Cited by 353Information Retrieval and Search BehaviorTopic ModelingAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques

ColBERTv2: Effective and Efficient Retrieval via Lightweight Late Interaction

Open access
Santhanam, Keshav, Khattab, Omar, Saad-Falcon, Jon, Potts, Christopher, Zaharia, Matei·2022·Proceedings of the 2022 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies

Abstract

Keshav Santhanam, Omar Khattab, Jon Saad-Falcon, Christopher Potts, Matei Zaharia. Proceedings of the 2022 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies. 2022.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.18653/v1/2022.naacl-main.272

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • MaxSim has been shown to be both effective and computationally attractive in multi-vector retrieval systems.

    “This winner-take-all formulation has been shown to be both effective and computationally attractive in multi-vector retrieval systems [1, 4, 5].”

    From Spike Hijacking in Late-Interaction Retrieval (2026) · cites this paper as [4]

  • HippoRAG outperforms state-of-the-art RAG methods on multi-hop question answering by up to 20%.

    “We compare HippoRAG with existing RAG methods on multi-hop question answering (QA) and show that our method outperforms the state-of-the-art methods remarkably, by up to 20 %.”

    From HippoRAG: Neurobiologically Inspired Long-Term Memory for Large Language Models (2024) · cites this paper as [70]

    The BEIR section reports ColBERTv2 retrieval results, including improvements of up to 4.6 points over SPLADEv2 on open-domain QA queries. Searches for HippoRAG, multi-hop QA comparisons, and a 20% improvement found no passage in our copy addressing the claimed result. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 74 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Alexander Bondarenko, Maik Fröbe, Meriem Be- loucif, Lukas Gienapp, Yamen Ajjour, Alexander Panchenko, Chris Biemann, Benno Stein, Henning Wachsmuth, Martin Potthast, et al. 2020. Overview of touché 2020: Argument Retrieval. In Interna- tional Conference of the Cross-Language Evalua- tion Forum for European Languages, pages 384- 395. Springer.
  2. Robert Gray. 1984. Vector quantization. IEEE Assp Magazine, 1(2):4-29.
  3. PMLR.
  4. Macedo Maia, Siegfried Handschuh, André Freitas, Brian Davis, Ross McDermott, Manel Zarrouk, and Alexandra Balahur. 2018. WWW'18 Open Chal- lenge: Financial Opinion Mining and Question An- swering. In Companion Proceedings of the The Web Conference 2018, pages 1941-1942.
  5. Nandan Thakur, Nils Reimers, Andreas Rücklé, Ab- hishek Srivastava, and Iryna Gurevych. 2021. BEIR: A Heterogenous Benchmark for Zero-shot Eval- uation of Information Retrieval Models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.08663. · arXiv
  6. Ikuya Yamada, Akari Asai, and Hannaneh Hajishirzi. 2021b. Efficient passage retrieval with hashing for open-domain question answering. In Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Com- putational Linguistics and the 11th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Volume 2: Short Papers), pages 979-986, Online. Association for Computational Linguistics. · DOI
  7. Peilin Yang, Hui Fang, and Jimmy Lin. 2018a. Anserini: Reproducible ranking baselines using lucene. Journal of Data and Information Quality (JDIQ), 10(4):1-20.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Santhanam, K., Khattab, O., Saad-Falcon, J., Potts, C., & Zaharia, M.
Affiliations
Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 2022 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies
Published
2022
Pages
3715-3734
OpenAlex
W3217305727
Cited by
353
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 123 · 2025: 99 · 2024: 49 · 2023: 64 · 2022: 18
FWCI
51.41
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1651570, CAREER)
  • Cisco Systems
  • VMware
  • Ant Financial Services Group
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Keywords
Colbert, efficient retrieval, dense retrieval, word embeddings

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review