Distillation versus Contrastive Learning: How to Train Your Rerankers

Training effective text rerankers is crucial for information retrieval. Two strategies are widely used: contrastive learning (optimizing directly on ground-truth labels) and knowledge distillation (transferring knowledge from a larger reranker). While both have been studied extensively, a clear comparison of their effectiveness for training cross-encoder rerankers under practical conditions is needed. This paper empirically compares these strategies by training rerankers of different sizes (0.5B, 1.5B, 3B, 7B) and architectures (Transformer, Recurrent) using both methods on the same data, with a strong contrastive learning model acting as the distillation teacher. Our results show that knowledge distillation generally yields better in-domain and out-of-domain ranking performance than contrastive learning when distilling from a more performant teacher model. This finding is consistent across student model sizes and architectures. However, distilling from a teacher of the same capacity does not provide the same advantage, particularly for out-of-domain tasks. These findings offer practical guidance for choosing a training strategy based on available teacher models. We recommend using knowledge distillation to train smaller rerankers if a larger, more performant teacher is accessible; in its absence, contrastive learning remains a robust baseline. Our code implementation is made available to facilitate reproducbility.

Publication Details

Journal
ArXiv.org
Published
2025-07-11
Primary Topic
Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Distillation versus Contrastive Learning: How to Train Your Rerankers

ArXiv.org
Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
article

Distillation versus Contrastive Learning: How to Train Your Rerankers

article en

Abstract

Training effective text rerankers is crucial for information retrieval. Two strategies are widely used: contrastive learning (optimizing directly on ground-truth labels) and knowledge distillation (transferring knowledge from a larger reranker). While both have been studied extensively, a clear comparison of their effectiveness for training cross-encoder rerankers under practical conditions is needed. This paper empirically compares these strategies by training rerankers of different sizes (0.5B, 1.5B, 3B, 7B) and architectures (Transformer, Recurrent) using both methods on the same data, with a strong contrastive learning model acting as the distillation teacher. Our results show that knowledge distillation generally yields better in-domain and out-of-domain ranking performance than contrastive learning when distilling from a more performant teacher model. This finding is consistent across student model sizes and architectures. However, distilling from a teacher of the same capacity does not provide the same advantage, particularly for out-of-domain tasks. These findings offer practical guidance for choosing a training strategy based on available teacher models. We recommend using knowledge distillation to train smaller rerankers if a larger, more performant teacher is accessible; in its absence, contrastive learning remains a robust baseline. Our code implementation is made available to facilitate reproducbility.

ArXiv.org
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 37%
Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Distillation versus Contrastive Learning: How to Train Your Rerankers · ArXiv.org (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS