Papers for

digital assistant developers

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Gating skips reranker calls for faster multi-hop retrieval with small accuracy loss

Per-Query Gating of LLM Rerankers for Multi-Hop Retrieval

Abstract: LLM rerankers add of the order of \$0.2-0.3 per 1,000 queries and about a second of tail latency on top of a graph-augmented dense pipeline such as HippoRAG2, and on three multi-hop benchmarks they improve final-hop top-K coverage on seven of nine (dataset, K) cells, by up to +34.8 pp. We ask whether a learned per-query gate can skip the reranker where it will not help, using only features available before the LLM call (27 score and lexical statistics of the two retrieval lists plus a PCA of a small query embedding) with an executable fallback. Every choice, including the fallback and the threshold, is made inside the training fold and applied once to held-out queries, and harmful skips (the rerank would have found the target, the fallback did not) are reported next to the aggregate coverage. Across nine cells on 2WikiMultiHopQA, MuSiQue and HotpotQA the gate skips 51% of calls at an average held-out LastHop@K cost of 1.2 pp; four cells meet a pre-registered 1 pp rule, harmful skips occur in eight (190 harmful against 136 beneficial), and a random gate at the same skip rate loses 2 to 11 pp on the high-lift cells. A second rule sets each cell's threshold from a pre-specified budget on the expected harmful-skip rate over Platt-calibrated harm probabilities (ECE 0.025 after calibration, 0.094 before): at a 1 pp budget the gate skips 42% at -0.8 pp with 66 harmful skips and six cells within 1 pp, but realised harm exceeds the promise in six cells (mean 1.45 vs 0.83 pp), a selection optimism we quantify; a 0.5 pp budget realises about 1 pp. The harm probabilities are calibrated but barely discriminative (AUC 0.16 to 0.70). An earlier version reported 73% "lossless" savings; that figure rested on an oracle fallback and a wrong MuSiQue target, and we document both.

Sat 19 SeptInformation RetrievalArtificial IntelligenceComputation and Language
The gist
Large language model (LLM) rerankers improve search accuracy but slow down the system and add cost. The authors develop a gate that decides for each query whether the reranker is needed, based on quick-to-get features before running the costly reranker. This gate skips about half of reranker calls, saving time and money with only a small drop in accuracy. The authors carefully measure harm caused when the gate skips useful reranking and adjust thresholds to control this risk. The gate’s predictive power is limited, so some harmful skips remain despite calibration.
Open 2609.22880v1

VoiceTrace improves speech search by who and what is said

VoiceTrace: A Benchmark and Retrieval Framework for Who-Said-What Speech Retrieval

Abstract: Speech retrieval has become increasingly important as spoken content continues to grow across meetings, lectures, podcasts, and videos. Existing benchmarks and models have advanced semantic search over spoken content, but largely focus on \emph{what} is said while overlooking \emph{who} says it. In many real-world scenarios, however, users need to retrieve speech based jointly on semantic content and a target speaker, where the speaker may be specified naturally through a reference speech utterance rather than a predefined identity. To address this gap, we introduce \textbf{VoiceTrace-Bench}, a benchmark for hybrid speech retrieval in which each query combines text specifying \emph{what} to retrieve with reference speech specifying \emph{who} to retrieve. This setting requires models to integrate complementary semantic and speaker information directly from heterogeneous query inputs. Motivated by the joint audio-text modeling capabilities of audio-language models (ALMs), we develop \textbf{VoiceTrace}, a two-stage retrieval framework consisting of \textbf{VoiceTrace-Emb}, an embedding model that learns unified representations for efficient large-scale retrieval, and \textbf{VoiceTrace-Reranker}, a reranking model that jointly examines each query--candidate pair for fine-grained relevance estimation. Experiments show that VoiceTrace achieves state-of-the-art performance on established semantic speech retrieval benchmarks, while substantially outperforming cascade-based approaches on VoiceTrace-Bench, demonstrating its effectiveness for both conventional semantic retrieval and the new hybrid retrieval setting.

Wed 16 SeptSoundArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Finding specific spoken words gets harder when many people talk in recordings. The authors created a new test called VoiceTrace-Bench to see how well systems can find speech by combining what was said with who said it, identified by a sample voice instead of just a name. They built VoiceTrace, a two-part system that first picks likely matches using voice and text together, then carefully rechecks these matches for better accuracy. Their system works better than older ones on both regular and new types of voice-and-text searches.
Open 2609.18521v1

HyperProve improves multi-step question answering with answer-guided search

HyperProve: Answer-Guided Hypergraph Expansion for Multi-Hop Question Answering

Abstract: Multi-hop question answering often fails when retrieval treats evidence as isolated matches to the original question, since the facts needed to answer a complex question are usually connected through intermediate entities, relations, and constraints. We propose HyperProve, a retrieval-augmented QA framework that addresses this challenge by coupling question decomposition with answer-conditioned expansion over a hypergraph of atomic facts. HyperProve does not use atomic facts, hypergraphs, or iterative retrieval in isolation; instead, it carries intermediate answers and supporting hyperedges as retrieval state, then uses that state to bias the next local hypergraph expansion. This design enables HyperProve to construct coherent evidence chains for final answer generation while making the retrieval process stateful and fact-centered. Across multi-hop QA benchmarks, HyperProve achieves the best overall performance in our evaluation, outperforming the strongest baselines by an average relative improvement of 6.2% in answer accuracy and 4.9% in F1.

Sat 12 SeptComputation and Language
The gist
Answering complex questions often requires piecing together multiple facts that are connected. The authors introduce HyperProve, a method that breaks down questions and builds chains of related facts step-by-step, keeping track of possible answers along the way. This helps gather more relevant evidence and improves the accuracy of final answers. Their approach performed better than strong existing methods on several benchmark tests.
Open 2609.13768v1