InfluMatch: Frontier-Quality KOL Search at 4B-Model Cost
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Matching influencers (KOLs) to free-form, multi-part Thai marketing criteria is today served either by keyword search over structured profiles, which misses semantic fit, or by prompting frontier LLMs over every candidate, which is accurate but slow and expensive. We present InfluMatch, a low-cost three-stage cascade -- retrieval rightarrow rerank rightarrow reason -- built entirely from small open-weight models: dense retrieval returns 50 candidates, a 4B pointwise reranker scores each by the log-probability of a single Yes token and keeps 10, and a 4B reasoner grades the shortlist per criterion on a rubric with a Thai rationale. The cascade is designed for cost: reasoning over a filtered top-10 halves token spend versus reasoning over all 50 while scoring 14 points higher. End-to-end against human relevance labels on an 11-query set with all 50 candidates labeled, the full cascade reaches 94.1% P@5, versus a retrieval-only baseline near random; it matches the frontier model Kimi-K2.6 (91.8%) while emitting ~35× fewer output tokens and serving a 50-KOL query in ~20 s on one A100. Notably, the only fine-tuning that pays off is pairwise: a SimPO-tuned reranker matches the frontier baseline's best-pick accuracy (78.0 EM), whereas fine-tuning the reasoner on pointwise per-criterion labels improves offline scores yet degrades end-to-end ranking -- an inversion we trace to the design of the absolute labeling task -- leaving the untuned base model as the strongest deployed reasoner. The result is a deployable, explainable KOL search system at a small fraction of frontier serving cost.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Jul 2026.
Builds on
18 of 23 references.
References · 18
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
- 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 8,851
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
- 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 7,916
- 2020Dense Passage Retrieval for Open-Domain Question Answeringcited by 3,779
- 2023Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluatorscited by 1,050
- 2024SimPO: Simple Preference Optimization with a Reference-Free Rewardcited by 951
- 2025DeepSeek-V3.2: Pushing the Frontier of Open Large Language Modelscited by 755
- 2019Passage Re-ranking with BERTcited by 629
- 2023Prometheus: Inducing Fine-grained Evaluation Capability in Language Modelscited by 558
- 2020Document Ranking with a Pretrained Sequence-to-Sequence Modelcited by 373
- 2023Is ChatGPT Good at Search? Investigating Large Language Models as Re-Ranking Agentscited by 356
6 more
- 2023Large Language Models are Effective Text Rankers with Pairwise Ranking Promptingcited by 302
- 2019Multi-Stage Document Ranking with BERTcited by 200
- 2023RankZephyr: Effective and Robust Zero-Shot Listwise Reranking is a Breeze!cited by 151
- 2022The 'Problem' of Human Label Variation: On Ground Truth in Data, Modeling and Evaluationcited by 133
- 2017Best-Worst Scaling More Reliable than Rating Scales: A Case Study on Sentiment Intensity Annotationcited by 77
- 2023RankVicuna: Zero-Shot Listwise Document Reranking with Open-Source Large Language Modelscited by 69
Built on by
Not cited yet.