Revisiting Generative vs. Dense Retrieval: A Static Value Prior Reverses the Gap

Renbo Tu, Yang Liu, Shuying Sun
10/13/2026
cs.IRcs.AIcs.LG

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

Generative retrieval (GR) has emerged as a strong candidate generator for sequential recommendation as language models and semantic-item identifiers have improved. However, GR is not a uniformly stronger replacement of dense retrieval (DR) in online retail candidate generation. We examine their differences on two Amazon Toys datasets under different metrics. GR leads on best relevant item value among users both methods cover, while DR leads on exact-target recall and relevant value across the ranked list. With deep analysis, we find that popularity contributes the most to GR's measured value lead. Adding the same static item value to DR in one reranking step reverses this lead and keeps recall above GR. Finally, on an industrial-scale internal e-commerce dataset with LLM-judged relevance, we show that a 14B SID-LLM still underperforms a $47\times$ smaller dense encoder.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. Any repos shown below are weak matches — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{tu2026revisiting,
  title  = {Revisiting Generative vs. Dense Retrieval: A Static Value Prior Reverses the Gap},
  author = {Renbo Tu and Yang Liu and Shuying Sun},
  year   = {2026},
  eprint = {2610.19065},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2610.19065v1}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2610.19065.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2610.19065)

Discussion