LINE Conversation History Retrieval for Personal Memory RAG: Evaluating Search Representations and Hybrid Retrieval

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.27809v1
• Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2026 00:52:11 GMT
• Title: LINE Conversation History Retrieval for Personal Memory RAG: Evaluating Search Representations and Hybrid Retrieval
• Abstract summary: This study presents a retrieval-only case study over one user's LINE conversation history.<n>We segmented 358,896 messages into 22,329 temporally coherent chunks and constructed three search representations.<n>We compared BM25, dense vector retrieval, and linear hybrid retrieval on 100 evaluation questions verified by a single annotator.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: As an initial step toward personal memory retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) for large language models (LLMs), this study presents a retrieval-only case study over one user's LINE conversation history. We segmented 358,896 messages into 22,329 temporally coherent chunks and constructed three search representations: raw_text, a generated summary, and embedding_text, which combines a summary with a raw-text excerpt and other fixed text. We compared BM25, dense vector retrieval, and linear hybrid retrieval on 100 evaluation questions verified by a single annotator. Among individual retrievers, embedding_text_bm25 achieved the highest point estimate, with Recall@5 of 0.584. We then explored six retriever pairings and 21 weights, for 126 configurations on the same evaluation set. The selected combination of embedding_text_bm25 and embedding_text_vector at beta = 0.45 achieved Recall@5 = 0.697, MRR@5 = 0.595, and nDCG@5 = 0.575. Its Recall@5 exceeded that of embedding_text_bm25 by 0.113, with a question-level paired percentile-bootstrap 95% confidence interval of [0.048, 0.184]. This interval is conditional on fixing the configuration selected on the same 100 questions and does not account for uncertainty from configuration selection or weight search. The difference from a summary-based hybrid at beta = 0.50 was 0.050, with a 95% confidence interval of [-0.013, 0.115], so no clear difference could be established. The 17 aggregate questions also yielded lower point estimates than the other question types, suggesting that flat chunk-level retrieval struggles when evidence is distributed across multiple times and conversations. This evaluation is an exploratory single-user, single-annotator study conducted on the same question set used for configuration search; it does not evaluate final answer generation or generalization to unseen questions.

Related papers

• SurveyReview: A Reviewer-Aligned Benchmark for Survey Evaluators [50.129606229339146]
  SurveyReview is a reviewer-aligned, multi-dimensional benchmark and dataset for survey evaluation.<n>We structure authentic peer-review reports by converting free-form comments into four-dimensional scores.<n>We release standardized train/test splits and an evaluation protocol to measure alignment between automatic evaluators and human reviewers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-07T16:11:46Z)
• Novelty-Aware Agentic Retrieval: Comparing Research Contributions Through Structured Multi-Step Reasoning [0.0]
  Novelty-Aware Research Agent is a prototype agentic retrieval system.<n>It layers structured multi-step reasoning on a RAG pipeline through six typed-contract components.<n>It produces structured comparison artifacts: per-paper contribution records, paper-level overlaps, and a problem x method gap matrix.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-20T17:04:02Z)
• MemoryDocDataSet: A Benchmark for Joint Conversational Memory and Long Document Reasoning [6.180594609315986]
  We introduce MemoryDocDataSet, a synthetic benchmark of 50 micro-worlds and 1,000 QA pairs.<n>Each instance comprises 3-5 personas, a temporal event graph spanning months of activity, 3-5 real long documents, and multi-session conversations grounded on those documents.<n>The defining feature is the Hybrid source tag: questions requiring a system to first navigate conversation history to identify which document is relevant, then extract the answer from within that document.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-03T04:44:50Z)
• From BM25 to Corrective RAG: Benchmarking Retrieval Strategies for Text-and-Table Documents [0.0]
  We benchmark ten retrieval strategies spanning sparse, dense, hybrid fusion, cross-encoder reranking, query expansion, index augmentation, and adaptive retrieval.<n>We evaluate retrieval quality via Recall@k, MRR, and nDCG, and end-to-end generation quality via Number Match.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-02T07:53:40Z)
• Test-Time Strategies for More Efficient and Accurate Agentic RAG [58.44913384057518]
  Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems face challenges with complex, multihop questions.<n>Such approaches can introduce inefficiencies, including repetitive retrieval of previously processed information.<n>We investigate test-time modifications to the Search-R1 pipeline to mitigate these identified shortcomings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-12T19:18:59Z)
• Beyond Relevance: On the Relationship Between Retrieval and RAG Information Coverage [89.58253972744531]
  Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems combine document retrieval with a generative model to address complex information seeking tasks like report generation.<n>We investigate whether upstream retrieval metrics can serve as reliable early indicators of the final generated response's information coverage.<n>Our findings demonstrate strong correlations between coverage-based retrieval metrics and nugget coverage in generated responses at both topic and system levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-09T18:20:20Z)
• Domain-Adaptive and Scalable Dense Retrieval for Content-Based Recommendation [0.0]
  We present a scalable dense retrieval system based on a two-tower bi-encoder, fine-tuned on the Amazon Reviews 2023 (Fashion) subset.<n>We construct training pairs from review text (as a query proxy) and item metadata (as the positive document) and fine-tune on 50,000 sampled interactions with a maximum sequence length of 500 tokens.<n>On a review-to-title benchmark over 826,402 catalog items, our approach improves Recall@10 from 0.26 (BM25) to 0.66.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-31T20:58:23Z)
• Evaluating Hybrid Retrieval Augmented Generation using Dynamic Test Sets: LiveRAG Challenge [8.680958290253914]
  We present our submission to the LiveRAG Challenge 2025, which evaluates retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems on dynamic test sets.<n>Our final hybrid approach combines sparse (BM25) and dense (E5) retrieval methods.<n>We demonstrate that neural re-ranking with RankLLaMA improves MAP from 0.523 to 0.797 but introduces prohibitive computational costs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-27T21:20:43Z)
• ELOQ: Resources for Enhancing LLM Detection of Out-of-Scope Questions [52.33835101586687]
  We study out-of-scope questions, where the retrieved document appears semantically similar to the question but lacks the necessary information to answer it.<n>We propose a guided hallucination-based approach ELOQ to automatically generate a diverse set of out-of-scope questions from post-cutoff documents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-18T16:11:29Z)
• Long-Span Question-Answering: Automatic Question Generation and QA-System Ranking via Side-by-Side Evaluation [65.16137964758612]
  We explore the use of long-context capabilities in large language models to create synthetic reading comprehension data from entire books. Our objective is to test the capabilities of LLMs to analyze, understand, and reason over problems that require a detailed comprehension of long spans of text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-31T20:15:10Z)
• Phrase Retrieval for Open-Domain Conversational Question Answering with Conversational Dependency Modeling via Contrastive Learning [54.55643652781891]
  Open-Domain Conversational Question Answering (ODConvQA) aims at answering questions through a multi-turn conversation. We propose a method to directly predict answers with a phrase retrieval scheme for a sequence of words.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-07T09:46:38Z)
• Zero-Shot Dialogue Disentanglement by Self-Supervised Entangled Response Selection [79.37200787463917]
  Dialogue disentanglement aims to group utterances in a long and multi-participant dialogue into threads. This is useful for discourse analysis and downstream applications such as dialogue response selection. We are the first to propose atextbfzero-shot dialogue disentanglement solution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-25T05:15:01Z)

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.