Modern conversational information access systems continuously extract user information from conversations to build user profiles for personalized retrieval. As user profiles accumulate over time, they inevitably become noisy, making effective user profile denoising a fundamental challenge. Existing personalized conversational query reformulation methods rely on the black-box reasoning capability of LLMs to expand the original query with relevant user profile phrases, producing a verbose query for retrieval. Such rewrite-then-retrieve pipelines reduce user profile denoising to the explicit selection of profile phrases in the sparse token space, separating personalization from downstream relevance modeling. Consequently, they often fail to identify user information that is truly beneficial for retrieval. To enable retrieval-aware user profile denoising, we propose Personalized Conversational Dense Retrieval (PCDR), which learns to jointly project the conversation history and user profile into a latent embedding space dedicated to retrieval. By inheriting the context denoising capability from conversational dense retrievers, PCDR requires only a handful of personalized relevance annotations for training. We evaluate PCDR on the iKAT 2026 tasks, where it serves as the core retrieval component of a conversational AI agent assisting users with complex information needs.
Figures & tables
Figure 1. An example of personalized conversational search. The current question depends on the dialogue history and on only two of the five profile statements, which are highlighted. PCDR encodes the conversation and the full profile into a single personalized query embedding.
Figure 2. Two-stage continual training of PCDR. The query encoder of Qwen3-Embedding 0.6B is first fine-tuned on TopiOCQA conversations to obtain conv-Qwen3, and then on iKAT conversations and user profiles, with distillation from human query rewrites, to obtain PCDR. The document encoder stays frozen in both stages.
Adaptation
Learning rate
NDCG@3
LoRA rank (lr 5e−6 )
LoRA r=4
5e−6
30.6
LoRA r=8
5e−6
31.0
LoRA r=16
5e−6
31.2
LoRA r=32
5e−6
32.2
LoRA r=64
5e−6
33.1
Table 1. Hyperparameter selection for personalized fine-tuning, in NDCG@ 3 on the held-out turns with full-corpus retrieval. All runs start from conv-Qwen3 and use the full-profile query and the complete objective. Bold indicates the best result.
Encoder
full-profile
relevant-profile
base-Qwen3
12.9
13.4
conv-Qwen3
29.0
28.9
PCDR (ours)
33.1
32.0
Table 2. Zero-shot baselines and PCDR under the two query forms, in NDCG@ 3 on the held-out turns with full-corpus retrieval. Bold indicates the best result.
Configuration
NDCG@3
pure KD
28.8
+ graded fine-tune (BiXSE)
30.3
+ initialization anchor
30.4
+ global negatives (full method, PCDR)
33.1
oracle upper bound
36.3
Table 3. Cumulative build-up of PCDR on top of conv-Qwen3, in NDCG@ 3 on the held-out turns. Each row adds one component to the row above. The upper bound encodes the human oracle rewrite with base-Qwen3.
Configuration
NDCG@3
full method
33.1
− conv-Qwen3 fine-tune (use base-Qwen3)
27.5
− oracle-rewrite KD
28.4
− initialization anchor
29.5
− global negatives
30.4
− graded fine-tune
28.6
Table 4. Leave-one-out ablation of PCDR, in NDCG@ 3 on the held-out turns. Each row removes one component from the full method and keeps all other settings fixed.
Run
Retrieval components
Reranking
6
PCDR
—
3
PCDR + CDR
—
5
PCDR + SPLADE-v3
—
4
PCDR + BM25
RankLLaMA
Table 5. The four runs submitted to the iKAT 2026 interactive task. All runs use PCDR as the personalized dense retriever and gpt-5-mini for profile extraction and response generation, and all fusions use RRF.
Run
NDCG@5
Rubric
Eng.
Rel.&Use.
Subtopic
Avg
PCDR
0.557
3.85
3.32
4.23
3.75
3.79
PCDR + CDR
0.559
3.74
3.17
4.12
3.65
3.67
PCDR + SPLADE-v3
0.577
3.97
3.20
4.11
3.69
3.74
PCDR + BM25
0.580
3.93
3.14
4.24
3.79
3.78
Table 6. Retrieval and per-turn response quality of the submitted runs with the iKAT 2026 simulated users, as judged by an LLM against the rubrics. NDCG@ 5 ranges from 0 to 1 , the rubric score from 0 to 5 , and the other criteria from 1 to 5 ; Avg averages the four response criteria.
Run
Pers.
Trust
Flow
Mix-Init
Sat.
