[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
10.1145/2806416.2806483acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescikmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Behavioral Dynamics from the SERP's Perspective: What are Failed SERPs and How to Fix Them?

Published: 17 October 2015 Publication History

Abstract

Web search is always in a state of flux: queries, their intent, and the most relevant content are changing over time, in predictable and unpredictable ways. Modern search technology has made great strides in keeping up to pace with these changes, but there remain cases of failure where the organic search results on the search engine result page (SERP) are outdated, and no relevant result is displayed. Failing SERPs due to temporal drift are one of the greatest frustrations of web searchers, leading to search abandonment or even search engine switch. Detecting failed SERPs timely and providing access to the desired out-of-SERP results has huge potential to improve user satisfaction. Our main findings are threefold: First, we refine the conceptual model of behavioral dynamics on the web by including the SERP and defining (un)successful SERPs in terms of observable behavior. Second, we analyse typical patterns of temporal change and propose models to predict query drift beyond the current SERP, and ways to adapt the SERP to include the desired results. Third, we conduct extensive experiments on real world search engine traffic demonstrating the viability of our approach. Our analysis of behavioral dynamics at the SERP level gives new insight in one of the primary causes of search failure due to temporal query intent drifts. Our overall conclusion is that the most detrimental cases in terms of (lack of) user satisfaction lead to the largest changes in information seeking behavior, and hence to observable changes in behavior we can exploit to detect failure, and moreover not only detect them but also resolve them.

References

[1]
M. Ageev, Q. Guo, D. Lagun, and E. Agichtein. Find it if you can: a game for modeling different types of web search success using interaction data. In SIGIR, 2011.
[2]
E. Agichtein, E. Brill, and S. T. Dumais. Improving web search ranking by incorporating user behavior information. In SIGIR, pages 19--26, 2006.
[3]
A. Al-Maskari, M. Sanderson, and P. Clough. The relationship between ir effectiveness measures and user satisfaction. In SIGIR, pages 773--774, 2007.
[4]
J. Allan. Incremental relevance feedback for information filtering. In SIGIR, pages 270--278, 1996.
[5]
A. Arampatzis and A. van Hameran. The score-distributional threshold optimization for adaptive binary classification tasks. In SIGIR, pages 285--293, 2001.
[6]
A. Bifet and R. Gavaldá. Learning from time-changing data with adaptive windowing. In Proceedings of SIAM International Conference on Data Mining (SDM), 2007.
[7]
A. Chuklin and P. Serdyukov. How query extensions reflect search result abandonments. In Proceeding of SIGIR, pages 1087--1088, 2012.
[8]
A. Chuklin and P. Serdyukov. Good abandonments in factoid queries. In Proceeding of WWW (Companion Volume), pages 483--484, 2012.
[9]
N. Craswell, O. Zoeter, M. J. Taylor, and B. Ramsey. An experimental comparison of click position-bias models. In WSDM, pages 87--94, 2008.
[10]
N. Dai, M. Shokouhi, and B. D. Davison. Learning to rank for freshness and relevance. In Proceeding of SIGIR, pages 95--104, 2011.
[11]
A. Diriye, R. White, G. Buscher, and S. T. Dumais. Leaving so soon?: understanding and predicting web search abandonment rationales. In Proceeding of CIKM, pages 1025--1034, 2012.
[12]
A. Dong, Y. Chang, Z. Zheng, G. Mishne, J. Bai, R. Zhang, K. Buchner, and C. L. F. Diaz. Towards recency ranking in web search. In WSDM, pages 11--20, 2010.
[13]
A. Dong, R. Zhang, P. Kolari, J. Bai, F. Diaz, Y. Chang, Z. Zheng, and H. Zha. Time is of the essence: improving recency ranking using twitter data. In Proceeding of WWW, pages 331--340, 2010.
[14]
H. A. Feild, J. Allan, and R. Jones. Predicting searcher frustration. In SIGIR, pages 34--41, 2010.
[15]
J. Gama, I. Zliobaite, A. Bifet, M. Pechenizkiy, and A. Bouchachia. A survey on concept drift adaptation. ACM Computing Surveys, 46 (4): 44:1--44:37, 2014.
[16]
Q. Guo, R. W. White, Y. Zhang, B. Anderson, and S. T. Dumais. Why searchers switch: understanding and predicting engine switching rationales. In SIGIR, pages 335--344, 2011.
[17]
A. Hassan and R. W. White. Personalized models of search satisfaction. In CIKM, pages 2009--2018, 2013.
[18]
A. Hassan, R. Jones, and K. L. Klinkner. Beyond DCG: user behavior as a predictor of a successful search. In WSDM, pages 221--230, 2010.
[19]
S. Ieong, N. Mishra, E. Sadikov, and L. Zhang. Domain bias in web search. In Proceeding of WSDM, pages 55--64, 2012.
[20]
J. Jiang, A. H. Awadallah, X. Shi, and R. W. White. Understanding and predicting graded search satisfaction. In Proceeding of WSDM, 2015.
[21]
T. Joachims. Optimizing search engines using clickthrough data. In Proceeding of KDD, pages 133--142, 2002.
[22]
T. Joachims, L. Granka, B. Pan, H. Hembrooke, and G. Gay. Accurately interpreting clickthrough data as implicit feedback. In SIGIR, pages 154--161, 2005.
[23]
Y. Kim, A. Hassan, R. W. White, and I. Zitouni. Modeling dwell time to predict click-level satisfaction. In Proceedings of WSDM, pages 193--202, New York, NY, USA, 2014. ACM.
[24]
J. Kiseleva, E. Crestan, R. Brigo, and R. Dittel. Modelling and detecting changes in user satisfaction. In Proceeding of CIKM, pages 1449--1458, 2014.
[25]
A. Kulkarni, J. Teevan, K. M. Svore, and S. T. Dumais. Understanding temporal query dynamics. In WSDM, pages 167--176, 2011.
[26]
D. Lefortier, P. Serdyukov, and M. de Rijke. Online exploration for detecting shifts in fresh intent. In Proceeding of CIKM, pages 589--598, 2014.
[27]
K. Radinsky, S. Davidovich, and S. Markovitch. Predicting the news of tomorrow using patterns in web search queries. In WI, 2008.
[28]
K. Radinsky, K. Svore, S. T. Dumais, J. Teevan, A. Bocharov, and E. Horvitz. Modeling and predicting behavioral dynamics on the web. In WWW, pages 599--608, 2012.
[29]
K. Radinsky, K. M. Svore, S. T. Dumais, M. Shokouhi, J. Teevan, A. Bocharov, and E. Horvitz. Behavioral dynamics on the web: Learning, modeling, and prediction. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), 31 (3): 16, 2013.
[30]
J. C. Schlimmer and R. H. Granger. Beyond incremental processing: Tracking concept drift. In AAAI, 1986.
[31]
M. Shokouhi. Detecting seasonal queries by time-series analysis. In SIGIR, pages 1171--1172, 2011.
[32]
M. Shokouhi and K. Radinsky. Time-sensitive query auto-completion. In SIGIR, pages 601--610, 2012.
[33]
A. Shtok, O. Kurland, D. Carmel, F. Raiber, and G. Markovits. Predicting query performance by query-drift estimation. TOIS, 30: 11:1--11:35, 2012.
[34]
Y. Song, X. Shi, R. White, and A. H. Awadallah. Context-aware web search abandonment prediction. In Proceeding of SIGIR, pages 93--102, 2014.
[35]
R. W. White and S. T. Dumais. Characterizing and predicting search engine switching behavior. In CIKM, pages 87--96, 2009.
[36]
G. Widmer and M. Kubat. Learning in the presence of concept drift and hidden contexts. Machine Learning (ML), 23 (1): 69--101, 1996.
[37]
Y. Yue, R. Patel, and H. Roehrig. Beyond position bias: Examining result attractiveness as a source of presentation bias in clickthrough data. In WWW, pages 1011--1018, 2010.

