Salvato in:
Dettagli Bibliografici
Autori principali: Meng, Chuan, Ou, Litu, MacAvaney, Sean, Dalton, Jeff
Natura: Preprint
Pubblicazione: 2026
Soggetti:
Accesso online:https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.21456
Tags: Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
_version_ 1866917293587431424
author Meng, Chuan
Ou, Litu
MacAvaney, Sean
Dalton, Jeff
author_facet Meng, Chuan
Ou, Litu
MacAvaney, Sean
Dalton, Jeff
contents Deep research has emerged as an important task that aims to address hard queries through extensive open-web exploration. To tackle it, most prior work equips large language model (LLM)-based agents with opaque web search APIs, enabling agents to iteratively issue search queries, retrieve external evidence, and reason over it. Despite search's essential role in deep research, black-box web search APIs hinder systematic analysis of search components, leaving the behaviour of established text ranking methods in deep research largely unclear. To fill this gap, we reproduce a selection of key findings and best practices for IR text ranking methods in the deep research setting. In particular, we examine their effectiveness from three perspectives: (i) retrieval units (documents vs. passages), (ii) pipeline configurations (different retrievers, re-rankers, and re-ranking depths), and (iii) query characteristics (the mismatch between agent-issued queries and the training queries of text rankers). We perform experiments on BrowseComp-Plus, a deep research dataset with a fixed corpus, evaluating 2 open-source agents, 5 retrievers, and 3 re-rankers across diverse setups. We find that agent-issued queries typically follow web-search-style syntax (e.g., quoted exact matches), favouring lexical, learned sparse, and multi-vector retrievers; passage-level units are more efficient under limited context windows, and avoid the difficulties of document length normalisation in lexical retrieval; re-ranking is highly effective; translating agent-issued queries into natural-language questions significantly bridges the query mismatch.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2602_21456
institution arXiv
publishDate 2026
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Revisiting Text Ranking in Deep Research
Meng, Chuan
Ou, Litu
MacAvaney, Sean
Dalton, Jeff
Information Retrieval
Artificial Intelligence
Computation and Language
H.3.3; I.2.7
Deep research has emerged as an important task that aims to address hard queries through extensive open-web exploration. To tackle it, most prior work equips large language model (LLM)-based agents with opaque web search APIs, enabling agents to iteratively issue search queries, retrieve external evidence, and reason over it. Despite search's essential role in deep research, black-box web search APIs hinder systematic analysis of search components, leaving the behaviour of established text ranking methods in deep research largely unclear. To fill this gap, we reproduce a selection of key findings and best practices for IR text ranking methods in the deep research setting. In particular, we examine their effectiveness from three perspectives: (i) retrieval units (documents vs. passages), (ii) pipeline configurations (different retrievers, re-rankers, and re-ranking depths), and (iii) query characteristics (the mismatch between agent-issued queries and the training queries of text rankers). We perform experiments on BrowseComp-Plus, a deep research dataset with a fixed corpus, evaluating 2 open-source agents, 5 retrievers, and 3 re-rankers across diverse setups. We find that agent-issued queries typically follow web-search-style syntax (e.g., quoted exact matches), favouring lexical, learned sparse, and multi-vector retrievers; passage-level units are more efficient under limited context windows, and avoid the difficulties of document length normalisation in lexical retrieval; re-ranking is highly effective; translating agent-issued queries into natural-language questions significantly bridges the query mismatch.
title Revisiting Text Ranking in Deep Research
topic Information Retrieval
Artificial Intelligence
Computation and Language
H.3.3; I.2.7
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.21456