mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Batched Self-Consistency Improves LLM Relevance Assessment and Ranking

arXiv 2505.12570 ↗First posted 18 May 2025cs.IRcited by 8

On the map: LLM reasoning → Knowledge- and tool-augmented reasoning

Abstract (arXiv)

LLM query-passage relevance assessment is typically studied using a one-by-one pointwise (PW) strategy where each LLM call judges one passage at a time. However, this strategy requires as many LLM calls as there are passages while also preventing information sharing between passages. We thus hypothesize that batched PW methods, which evaluate multiple passages per LLM call, can improve not only efficiency but also judgment quality -- by enabling content from multiple passages to be seen jointly. Moreover, batched PW methods may be better suited to harness the test-time scaling benefits of self-consistency -- the ensembling technique of repeating (potentially perturbed) LLM tasks in parallel and aggregating results -- since batching can naturally enable prompt diversification through varied batch permutations and compositions to create more robust ensembles. We evaluate several batched PW methods against one-by-one PW and listwise ranking baselines on LLM relevance assessment and ranking tasks, using three passage retrieval datasets and GPT-4o, Claude Sonnet 3, and Amazon Nova Pro. We show that batching can greatly amplify self-consistency benefits, making batched PW methods achieve the best performance while often reducing latency by an order of magnitude or more compared to one-by-one PW methods. For instance, on legal search, batched PW ranking with GPT-4o improves from 43.8% to 51.3% NDCG@10 when using 1 vs. 15 self-consistency calls, compared to one-by-one PW ranking improving from 44.9% to 46.8% and being 15.3x slower.

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Knowledge- and tool-augmented reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 9 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 May 2025.

Builds on

9 of 31 references.

References · 9

  1. 2021Unsupervised Dense Information Retrieval with Contrastive Learningcited by 1,216
  2. 2019Passage Re-ranking with BERTcited by 645
  3. 2020Overview of the TREC 2019 deep learning trackcited by 286
  4. 2025Scalable Best-of-N Selection for Large Language Models via Self-Certaintycited by 187
  5. 2023RankZephyr: Effective and Robust Zero-Shot Listwise Reranking is a Breeze!cited by 155
  6. 2024Knowledge Fusion of Large Language Modelscited by 115
  7. 2023Zero-Shot Listwise Document Reranking with a Large Language Modelcited by 82
  8. 2023RankVicuna: Zero-Shot Listwise Document Reranking with Open-Source Large Language Modelscited by 70
  9. 2024UMBRELA: UMbrela is the (Open-Source Reproduction of the) Bing RELevance Assessorcited by 42

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 7.

8 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025GroupRank: A Groupwise Paradigm for Effective and Efficient Passage Reranking with LLMs
  2. 2026PRECISE: Reducing the Bias of LLM Evaluations Using Prediction-Powered Ranking Estimation
  3. 2026Finding the Right Balance: Relevance and Diversity in LLM Retrieval
  4. 2025LLM-Specific Utility for Retrieval-Augmented Generation
  5. 2026When Do Anchor-Based Pointwise LLM Rerankers Help? Retriever Quality, Statistical Scope, and Anchor Design
  6. 2024A Large-Scale Study of Relevance Assessments with Large Language Models: An Initial Look
  7. 2025InsertRank: LLMs can reason over BM25 scores to Improve Listwise Reranking
  8. 2025Do RAG Systems Really Suffer From Positional Bias?