Optimizing What Matters: AUC-Driven Learning for Robust Neural Retrieval
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Dual-encoder retrievers depend on the principle that relevant documents should score higher than irrelevant ones for a given query. Yet the dominant Noise Contrastive Estimation (NCE) objective, which underpins Contrastive Loss, optimizes a softened ranking surrogate that we rigorously prove is fundamentally oblivious to score separation quality and unrelated to AUC. This mismatch leads to poor calibration and suboptimal performance in downstream tasks like retrieval-augmented generation (RAG). To address this fundamental limitation, we introduce the MW loss, a new training objective that maximizes the Mann-Whitney U statistic, which is mathematically equivalent to the Area under the ROC Curve (AUC). MW loss encourages each positive-negative pair to be correctly ranked by minimizing binary cross entropy over score differences. We provide theoretical guarantees that MW loss directly upper-bounds the AoC, better aligning optimization with retrieval goals. We further promote ROC curves and AUC as natural threshold free diagnostics for evaluating retriever calibration and ranking quality. Empirically, retrievers trained with MW loss consistently outperform contrastive counterparts in AUC and standard retrieval metrics. Our experiments show that MW loss is an empirically superior alternative to Contrastive Loss, yielding better-calibrated and more discriminative retrievers for high-stakes applications like RAG.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 29 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Sep 2025.
Builds on
29 of 38 references.
References · 29
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
- 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,744
- 2020Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Taskscited by 9,297
- 2018Representation Learning with Contrastive Predictive Codingcited by 7,777
- 2019Momentum Contrast for Unsupervised Visual Representation Learningcited by 7,513
- 2020Bootstrap your own latent: A new approach to self-supervised Learningcited by 4,750
- 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,148
- 2019Unsupervised Cross-lingual Representation Learning at Scalecited by 3,935
- 2020Dense Passage Retrieval for Open-Domain Question Answeringcited by 3,824
- 2023Sigmoid Loss for Language Image Pre-Trainingcited by 3,109
- 2023Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 2,212
- 2021SimCSE: Simple Contrastive Learning of Sentence Embeddingscited by 2,173
17 more
- 2016MS MARCO: A Human Generated MAchine Reading COmprehension Datasetcited by 1,605
- 2020MiniLM: Deep Self-Attention Distillation for Task-Agnostic Compression of Pre-Trained Transformerscited by 1,463
- 2022Text Embeddings by Weakly-Supervised Contrastive Pre-trainingcited by 1,253
- 2021BEIR: A Heterogenous Benchmark for Zero-shot Evaluation of Information Retrieval Modelscited by 1,252
- 2021Unsupervised Dense Information Retrieval with Contrastive Learningcited by 1,216
- 2020Approximate Nearest Neighbor Negative Contrastive Learning for Dense Text Retrievalcited by 849
- 2021Large Dual Encoders Are Generalizable Retrieverscited by 456
- 2014Deep metric learning using Triplet networkcited by 422
- 2019Representation Degeneration Problem in Training Natural Language Generation Modelscited by 255
- 2022RankT5: Fine-Tuning T5 for Text Ranking with Ranking Lossescited by 115
- 2018Noise Contrastive Estimation and Negative Sampling for Conditional Models: Consistency and Statistical Efficiencycited by 105
- 2024NV-Retriever: Improving text embedding models with effective hard-negative miningcited by 84
- 2022Benchmarking Deep AUROC Optimization: Loss Functions and Algorithmic Choicescited by 10
- 2024ARL2: Aligning Retrievers for Black-box Large Language Models via Self-guided Adaptive Relevance Labelingcited by 10
- 2023SamToNe: Improving Contrastive Loss for Dual Encoder Retrieval Models with Same Tower Negativescited by 9
- 2022Hard Negatives or False Negatives: Correcting Pooling Bias in Training Neural Ranking Modelscited by 6
- 2023Mitigating the Impact of False Negatives in Dense Retrieval with Contrastive Confidence Regularizationcited by 4
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Retrieval-Guided Fine-Tuning as Noisy Estimation: Risk bounds and Architectural Analysis
- 2026Training Dense Retrievers with Multiple Positive Passages
- 2024Neural Machine Unranking
- 2026Towards a Relevance Posterior in Neural Information Access ↗
- 2025U-MARVEL: Unveiling Key Factors for Universal Multimodal Retrieval via Embedding Learning with MLLMs
- 2023Can Query Expansion Improve Generalization of Strong Cross-Encoder Rankers?
- 2026Autoregressive Retriever: Improving Query Understanding from Item Feedback for Universal Multimodal Retrieval
- 2026When Does Dense Retrieval Need Asymmetric Geometry? A Bias-Variance Theory of Shared and Dual Projections