Matching candidates to vacancies is central to recruitment, and a recruiter needs to see why a candidate fits, not only a single opaque relevance score. We provide this evidence as named, interpretable matching dimensions recruiters can act on - eight in our current deployment. We propose a two-part approach. The first is an LLM-based labeler whose prompts and feature definitions were refined from recruiter feedback while it served as an earlier production matching stage. In the current architecture, it is used only for offline labeling and is not called on online requests. The second is a feature bi-encoder distilled from it: a LoRA-adapted embedding backbone with compact per-dimension heads that runs on CPU and serves all online requests. Both parts keep improving: prompts are revised as feedback arrives, and the bi-encoder is retrained on the updated labels. The model is trained on 168,772 labeled vacancy-resume pairs (17,921 vacancies and 180,030 resumes). Recruiters using the service can confirm or revise surfaced feature predictions. On 927 recruiter-recorded values from this selected production-feedback subset, the deployed student agrees with the recorded decisions in 888 cases (95.79%). This is operational, non-blinded agreement rather than an independent human evaluation.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Feature bi-encoder architecture. Vacancy and resume are encoded independently by a shared Qwen3-Embedding-0.6B + LoRA encoder. The four-component pair representation φ feeds eight task-specific MLP heads that predict ordinal or binary matching features — the interpretable per-feature verdicts shown to recruiters. A query-only certification applicability head (Eq. 2 , left) depends only on the vacancy embedding E(j) and masks the certification dimension when it is not required by the vacancy.
Figure 2: Full training pipeline. Production-refined LLM prompts annotate vacancy-resume pairs offline with hard ordinal labels. A cross-encoder trained on these labels provides soft per-class targets for knowledge distillation. The feature bi-encoder is trained with a hybrid loss (Eq. 3 ) combining KD, direct supervision, monotonicity, and margin regularization, in two stages (frozen encoder, then LoRA fine-tuning). The deployed student removes every online LLM call.
Document
n
p50
p75
p90
p95
p99
Vacancy
17,921
503
725
997
1,236
2,018
Resume
180,030
1,321
2,038
3,235
4,205
6,244
Table 1: Document length in tokens (training corpus).
Method
Acc.
Macro-F1
Majority baseline
0.606
0.268
Original encoder + MLP
0.760
0.669
Cross-encoder (offline)
0.934
0.897
Bi-encoder (production)
0.886
0.849
Table 2: Fidelity to LLM labels on the single held-out, vacancy-disjoint corpus split described in § 4.1 , averaged over eight dimensions; these are not human ground-truth metrics. The cross-encoder is the offline teacher and the bi-encoder is the production student. Bold: best fidelity.
(a) Pair representation
(b) Training objective
[u;v]
0.837
Hard-label cross-entropy
0.825
[u;v;u⊙v]
0.842
+ cross-encoder soft targets (KD)
0.840
[u;v;∣u−v∣]
0.846
+ KD + ordinal consistency
0.845
[u;v;∣u−v∣;u⊙v]
0.849
+ KD + margin (without ordinal)
0.844
Full objective
0.849
Table 3: Controlled macro-F1 ablations. The pairwise terms follow established sentence-pair practice; the full representation and full objective perform best.
Dimension
n
Exact
Agree
Wilson 95% CI
Maj.
Skill Context
120
120
100.0%
96.90–100.00%
72.5%
Skill Proficiency
120
120
100.0%
96.90–100.00%
61.7%
Hard Skill Experience
120
120
100.0%
96.90–100.00%
38.3%
Industry Experience
120
120
100.0%
96.90–100.00%
47.5%
Experience Recency
87
87
100.0%
95.77–100.00%
87.4%
Job Title Match
120
118
98.3%
94.13–99.54%
35.8%
Table 4: Agreement of the deployed student with recruiter-recorded production decisions. Recruiters saw the deployed system prediction before confirming or revising it; the analysis is non-blinded and uses only explicitly recorded feedback. Wilson intervals quantify uncertainty in the observed proportions; 100% is sample agreement, not perfect population accuracy.
Appendix figures & tables3 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Work
Student model
Supervision
Interpretable output
Serving
Li et al. (2025)
Role-aware MoE ranker
LLM-generated job descr.
Single ranking score
GPU
Yu et al. (2026)
LLM re-ranker (Qwen3)
Contrastive + LLM rerank
Single relevance score
GPU
Fu et al. (2025)
Distilled generative LLM
LLM (fit + explanation)
Free-text explanation
GPU
Jouanneau et al. (2026)
Late cross-attn. ranker
Generative LLM, calib. KD
Single skill-fit score
GPU
Ours
Bi-encoder (0.6B+LoRA)
Prod. LLM → cross-enc. KD
Eight named ordinal/binary dimensions
CPU
Appendix
Table 5: Qualitative comparison with the closest LLM-for-person–job-fit systems. Prior systems distil or prompt an LLM into a single score (or a free-text rationale); ours exposes eight independently supervised, named dimensions.
