Beyond the Resumé: A Rubric-Aware Automatic Interview System for Information Elicitation

Modern recruitment platforms operate under severe information imbalance: job seekers must search over massive, rapidly changing collections of postings, while employers are overwhelmed by high-volume, low-relevance applicant pools. Existing recruitment recommender systems typically rely on keyword matching or single-stage semantic retrieval, which struggle to capture fine-grained alignment between candidate experience and job requirements under real-world scale and cost constraints. We present Synapse, a multi-stage semantic recruitment system that separates high-recall candidate generation from high-precision semantic reranking, combining efficient dense retrieval using FAISS with an ensemble of contrastive learning and Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning. To improve transparency, Synapse incorporates a retrieval-augmented explanation layer that grounds recommendations in explicit evidence. Beyond retrieval, we introduce a novel evolutionary resume optimization framework that treats resume refinement as a black-box optimization problem. Using Differential Evolution with LLM-guided mutation operators, the system iteratively modifies candidate representations to improve alignment with screening objectives, without any labeled data. Evaluation shows that the proposed ensemble improves nDCG@10 by 22% over embedding-only retrieval baselines, while the evolutionary optimization loop consistently yields monotonic improvements in recommender scores, exceeding 60% relative gain across evaluated profiles. We plan to release code and data upon publication.

In this work, we present a modular and interpretable framework that uses Large Language Models (LLMs) to automate candidate assessment in recruitment. The system integrates diverse sources, including job descriptions, CVs, interview transcripts, and HR feedback; to generate structured evaluation reports that mirror expert judgment. Unlike traditional ATS tools that rely on keyword matching or shallow scoring, our approach employs role-specific, LLM-generated rubrics and a multi-agent architecture to perform fine-grained, criteria-driven evaluations. The framework outputs detailed assessment reports, candidate comparisons, and ranked recommendations that are transparent, auditable, and suitable for real-world hiring workflows. Beyond rubric-based analysis, we introduce an LLM-Driven Active Listwise Tournament mechanism for candidate ranking. Instead of noisy pairwise comparisons or inconsistent independent scoring, the LLM ranks small candidate subsets (mini-tournaments), and these listwise permutations are aggregated using a Plackett-Luce model. An active-learning loop selects the most informative subsets, producing globally coherent and sample-efficient rankings. This adaptation of listwise LLM preference modeling (previously explored in financial asset ranking) provides a principled and highly interpretable methodology for large-scale candidate ranking in talent acquisition.

Research has documented LLMs' name-based bias in hiring and salary recommendations. In this paper, we instead consider a setting where LLMs generate candidate summaries for downstream assessment. In a large-scale controlled study, we analyze nearly one million resume summaries produced by 4 models under systematic race-gender name perturbations, using synthetic resumes and real-world job postings. By decomposing each summary into resume-grounded factual content and evaluative framing, we find that factual content remains largely stable, while evaluative language exhibits subtle name-conditioned variation concentrated in the extremes of the distribution, especially in open-source models. Our hiring simulation demonstrates how evaluative summary transforms directional harm into symmetric instability that might evade conventional fairness audit, highlighting a potential pathway for LLM-to-LLM automation bias.