Reproducing Complex Set-Compositional Information Retrieval
Fuente:
arXiv
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2026
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866911651807100928 |
|---|---|
| author | Degenhart, Vincent Timman, Dewi de Vries, Arjen P. Hasibi, Faegheh Hoveyda, Mohanna |
| author_facet | Degenhart, Vincent Timman, Dewi de Vries, Arjen P. Hasibi, Faegheh Hoveyda, Mohanna |
| contents | Complex information needs may involve set-compositional queries using conjunction, disjunction, and exclusion, yet it remains unclear whether current retrieval paradigms genuinely satisfy such constraints or exploit `semantic shortcuts'. We conduct a reproducibility study to benchmark major retrieval families and reasoning-targeted methods on QUEST and QUEST+Variants, and introduce LIMIT+, a controlled benchmark where relevance depends on arbitrary attribute predicates and constraint satisfaction, and less on pretrained knowledge. Our findings show that (i) on QUEST, the best neural retrievers achieve an effectiveness that is more than double what can be achieved with BM25 (Recall@100 ${>}$0.41 vs.\ 0.20), but reasoning-targeted methods like ReasonIR and Search-R1 do not outperform general-purpose retrievers uniformly; (ii) on LIMIT+, gains fail to transfer, where the strongest QUEST method collapses from Recall@100${\approx}$0.42 to below 0.02, while classic lexical retrieval gains to ${\sim}$0.96. Lastly, (iii) stratifying by compositional depth reveals a consistent degradation across all methods, where algebraic sparse and lexical methods show more stable performance while dense approaches collapse. We release code and LIMIT+ data generation scripts to support future reproducibility and controlled evaluation. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2605_03824 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Reproducing Complex Set-Compositional Information Retrieval Degenhart, Vincent Timman, Dewi de Vries, Arjen P. Hasibi, Faegheh Hoveyda, Mohanna Computation and Language Information Retrieval Complex information needs may involve set-compositional queries using conjunction, disjunction, and exclusion, yet it remains unclear whether current retrieval paradigms genuinely satisfy such constraints or exploit `semantic shortcuts'. We conduct a reproducibility study to benchmark major retrieval families and reasoning-targeted methods on QUEST and QUEST+Variants, and introduce LIMIT+, a controlled benchmark where relevance depends on arbitrary attribute predicates and constraint satisfaction, and less on pretrained knowledge. Our findings show that (i) on QUEST, the best neural retrievers achieve an effectiveness that is more than double what can be achieved with BM25 (Recall@100 ${>}$0.41 vs.\ 0.20), but reasoning-targeted methods like ReasonIR and Search-R1 do not outperform general-purpose retrievers uniformly; (ii) on LIMIT+, gains fail to transfer, where the strongest QUEST method collapses from Recall@100${\approx}$0.42 to below 0.02, while classic lexical retrieval gains to ${\sim}$0.96. Lastly, (iii) stratifying by compositional depth reveals a consistent degradation across all methods, where algebraic sparse and lexical methods show more stable performance while dense approaches collapse. We release code and LIMIT+ data generation scripts to support future reproducibility and controlled evaluation. |
| title | Reproducing Complex Set-Compositional Information Retrieval |
| topic | Computation and Language Information Retrieval |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.03824 |