Hard Negatives or False Negatives: Correcting Pooling Bias in Training Neural Ranking Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Neural ranking models (NRMs) have become one of the most important techniques in information retrieval (IR). Due to the limitation of relevance labels, the training of NRMs heavily relies on negative sampling over unlabeled data. In general machine learning scenarios, it has shown that training with hard negatives (i.e., samples that are close to positives) could lead to better performance. Surprisingly, we find opposite results from our empirical studies in IR. When sampling top-ranked results (excluding the labeled positives) as negatives from a stronger retriever, the performance of the learned NRM becomes even worse. Based on our investigation, the superficial reason is that there are more false negatives (i.e., unlabeled positives) in the top-ranked results with a stronger retriever, which may hurt the training process; The root is the existence of pooling bias in the dataset constructing process, where annotators only judge and label very few samples selected by some basic retrievers. Therefore, in principle, we can formulate the false negative issue in training NRMs as learning from labeled datasets with pooling bias. To solve this problem, we propose a novel Coupled Estimation Technique (CET) that learns both a relevance model and a selection model simultaneously to correct the pooling bias for training NRMs. Empirical results on three retrieval benchmarks show that NRMs trained with our technique can achieve significant gains on ranking effectiveness against other baseline strategies.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 12 Sep 2022.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 1; 2025: 1; 2026: 2.
6 papers.
- 2024FollowIR: Evaluating and Teaching Information Retrieval Models to Follow Instructionscited by 67
- 2023CAME: Competitively Learning a Mixture-of-Experts Model for First-stage Retrievalcited by 6
- 2026Training Dense Retrievers with Multiple Positive Passagescited by 1
- 2023Mitigating Pooling Bias in E-commerce Search via False Negative Estimationcited by 0
- 2025Optimizing What Matters: AUC-Driven Learning for Robust Neural Retrievalcited by 0
- 2026Beyond Topical Similarity: Contrastive Evidence Retrieval with Interpretable Attention Alignment in RAGcited by 0
- 2026Beyond Topical Similarity: Contrastive Evidence Retrieval with Interpretable Attention Alignment in RAG31 May 2026
- 2026Training Dense Retrievers with Multiple Positive Passages13 Feb 2026
- 2025Optimizing What Matters: AUC-Driven Learning for Robust Neural Retrieval30 Sep 2025
- 2024FollowIR: Evaluating and Teaching Information Retrieval Models to Follow Instructions22 Mar 2024
- 2023Mitigating Pooling Bias in E-commerce Search via False Negative Estimation11 Nov 2023
- 2023CAME: Competitively Learning a Mixture-of-Experts Model for First-stage Retrieval6 Nov 2023