--- license: mit task_categories: - text-ranking language: - en tags: - information-retrieval - reranking - llm - benchmark - temporal - llm-reranking --- # How Good are LLM-based Rerankers? An Empirical Analysis of State-of-the-Art Reranking Models 🔍 This repository contains the **FutureQueryEval Dataset** presented in the paper [How Good are LLM-based Rerankers? An Empirical Analysis of State-of-the-Art Reranking Models](https://huggingface.co/papers/2508.16757). Code: [https://github.com/DataScienceUIBK/llm-reranking-generalization-study](https://github.com/DataScienceUIBK/llm-reranking-generalization-study) Project Page / Leaderboard: [https://rankarena.ngrok.io](https://rankarena.ngrok.io) ## 🎉 News - **[2025-08-22]** 🎯 **FutureQueryEval Dataset Released!** - The first temporal IR benchmark with queries from April 2025+ - **[2025-08-22]** 🔧 Comprehensive evaluation framework released - 22 reranking methods, 40 variants tested - **[2025-08-22]** 📊 Integrated with [RankArena](https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.05512) leaderboard. You can view and interact with RankArena through this [link](https://rankarena.ngrok.io) - **[2025-08-20]** 📝 Paper accepted at EMNLP Findings 2025 ## 📖 Introduction We present the **most comprehensive empirical study of reranking methods** to date, systematically evaluating 22 state-of-the-art approaches across 40 variants. Our key contribution is **FutureQueryEval** - the first temporal benchmark designed to test reranker generalization on truly novel queries unseen during LLM pretraining.
Performance Overview

Performance comparison across pointwise, pairwise, and listwise reranking paradigms

### Key Findings 🔍 - **Temporal Performance Gap**: 5-15% performance drop on novel queries compared to standard benchmarks - **Listwise Superiority**: Best generalization to unseen content (8% avg. degradation vs 12-15% for others) - **Efficiency Trade-offs**: Comprehensive runtime analysis reveals optimal speed-accuracy combinations - **Domain Vulnerabilities**: All methods struggle with argumentative and informal content # 📄 FutureQueryEval Dataset ## Overview **FutureQueryEval** is a novel IR benchmark comprising **148 queries** with **2,938 query-document pairs** across **7 topical categories**, designed to evaluate reranker performance on temporal novelty. ### 🎯 Why FutureQueryEval? - **Zero Contamination**: All queries refer to events after April 2025 - **Human Annotated**: 4 expert annotators with quality control - **Diverse Domains**: Technology, Sports, Politics, Science, Health, Business, Entertainment - **Real Events**: Based on actual news and developments, not synthetic data ### 📊 Dataset Statistics | Metric | Value | |--------|-------| | Total Queries | 148 | | Total Documents | 2,787 | | Query-Document Pairs | 2,938 | | Avg. Relevant Docs per Query | 6.54 | | Languages | English | | License | MIT | ### 🌍 Category Distribution - **Technology**: 25.0% (37 queries) - **Sports**: 20.9% (31 queries) - **Science & Environment**: 13.5% (20 queries) - **Business & Finance**: 12.8% (19 queries) - **Health & Medicine**: 10.8% (16 queries) - **World News & Politics**: 9.5% (14 queries) - **Entertainment & Culture**: 7.4% (11 queries) ### 📝 Example Queries ``` 🌍 World News & Politics: "What specific actions has Egypt taken to support injured Palestinians from Gaza, as highlighted during the visit of Presidents El-Sisi and Macron to Al-Arish General Hospital?" ⚽ Sports: "Which teams qualified for the 2025 UEFA European Championship playoffs in June 2025?" 💻 Technology: "What are the key features of Apple's new Vision Pro 2 announced at WWDC 2025?" ``` ## Data Collection Methodology 1. **Source Selection**: Major news outlets, official sites, sports organizations 2. **Temporal Filtering**: Events after April 2025 only 3. **Query Creation**: Manual generation by domain experts 4. **Novelty Validation**: Tested against GPT-4 knowledge cutoff 5. **Quality Control**: Multi-annotator review with senior oversight # 📊 Evaluation Results ## Top Performers on FutureQueryEval | Method Category | Best Model | NDCG@10 | Runtime (s) | |----------------|------------|---------|-------------| | **Listwise** | Zephyr-7B | **62.65** | 1,240 | | **Pointwise** | MonoT5-3B | **60.75** | 486 | | **Setwise** | Flan-T5-XL | **56.57** | 892 | | **Pairwise** | EchoRank-XL | **54.97** | 2,158 | | **Tournament** | TourRank-GPT4o | **62.02** | 3,420 | ## Performance Insights - 🏆 **Best Overall**: Zephyr-7B (62.65 NDCG@10) - ⚡ **Best Efficiency**: FlashRank-MiniLM (55.43 NDCG@10, 195s) - 🎯 **Best Balance**: MonoT5-3B (60.75 NDCG@10, 486s)
Efficiency Analysis

Runtime vs. Performance trade-offs across reranking methods

# 🔧 Supported Methods We evaluate **22 reranking approaches** across multiple paradigms: ### Pointwise Methods - MonoT5, RankT5, InRanker, TWOLAR - FlashRank, Transformer Rankers - UPR, MonoBERT, ColBERT ### Listwise Methods - RankGPT, ListT5, Zephyr, Vicuna - LiT5-Distill, InContext Rerankers ### Pairwise Methods - PRP (Pairwise Ranking Prompting) - EchoRank ### Advanced Methods - Setwise (Flan-T5 variants) - TourRank (Tournament-based) - RankLLaMA (Task-specific fine-tuned) # 🔄 Dataset Updates **FutureQueryEval will be updated every 6 months** with new queries about recent events to maintain temporal novelty. Subscribe to releases for notifications! ## Upcoming Updates - **Version 1.1** (December 2025): +100 queries from July-September 2025 events - **Version 1.2** (June 2026): +100 queries from October 2025-March 2026 events # 📋 Leaderboard Submit your reranking method results to appear on our leaderboard! See [SUBMISSION.md](https://github.com/DataScienceUIBK/llm-reranking-generalization-study/blob/main/SUBMISSION.md) for guidelines. Current standings available at: [RanArena](https://rankarena.ngrok.io) # 🤝 Contributing We welcome contributions! See [CONTRIBUTING.md](https://github.com/DataScienceUIBK/llm-reranking-generalization-study/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md) for: - Adding new reranking methods - Improving evaluation metrics - Dataset quality improvements - Bug fixes and optimizations # 🎈 Citation If you use FutureQueryEval or our evaluation framework, please cite: ```bibtex @misc{abdallah2025howgoodarellmbasedrerankers, title={How Good are LLM-based Rerankers? An Empirical Analysis of State-of-the-Art Reranking Models}, author={Abdelrahman Abdallah and Bhawna Piryani}, year={2025}, eprint={2508.16757}, archivePrefix={arXiv}, primaryClass={cs.IR} } ``` # 📞 Contact - **Authors**: [Abdelrahman Abdallah](mailto:abdelrahman.abdallah@uibk.ac.at), [Bhawna Piryani](mailto:bhawna.piryani@uibk.ac.at) - **Institution**: University of Innsbruck - **Issues**: Please use GitHub Issues for bug reports and feature requests ---

⭐ Star this repo if you find it helpful! ⭐

📧 Questions? Open an issue or contact the authors