PJB: A Reasoning-Aware Benchmark for Person-Job Retrieval

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.17386v1
• Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2026 06:08:06 GMT
• Title: PJB: A Reasoning-Aware Benchmark for Person-Job Retrieval
• Abstract summary: Person-job matching requires systems to verify explicit constraints and perform skill-transfer inference and job-competency reasoning.<n>Existing benchmarks provide no systematic diagnostic support for this task.<n>We introduce PJB, a reasoning-aware retrieval evaluation dataset.
• Score: 21.108322341202815
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: As retrieval models converge on generic benchmarks, the pressing question is no longer "who scores higher" but rather "where do systems fail, and why?" Person-job matching is a domain that urgently demands such diagnostic capability -- it requires systems not only to verify explicit constraints but also to perform skill-transfer inference and job-competency reasoning, yet existing benchmarks provide no systematic diagnostic support for this task. We introduce PJB (Person-Job Benchmark), a reasoning-aware retrieval evaluation dataset that uses complete job descriptions as queries and complete resumes as documents, defines relevance through job-competency judgment, is grounded in real-world recruitment data spanning six industry domains and nearly 200,000 resumes, and upgrades evaluation from "who scores higher" to "where do systems differ, and why" through domain-family and reasoning-type diagnostic labels. Diagnostic experiments using dense retrieval reveal that performance heterogeneity across industry domains far exceeds the gains from module upgrades for the same model, indicating that aggregate scores alone can severely mislead optimization decisions. At the module level, reranking yields stable improvements while query understanding not only fails to help but actually degrades overall performance when combined with reranking -- the two modules face fundamentally different improvement bottlenecks. The value of PJB lies not in yet another leaderboard of average scores, but in providing recruitment retrieval systems with a capability map that pinpoints where to invest.

