mlsanityData to 13 Oct 2026

Unified Generative & Dense Retrieval for Query Rewriting in Sponsored Search

arXiv 2209.05861 ↗First posted 13 Sep 2022cs.CL cs.IRcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Sponsored search is a key revenue source for search engines, where advertisers bid on keywords to target users or search queries of interest. However, finding relevant keywords for a given query is challenging due to the large and dynamic keyword space, ambiguous user/advertiser intents, and diverse possible topics and languages. In this work, we present a comprehensive comparison between two paradigms for online query rewriting: Generative (NLG) and Dense Retrieval (DR) methods. We observe that both methods offer complementary benefits that are additive. As a result, we show that around 40% of the high-quality keywords retrieved by the two approaches are unique and not retrieved by the other. To leverage the strengths of both methods, we propose CLOVER-Unity, a novel approach that unifies generative and dense retrieval methods in one single model. Through offline experiments, we show that the NLG and DR components of CLOVER-Unity consistently outperform individually trained NLG and DR models on public and internal benchmarks. Furthermore, we show that CLOVER-Unity achieves 9.8% higher good keyword density than the ensemble of two separate DR and NLG models while reducing computational costs by almost half. We conduct extensive online A/B experiments on Microsoft Bing in 140+ countries and achieve improved user engagement, with an average increase in total clicks by 0.89% and increased revenue by 1.27%. We also share our practical lessons and optimization tricks for deploying such unified models in production.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Sep 2022.

Builds on

18 of 34 references.

References · 18

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,106
  2. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,304
  3. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,480
  4. 2019Unsupervised Cross-lingual Representation Learning at Scalecited by 3,916
  5. 2021SimCSE: Simple Contrastive Learning of Sentence Embeddingscited by 2,170
  6. 2020mT5: A massively multilingual pre-trained text-to-text transformercited by 1,815
  7. 2020BLEURT: Learning Robust Metrics for Text Generationcited by 1,200
  8. 2020Approximate Nearest Neighbor Negative Contrastive Learning for Dense Text Retrievalcited by 847
  9. 2017Non-Autoregressive Neural Machine Translationcited by 462
  10. 2020RocketQA: An Optimized Training Approach to Dense Passage Retrieval for Open-Domain Question Answeringcited by 412
  11. 2021Efficiently Teaching an Effective Dense Retriever with Balanced Topic Aware Samplingcited by 238
  12. 2020Deep Encoder, Shallow Decoder: Reevaluating Non-autoregressive Machine Translationcited by 105
6 more
  1. 2021ECLARE: Extreme Classification with Label Graph Correlationscited by 38
  2. 2021DECAF: Deep Extreme Classification with Label Featurescited by 33
  3. 2022NGAME: Negative Mining-aware Mini-batching for Extreme Classificationcited by 32
  4. 2021Diversity driven Query Rewriting in Search Advertisingcited by 14
  5. 2020ProphetNet-Ads: A Looking Ahead Strategy for Generative Retrieval Models in Sponsored Search Enginecited by 11
  6. 2020Extreme Regression for Dynamic Search Advertisingcited by 9

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 13 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 1; 2026: 1.

5 papers.