SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Gantala Thulsiram

Publications and source records attributed to Gantala Thulsiram.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Semantic Candidate-Job Matching: A Comparative Evaluation of Dense Embedding Models in Hybrid Retrieval

This paper presents a comparative evaluation of dense embedding models for semantic candidate-job matching in high-volume staffing workflows. Incoming job descriptions are converted into structured English search text and language-specific keywords through LLM-based parsing, and candidate profiles are indexed as semantically enriched resume representations. We evaluate EmbeddingGemma (base) against EmbeddingGemma fine-tuned with Cached Multiple Negatives Ranking Loss (MNRL) within a unified hybrid retrieval pipeline that fuses vector similarity and full-text relevance via reciprocal rank fusion (RRF), and benchmark both against the MPNet model on a batch comparative evaluation dataset scored through the deployed job-candidate matching scoring pipeline. We further document, with mathematical detail, the broader set of contrastive fine-tuning objectives considered during model development (including AnglE/CoSENT-style refinement) and the empirical rationale for retaining Cached-MNRL-only adaptation as the preferred configuration. To support reproducible model selection, we define a broader evaluation framework comprising standard information retrieval metrics (Recall@K, mean reciprocal rank, nDCG) under the exact hybrid-retrieval protocol; the metrics used for the evaluation reported in this paper are fine-tuning convergence diagnostics and a batch comparative evaluation using the deployed AI-Match score and an independent LLM-as-a-Judge relevance score, and we state this scope explicitly rather than implying the full framework was measured. The paper addresses the gap between general-purpose embedding benchmarks and enterprise job-candidate matching constraints, providing a structured basis for comparing embedding strategies under realistic job-candidate retrieval conditions.

cs.IR

Counterfactual Bias Testing for Application Tracking System

Automated candidate-job matching systems are increasingly classified as high-risk AI under emerging regulation, yet auditing them for demographic bias is expensive: classical correspondence-audit studies require hand-crafted resumes and manual submission, which does not scale to fast pipeline retraining cycles. This paper presents a general, reusable methodology that (1) uses task-specialized LLM agents to synthesize identity-neutral base resumes and inject controlled demographic treatments across five protected-characteristic axes (sex/gender, age, residence, language, disability), producing a K x (1+N) correspondence-audit matrix; (2) qualitatively flags inferred protected characteristics per an EU AI Act-aligned prompt; (3) ranks candidates against a job description via a fine-tuned sentence-embedding model and cosine similarity; and (4) computes a nine-metric fairness suite spanning counterfactual (score delta, mean absolute rank change, flip rate), group-fairness (top-K retention, four-fifths/impact ratio), and merit-aware (Recall@K, nDCG@K, equal opportunity, equalized odds) families, each with bootstrap confidence intervals, significance tests, and Benjamini-Hochberg correction, culminating in an automated PASS/INVESTIGATE/FAIL report with a composite risk score. On an example corpus of 5 job orders, 100 base candidates, and 10 demographic treatments (90 metric x variant evaluations): score shifts, top-K retention, and merit-aware rate gaps stay within tolerance for every treatment, but a rank-stability metric (MARC) and nDCG@K each surface borderline findings - including one on the neutral baseline itself - that a score- or retention-only view would miss. The results argue for multi-metric, multi-family auditing over any single aggregate score, and for LLM-agent-generated audits as a practical, low-cost complement to human-curated audits for any candidate-job matching pipeline.

cs.AI

Invoice Information Extraction: Methods and Performance Evaluation

This paper presents methods for extracting structured information from invoice documents and proposes a set of evaluation metrics (EM) to assess the accuracy of the extracted data against annotated ground truth. The approach involves pre-processing scanned or digital invoices, applying Docling and LlamaCloud Services to identify and extract key fields such as invoice number, date, total amount, and vendor details. To ensure the reliability of the extraction process, we establish a robust evaluation framework comprising field-level precision, consistency check failures, and exact match accuracy. The proposed metrics provide a standardized way to compare different extraction methods and highlight strengths and weaknesses in field-specific performance.

cs.AI