They can be generated in any order to retrieve the corresponding document and can be optimized through training to better learn semantics and relationships between documents. We propose to optimize NOVO docids through query denoising modeling and retrieval tasks, allowing for optimizing both semantic and token representations for such docids. Experiments on two datasets under the normal and zero-shot settings show that NOVO exhibits strong performance in more effective and interpretable model-based IR.