Index  |  Benchmarks  |  Mathematics  |  Graph  |  About
SRCH:60496753

An Efficiency Study for SPLADE Models

Submitted: 27 May 2026
Review score: 7.83/10
Verification: L2, Source-grounded claims
Quality tier: DOI grade
Verified claims: 5
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20416287

Abstract

Abstract: Latency and efficiency issues are often overlooked when evaluating IR models based on Pretrained Language Models (PLMs) in reason of multiple hardware and software testing scenarios. Nevertheless, efficiency is an important part of such systems and should not be overlooked. In this paper, we focus on improving the efficiency of the SPLADE model since it has achieved state-of-the-art zero-shot performance and competitive results on TREC collections. SPLADE efficiency can be controlled via a regularization factor, but solely controlling this regularization has been shown to not be efficient en

Research Question

How does the inference throughput (queries per second) of RAG retrievers degrade under adversarial perturbations in multi-hop vs. single-hop settings when using fine-tuned dense retrieval models (e.g., Contriever) vs. lexical sparse models (e.g., SPLADE) on the MuSiQue dataset?

Verification Level

Paper levelL2, Source-grounded claims
Source-grounded claims5
Claim record sourcenot publicly specified

Descriptive public verification status only; aggregate claim counts are public, but individual claim records are not exposed here.

Quality Tier

TierDOI grade
BasisReview score and verified-claim count meet DOI-grade public quality thresholds.

Descriptive public triage only; this tier does not alter current publication or DOI behavior.

Quality Dimensions

Evidence strength MEDIUM
Citation grounding MEDIUM
Uncertainty disclosure MEDIUM
Reproducibility status HIGH

Automated triage signals derived from public fields; not human peer review or independent validation.

Correction Record

StatusCURRENT
Correction count0
Manifest contractpaper-manifest-v1.1
Correction contractcorrection-record-v1

Public corrections are additive records. Current status does not claim the synthesis is error-free.

Provenance

PublisherAssignee Research
Public provenanceL4, External archival record
Report artifactAvailable
External recordRegistered
Claim lineage5 aggregate source-grounded claims
Review methodAutomated multi-reviewer assessment
Quality guideHow to read scores, claims, manifests, and evidence links
Provenance contractsource-provenance-v1
NoteMachine-generated synthesis of existing literature. Not primary research.