Most human languages use scripts other than the Latin alphabet. Search users in these languages often formulate their information needs in a transliterated -usually Latinized- form for ease of typing. For example, Greek speakers might use Greeklish, and Arabic speakers might use Arabizi. This paper shows that current search systems, including those that use multilingual dense embeddings such as BGE-M3, do not generalise to this setting, and their performance rapidly deteriorates when exposed to transliterated queries. This creates a ''script gap'' between the performance of the same queries when written in their native or transliterated form. We explore whether adapting the popular ''translate-train'' paradigm to transliterations can enhance the robustness of multilingual Information Retrieval (IR) methods and bridge the gap between native and transliterated scripts. https://github.com/andreaschari/transliterations By exploring various combinations of non-Latin and Latinized query text for training, we investigate whether we can enhance the capacity of existing neural retrieval techniques and enable them to apply to this important setting. We show that by further fine-tuning IR models on an even mixture of native and Latinized text, they can perform this cross-script matching at nearly the same performance as when the query was formulated in the native script. Out-of-domain evaluation and further qualitative analysis show that transliterations can also cause queries to lose some of their nuances, motivating further research.

One advantage of neural ranking models is that they are meant to generalise well in situations of synonymity i.e. where two words have similar or identical meanings. In this paper, we investigate and quantify how well various ranking models perform in a clear-cut case of synonymity: when words are simply expressed in different surface forms due to regional differences in spelling conventions (e.g., color vs colour). We first explore the prevalence of American and British English spelling conventions in datasets used for the pre-training, training and evaluation of neural retrieval methods, and find that American spelling conventions are far more prevalent. Despite these biases in the training data, we find that retrieval models often generalise well in this case of synonymity. We explore the effect of document spelling normalisation in retrieval and observe that all models are affected by normalising the document's spelling. While they all experience a drop in performance when normalised to a different spelling convention than that of the query, we observe varied behaviour when the document is normalised to share the query spelling convention: lexical models show improvements, dense retrievers remain unaffected, and re-rankers exhibit contradictory behaviour.