Avg
PCDR
3.93
3.68
3.98
3.00
3.93
3.70
PCDR + CDR
3.82
3.70
3.98
2.70
4.02
3.64
PCDR + SPLADE-v3
3.80
3.39
3.86
2.82
3.84
3.54
PCDR + BM25
3.95
3.41
4.07
2.52
3.93
3.58
Table 7. Dialogue-level quality of the submitted runs with the iKAT 2026 simulated users, as judged by an LLM on a 1 – 5 scale. Avg averages the five criteria.
Figure 3. Token relevancy of the PCDR query embedding on an iKAT 2024 skincare turn, computed with the method of Chefer et al. ( Chefer et al., 2021 ) . Darker colors indicate a larger contribution to the embedding. The two profile statements annotated as relevant are marked with ▹ , and the antecedent of “it in the question is boxed.
Appendix figures & tables1 asset
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Query
NDCG@3
Δ
p
w/l/t
PCDR
33.1
—
—
—
Qwen3- 0.6 B rw.
11.7
−21.4
0.0001∗
3/23/18
Qwen3- 1.7 B rw.
20.8
−12.3
0.013
8/19/17
Qwen3- 4 B rw.
33.5
+0.4
0.60
16/11/17
Qwen3- 32 B rw.
36.1
+3.0
0.066
21/12/11
gpt-4o rw.
39.5
+6.5
0.10
17/14/13
Appendix
Table 8. PCDR versus PCQR with rewriters of different sizes, in NDCG@ 3 on the 44 held-out turns. Δ and p are computed against PCDR with a paired Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and ∗ indicates significance after Bonferroni correction. Rewriter rows are scored on an int8-quantized document index.
Long-term conversational agents are expected to remember past interactions, but memory is useful only when the right evidence is recalled for the right user. Existing memory-augmented LLM agents have made progress in building compact memory banks, yet retrieval is still often driven by query-centered similarity or fixed ranking rules, leaving user-conditioned relevance underexplored. To address this gap, we propose Profile-guided Personalized Retrieval Optimization (PPRO), a retrieval-centric framework that makes memory retrieval both user-aware and optimizable. PPRO builds episodic and semantic memory banks from dialogue histories and derives a user profile from accumulated memories. The profile serves as an explicit personalized prior in memory ranking, allowing retrieval to account for stable user attributes, preferences, and relationships. PPRO further trains a query rewriter with Group Relative Policy Optimization, using both evidence retrieval quality and downstream answer quality as feedback while keeping the memory banks and answer model fixed. Experiments on LoCoMo and LongMemEval-S show consistent gains over training-free memory systems and training-based baselines. Ablation studies further show that both profile-guided ranking and retrieval-oriented rewriting contribute substantially to performance, highlighting retrieval optimization as a key factor in personalized long-term memory use.
Personalized Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) relies on accurately selecting user-relevant documents. In practice, existing RAG approaches often suffer from high retrieval costs and overlook that collaborative signals from similar users can enhance personalized generation for the current user. We propose ClusterRAG, a Cluster-Based Collaborative Filtering for Personalized Retrieval-Augmented Generation. ClusterRAG represents users through their profile documents, organizes users into semantically coherent clusters using density-based clustering, and performs retrieval at both the cluster and document levels via cluster-level similarity and fine-grained ranking. Extensive experiments on the LaMP benchmark demonstrate that jointly leveraging the target user's profile and profiles from top similar users consistently yields the best performance across diverse tasks. Further analysis shows that ClusterRAG integrates seamlessly with different dense retrievers and rankers, and remains effective when paired with both fine-tuned and zero-shot language models.
Gibson Nkhata, Uttamasha Anjally Oyshi, Quan Mai +1
University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA · Walmart Inc., Bentonville, AR 72716, USA
Modern information retrieval (IR) is no longer consumed primarily by humans but increasingly by large language models (LLMs) via retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) and agentic search. Unlike human users, LLMs are constrained by limited attention budgets and are uniquely vulnerable to noise; misleading or irrelevant information is no longer just a nuisance, but a direct cause of hallucinations and reasoning failures. In this perspective paper, we argue that denoising-maximizing usable evidence density and verifiability within a context window-is becoming the primary bottleneck across the full information access pipeline. We conceptualize this paradigm shift through a four-stage framework of IR challenges: from inaccessible to undiscoverable, to misaligned, and finally to unverifiable. Furthermore, we provide a pipeline-organized taxonomy of signal-to-noise optimization techniques, spanning indexing, retrieval, context engineering, verification, and agentic workflow. We also present research works on information denoising in domains that rely heavily on retrieval such as lifelong assistant, coding agent, deep research, and multimodal understanding.
Lu Dai, Liang Sun, Fanpu Cao +4
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology · Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (Guangzhou)