Autoregressive Ranking: Bridging the Gap Between Dual and Cross Encoders
Benjamin Rozonoyer, Chong You, Michael Boratko, Himanshu Jain, Nilesh Gupta, Srinadh Bhojanapalli, Andrew McCallum, Felix Yu

TL;DR
This paper demonstrates that autoregressive ranking (ARR) surpasses dual encoders in expressive power, introduces a new training loss for LLMs to improve ranking, and validates its effectiveness through experiments on benchmark datasets.
Contribution
It provides a theoretical proof of ARR's superior expressive capacity over dual encoders and proposes SToICaL, a novel rank-aware training loss for LLM finetuning.
Findings
ARR can solve ranking with constant hidden dimension, unlike DEs.
SToICaL improves ranking metrics beyond top-1 retrieval.
Experiments confirm the effectiveness of the proposed loss.
Abstract
The success of Large Language Models (LLMs) has motivated a shift toward generative approaches to retrieval and ranking, aiming to supersede classical Dual Encoders (DEs) and Cross Encoders (CEs). A prominent paradigm is pointwise Autoregressive Ranking (ARR), where an LLM generates document identifiers (docIDs) token-by-token to enable ranking via beam search. ARR offers the promise of superior expressivity compared to DEs while avoiding the prohibitive computational cost of CEs. However, a formal theoretical foundation for this expressive power has been missing. Moreover, the standard next-token prediction loss is rank-agnostic and inappropriate for finetuning an LLM for ranking tasks. In this paper, we first prove that the expressive capacity of ARR is strictly superior to DEs. While a DE requires an embedding dimension that grows linearly with corpus size to achieve arbitrary…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsInformation Retrieval and Search Behavior · Topic Modeling · Text and Document Classification Technologies