Related papers

• When Agents Implement Systems: A Case Study in Defects, Detection, and Evaluation Rigor [0.0]
  We present a case study of one such agent implementing a multi-component data system against a detailed pre-existing specification.<n>We catalog five such defects, categorized by constraint violated and detection method.<n>Across retrieval budgets from 1 to 10 and 100 questions against a pooled corpus of 2994 paragraphs, filtered recall reaches its ceiling by a budget of 3, expected once candidates are restricted to the gold paragraphs themselves.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-02T01:43:09Z)
• The Optimizer Is the Agent: Reasoning-Driven Search across Prompts, Programs, and ML Workflows [72.9051182568928]
  We present ReASearch, a unified framework for reasoning-driven optimization.<n>With a shared agent loop and domain-specific tools, ReASearch instantiates the exact same scaffold to optimize prompts, programs, and ML.<n>We observe that complex search behaviors emerge naturally from the agent's reasoning process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-07T02:15:39Z)
• A Multi-Dataset Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Agents in Microservice Failure Diagnosis [8.941814067287673]
  LLM-based agents are reshaping microservice operations into AgentOps, where benchmarks are key to evaluating failure diagnosis over multimodal observability data.<n>We introduce two large-scale datasets (AIOps2025 and RCA100) under a reasoning-process evaluation paradigm.<n>Together, the two datasets comprise over 500 expert-labeled failure cases across two representative microservice systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-28T04:38:05Z)
• Agent-Orchestrated Adaptive RAG: A Comparative Study on Structured and Multi-Hop Retrieval [0.0]
  Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) enhances Large Language Models (LLMs) by grounding their responses in external knowledge.<n>This paper presents an Agent-Orchestrated Adaptive RAG framework that introduces dynamic query decomposition, iterative retrieval, and a bounded self-reflective evaluation loop.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-04T03:38:46Z)
• CoSearch: Joint Training of Reasoning and Document Ranking via Reinforcement Learning for Agentic Search [51.911048955965136]
  CoSearch is a framework that jointly trains a multi-step reasoning agent and a generative document ranking model.<n>Our results show that joint training of the reasoning agent and retrieval system is both feasible and strongly performant.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-19T17:48:17Z)
• FRESCO: Benchmarking and Optimizing Re-rankers for Evolving Semantic Conflict in Retrieval-Augmented Generation [73.22935457705057]
  We introduce FRESCO, a benchmark for evaluating re-rankers in temporally dynamic contexts.<n>By pairing recency-seeking queries with historical Wikipedia revisions, FRESCO tests whether re-rankers can prioritize factually recent evidence while maintaining semantic relevance.<n>Our evaluation reveals a consistent failure mode across existing re-rankers: a strong bias toward older, semantically rich documents, even when they are factually obsolete.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-14T17:04:25Z)
• BeyondSWE: Can Current Code Agent Survive Beyond Single-Repo Bug Fixing? [61.247730037229815]
  We introduce BeyondSWE, a comprehensive benchmark that broadens existing evaluations along two axes - resolution scope and knowledge scope.<n>To investigate the role of external knowledge, we develop SearchSWE, a framework that integrates deep search with coding abilities.<n>This work offers both a realistic, challenging evaluation benchmark and a flexible framework to advance research toward more capable code agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-03T17:52:01Z)
• HotelQuEST: Balancing Quality and Efficiency in Agentic Search [6.1626572270420334]
  Agentic search has emerged as a promising paradigm for adaptive retrieval systems powered by large language models (LLMs)<n>We introduce HotelQuEST, a benchmark comprising 214 hotel search queries that range from simple factual requests to complex queries.<n>We find that LLM-based agents achieve higher accuracy than traditional retrievers, but at substantially higher costs due to redundant tool calls and suboptimal routing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-27T11:50:57Z)
• Benchmarking at the Edge of Comprehension [38.43582342860192]
  If benchmarking becomes infeasible, our ability to measure any progress in AI is at stake.<n>We propose Critique-Resilient Benchmarking, an adversarial framework designed to compare models even when full human understanding is infeasible.<n>Unlike standard benchmarking, humans serve as bounded verifiers and focus on localized claims.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-15T20:51:29Z)
• The Necessity of a Unified Framework for LLM-Based Agent Evaluation [46.631678638677386]
  General-purpose agents have seen fundamental advancements.<n> evaluating these agents presents unique challenges that distinguish them from static QA benchmarks.<n>We propose that a unified evaluation framework is essential for the rigorous advancement of agent evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-03T08:18:37Z)
• DoVer: Intervention-Driven Auto Debugging for LLM Multi-Agent Systems [48.971606069204825]
  DoVer is an intervention-driven debug framework for large language model (LLM)-based multi-agent systems.<n>It augments hypothesis generation with active verification through targeted interventions.<n>DoVer flips 18-28% of failed trials into successes, achieves up to 16% milestone progress, and validates or refutes 30-60% of failure hypotheses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-07T09:23:48Z)
• Demystifying deep search: a holistic evaluation with hint-free multi-hop questions and factorised metrics [89.1999907891494]
  We present WebDetective, a benchmark of hint-free multi-hop questions paired with a controlled Wikipedia sandbox.<n>Our evaluation of 25 state-of-the-art models reveals systematic weaknesses across all architectures.<n>We develop an agentic workflow, EvidenceLoop, that explicitly targets the challenges our benchmark identifies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-01T07:59:03Z)
• Eigen-1: Adaptive Multi-Agent Refinement with Monitor-Based RAG for Scientific Reasoning [53.45095336430027]
  We develop a unified framework that combines implicit retrieval and structured collaboration.<n>On Humanity's Last Exam (HLE) Bio/Chem Gold, our framework achieves 48.3% accuracy.<n>Results on SuperGPQA and TRQA confirm robustness across domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-25T14:05:55Z)
• Benchmarking Deep Search over Heterogeneous Enterprise Data [73.55304268238474]
  We present a new benchmark for evaluating a form of retrieval-augmented generation (RAG)<n>RAG requires source-aware, multi-hop reasoning over diverse, sparsed, but related sources.<n>We build it using a synthetic data pipeline that simulates business across product planning, development, and support stages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-29T08:34:59Z)
• Hard Negative Mining for Domain-Specific Retrieval in Enterprise Systems [2.4830284216463]
  We propose a scalable hard-negative mining framework tailored specifically for domain-specific enterprise data.<n>Our approach dynamically selects semantically challenging but contextually irrelevant documents to enhance deployed re-ranking models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-23T20:51:20Z)
• TestAgent: Automatic Benchmarking and Exploratory Interaction for Evaluating LLMs in Vertical Domains [19.492393243160244]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in highly specialized vertical domains.<n>Existing evaluations for vertical domains typically rely on the labor-intensive construction of static single-turn datasets.<n>We propose TestAgent, a framework for automatic benchmarking and exploratory dynamic evaluation in vertical domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-15T11:20:42Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.