In my experience, negative sampling is super application-dependent (esp for retrieval) sadly. FB had a paper discussing how they train a search retrieval model (no hard negatives), while amazon used hard negatives combined with easy negatives in product search (fb paper mentioned they tried this but it didn't help, but did some other stuff). Both of them use hinge loss, but other places use softmax more often. I'm a fan of random negatives (and distance weighted sampling), but eventually we found that mixed negatives + softmax with sample probability correction work a little better for a lot of cases.

One of the big challenges is that there are so many possible hyperparams here: do you concatenate negatives or sum losses, how many in-batch negatives do you use, if you have things that are from a different distribution that positives, can you use them as in-batch negatives, what's the ratio of in-batch to random negatives. And depending on the application, different configurations here can yield better or worse results.

Some not super-recent papers I can think of:

https://research.google/pubs/pub50257/

https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.07567

https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.14395

https://arxiv.org/abs/1907.00937 (3.2)

https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.11632 (2.2/2.4,6.1)

Sure, do you want something specific about the sampling stuff or ranking in general?