---
格式版本: 2
标题: "Incremental Pooled LLM Evaluation for Cost-Effective Retrieval Model Selection"
原文链接: "https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.02745"
发布日期: "2026-09-02"
发布时间校准状态: "found"
发布时间需复核: "否"
发布时间来源: "rule:local:strict_original_body"
发布时间证据: "**\\[v1\\]** Wed, 2 Sep 2026 15:47:49 UTC (428 KB)"
发布时间校准原因: "规则确认唯一严格发布时间，来源 local:strict_original_body"
发布时间校准置信度: "high"
发布时间候选数量: 18
发布时间严格候选数量: 6
发布时间原页读取状态: "source template page reused from URL open"
发布时间未找到原因: ""
发布时间校准时间: "2026-09-04T01:36:39+08:00"
发布时间仲裁状态: "skipped"
发布时间仲裁尝试次数: 0
发布时间仲裁耗时毫秒: 0
发现时间: "2026-09-04T01:32:16+08:00"
入库时间: "2026-09-03T17:36:39.078Z"
来源平台: "arXiv 学术论文搜索"
搜索渠道: "source_template"
搜索词: "https://arxiv.org/search/?query=Scale-up&searchtype=all"
匹配关键词:
  - "Scale-up"
相关厂家:
  []
相关专家:
  []
内容类型: "网页"
抓取工具: "Free Fetch + Defuddle"
清洗工具: "Defuddle Markdown + Defuddle/Readability 正文提取"
原始附件:
  []
AI优质: "否"
AI打分: 18
AI分档: "非优质"
AI质检状态: "不通过"
AI打分理由: "该资料为arXiv论文，主题是信息检索中的LLM评估方法，与超节点/AI Rack/机柜级AI基础设施完全无关，未涉及任何相关技术或商业信号。"
AI质检模型: "zj-deepseek-v4-flash"
AI质检时间: "2026-09-04T01:38:19+08:00"
AI主题相关性: 0
AI来源权威性: 8
AI新颖性: 5
AI技术细节: 0
AI商业部署信号: 0
AI完整性: 5
AI摘要: "本文提出增量池化LLM评估方法，用于低成本地比较生产RAG系统中的候选检索模型：新系统加入时仅评判其新增文档，并复用已有判断。"
AI摘要模型: "ali-deepseek-v4-flash"
AI摘要时间: "2026-09-04T00:17:54.402Z"
采集批次: "2026年9月3日22点43分34秒"
采集批次ID: "20260903-224334-406"
去重键: "https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.02745"
---

## Computer Science > Information Retrieval

## Title:Incremental Pooled LLM Evaluation for Cost-Effective Retrieval Model Selection

Authors:[Max Nelson](https://arxiv.org/search/cs?searchtype=author&query=Nelson,+M), [Hanoz Bhathena](https://arxiv.org/search/cs?searchtype=author&query=Bhathena,+H), [Aviral Joshi](https://arxiv.org/search/cs?searchtype=author&query=Joshi,+A), [Saket Sharma](https://arxiv.org/search/cs?searchtype=author&query=Sharma,+S)

[View PDF](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.02745) [HTML (experimental)](https://arxiv.org/html/2609.02745v1)

> Abstract:Selecting a retrieval model for a production RAG system requires reliable comparative evaluation, but obtaining relevance judgments at scale is expensive and difficult to repeat as new candidate systems arrive. We study pooled LLM evaluation, in which an LLM judges the union of documents retrieved by the current set of candidate systems, and the pool is then expanded incrementally as new systems are introduced by judging only the new documents they contribute. These judgments are reused to evaluate all systems on a common basis. We validate this approach on four retrieval benchmarks with 11 systems spanning dense, sparse, and hybrid configurations, and deploy it to compare 62 retrieval configurations for a financial news QA system. Pooled LLM rankings correlate strongly with gold-standard evaluation across datasets, and 97% of pairwise system orderings are preserved once bootstrap uncertainty in the qrels is taken into account. In production, document overlap yields 65-80% judgment reuse and up to 4.9x lower evaluation cost, allowing teams to benchmark new retrieval candidates without re-judging previously assessed documents. These results suggest pooled LLM evaluation is a practical and cost-effective workflow for incremental retrieval model selection in deployed systems.

| Comments: |  |
| --- | --- |
| Subjects: | Information Retrieval (cs.IR); Computation and Language (cs.CL) |
| Cite as: | [arXiv:2609.02745](https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.02745) \[cs.IR\] |
|  | (or [arXiv:2609.02745v1](https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.02745v1) \[cs.IR\] for this version) |
|  | [https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.02745](https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.02745) |

## Submission history

From: Max Nelson \[[view email](https://arxiv.org/show-email/0e21d992/2609.02745)\]  
**\[v1\]** Wed, 2 Sep 2026 15:47:49 UTC (428 KB)

[Which authors of this paper are endorsers?](https://arxiv.org/auth/show-endorsers/2609.02745) | Disable MathJax ([What is MathJax?](https://info.arxiv.org/help/mathjax.html))