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)Evaluating the Cranfield Paradigm for Conversational Search SystemsProceedings of the 2022 ACM SIGIR International Conference on Theory of Information Retrieval10.1145/3539813.3545126(275-280)Online publication date: 23-Aug-2022
  • (2018)Information Scent, Searching and StoppingAdvances in Information Retrieval10.1007/978-3-319-76941-7_16(210-222)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2018
  • (2016)Predicting User Satisfaction with Intelligent AssistantsProceedings of the 39th International ACM SIGIR conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval10.1145/2911451.2911521(45-54)Online publication date: 7-Jul-2016
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Behavioral Dynamics from the SERP's Perspective: What are Failed SERPs and How to Fix Them?

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CIKM '15: Proceedings of the 24th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management
      October 2015
      1998 pages
      ISBN:9781450337946
      DOI:10.1145/2806416
      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Sponsors

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 17 October 2015

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. concept drift
      2. information retrieval
      3. query reformulation

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Funding Sources

      • STW

      Conference

      CIKM'15
      Sponsor:

      Acceptance Rates

      CIKM '15 Paper Acceptance Rate 165 of 646 submissions, 26%;
      Overall Acceptance Rate 1,861 of 8,427 submissions, 22%

      Upcoming Conference

      CIKM '25

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)5
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
      Reflects downloads up to 10 Dec 2024

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2022)Evaluating the Cranfield Paradigm for Conversational Search SystemsProceedings of the 2022 ACM SIGIR International Conference on Theory of Information Retrieval10.1145/3539813.3545126(275-280)Online publication date: 23-Aug-2022
      • (2018)Information Scent, Searching and StoppingAdvances in Information Retrieval10.1007/978-3-319-76941-7_16(210-222)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2018
      • (2016)Predicting User Satisfaction with Intelligent AssistantsProceedings of the 39th International ACM SIGIR conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval10.1145/2911451.2911521(45-54)Online publication date: 7-Jul-2016
      • (2016)Understanding User Satisfaction with Intelligent AssistantsProceedings of the 2016 ACM on Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval10.1145/2854946.2854961(121-130)Online publication date: 13-Mar-2016
      • (2016)Contextual Search and ExplorationInformation Retrieval10.1007/978-3-319-41718-9_1(3-23)Online publication date: 26-Jul-2016

      View Options

      Login options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media