Feature
Classes (0 → 1 → 2)
What is evaluated
Skill group (evaluated jointly by combined-skill prompt)
Skill Context
no_overlap → research → production
Context in which the overlapping required skill was applied: no evidence, R&D / experimentation, or live production / business delivery.
Experience Recency
old → recent → active
How recently the candidate used the main required skill cluster ( > 3 yr, 1–3 yr, or current / < 1 yr).
Skill Proficiency
no_overlap → practical → professional
Depth of hands-on ownership: no credible evidence, real applied use with limited scope, or substantial ownership and repeated delivery.
Hard Skill Experience
mismatch → close_match → match
How well the demonstrated hands-on hard-skill experience (type and level) meets the vacancy requirement.
Fit group (separate per-dimension prompts)
Appendix
Table 6: The eight matching dimensions predicted by the feature bi-encoder. Class 2 always represents the strongest match. Certifications is treated as binary after applicability gating; the remaining seven dimensions use three-class ordinal modelling via cumulative logits.
Feature
Majority
MLP,
Full
baseline
orig. enc.
model
Skill Context
0.489
0.788
0.883
Skill Proficiency
0.240
0.642
0.801
Hard Skill Experience
0.218
0.739
0.846
Industry Experience
0.203
0.682
0.853
Experience Recency
0.279
0.467
0.828
Appendix
Table 7: Macro-F1 per feature on the held-out, vacancy-disjoint validation split. Majority baseline : majority-class prediction. MLP, orig. enc. : MLP head on original (non-fine-tuned) encoder embeddings. Full model : fine-tuned encoder with knowledge distillation, monotonicity, and margin losses (trained with the full hybrid loss). Bold marks the best result per feature.
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.
A reliable resume-job matching system helps a company find suitable candidates from a pool of resumes and helps a job seeker find relevant jobs from a list of job posts. While recent advances in embedding-based methods such as ConFit and ConFit v2 can efficiently retrieve candidates at scale, the lack of controllability and explainability limits their real-world adaptations. LLM-based re-rankers can address these limitations through reasoning, but existing training recipes are developed on short-document benchmarks and do not account for noise in real-world recruiting data. In this work, we first conduct a systematic analysis over the LLM re-ranker training pipeline for person-job fit, covering inference algorithm design, RL algorithm selection, data processing, and SFT distillation. We find that using multi-pass re-ranking, training with listwise RL objectives, removing noisy samples, and distilling from a stronger LLM before RL significantly improves re-ranking performance. We then aggregate these findings to train ConFit v3 with Qwen3-8B and Qwen3-32B on real-world person-job fit datasets, and find significant improvements over existing best person-job fit systems as well as strong LLMs such as GPT-5 and Claude Opus-4.5. We hope our findings provide useful insights for future research on adapting LLM-based re-rankers to person-job fit systems.
Xiao Yu, Ruize Xu, Chengyuan Xue +6
Columbia University · New York, NY, USA · John Hopkins University +6
Candidate sourcing for recruiters is best viewed as a two-stage retrieval and reranking pipeline with recall as the primary objective under a limited review budget. An upstream production retriever first returns a candidate shortlist for each job description (JD), and our goal is to rerank that shortlist so that qualified candidates appear as high as possible. We present mira-embeddings-v1, a semantic reranking system for the recruitment domain that reshapes the embedding space with LLM-synthesized training data and corrects boundary confusions with a lightweight reranking head. Starting from real JDs, we build a five-stage prompt pipeline to generate diverse positive and hard negative samples that sculpt the semantic space from multiple angles. We then apply a two-round LoRA adaptation: JD--JD contrastive training followed by JD--CV triplet alignment on a heterogeneous text dataset. Importantly, these gains require no large-scale manually labeled industrial training pairs: a modest set of real JDs is expanded into supervision through LLM synthesis. Finally, a BoundaryHead MLP reranks the Top-K results to distinguish between roles that share the same title but differ in scope. On a local pool of 300 real JDs with candidates from an upstream production retriever, mira-embeddings-v1 improves Recall@50 from 68.89% (baseline) to 77.55% while lifting Precision@10 from 35.77% to 39.62%. On a supportive global pool over 44,138 candidates judged by a Qwen3-32B rubric, it achieves Recall@200 of 0.7047 versus 0.5969 for the baseline. These results show that LLM-synthesized supervision with boundary-aware reranking yields robust gains without a heavy cross-encoder.