[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
10.1145/2348283.2348385acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesirConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Robust ranking models via risk-sensitive optimization

Published: 12 August 2012 Publication History

Abstract

Many techniques for improving search result quality have been proposed. Typically, these techniques increase average effectiveness by devising advanced ranking features and/or by developing sophisticated learning to rank algorithms. However, while these approaches typically improve average performance of search results relative to simple baselines, they often ignore the important issue of robustness. That is, although achieving an average gain overall, the new models often hurt performance on many queries. This limits their application in real-world retrieval scenarios. Given that robustness is an important measure that can negatively impact user satisfaction, we present a unified framework for jointly optimizing effectiveness and robustness. We propose an objective that captures the tradeoff between these two competing measures and demonstrate how we can jointly optimize for these two measures in a principled learning framework. Experiments indicate that ranking models learned this way significantly decreased the worst ranking failures while maintaining strong average effectiveness on par with current state-of-the-art models.

References

[1]
P. N. Bennett, F. Radlinski, R. W. White, and E. Yilmaz. Inferring and using location metadata to personalize web search. In SIGIR, pages 135--144, 2011.
[2]
R. Bhattacharjee and A. Goel. Algorithms and incentives for robust ranking. In SODA 2007.
[3]
J. Bian, X. Li, F. Li, Z. Zheng, and H. Zha. Ranking specialization for web search: a divide-and-conquer approach by using topical ranksvm. In WWW, pages 131--140, 2010.
[4]
J. Bian, T.-Y. Liu, T. Qin, and H. Zha. Ranking with query-dependent loss for web search. In WSDM, pages 141--150, 2010.
[5]
C. Burges, T. Shaked, E. Renshaw, A. Lazier, M. Deeds, N. Hamilton, and G. Hullender. Learning to rank using gradient descent. In ICML, pages 89--96, 2005.
[6]
C. J. C. Burges. From RankNet to LambdaRank to LambdaMART: An Overview. Technical report, Microsoft Research, 2010.
[7]
C. J. C. Burges, R. Ragno, and Q. V. Le. Learning to Rank with Nonsmooth Cost Functions. In NIPS, pages 193--200. MIT Press, 2006.
[8]
S. Büttcher, C. L. A. Clarke, and B. Lushman. Term proximity scoring for ad-hoc retrieval on very large text collections. In SIGIR, pages 621--622, 2006.
[9]
O. Chapelle and Y. Chang. Yahoo! learning to rank challenge overview. Journal of Machine Learning Research - Proceedings Track, 14:1--24, 2011.
[10]
K. Collins-Thompson. Reducing the risk of query expansion via robust constrained optimization. In CIKM 2009, pages 837--846.
[11]
K. Collins-Thompson, P. N. Bennett, R. W. White, S. de la Chica, and D. Sontag. Personalizing web search results by reading level. In CIKM, pages 403--412, 2011.
[12]
S. Cronen-Townsend, Y. Zhou, and W. B. Croft. Predicting query performance. In SIGIR, pages 299--306.
[13]
N. Dai, M. Shokouhi, and B. D. Davison. Learning to rank for freshness and relevance. In SIGIR, pages 95--104, 2011.
[14]
P. Donmez, K. M. Svore, and C. J. C. Burges. On the local optimality of lambdarank. In SIGIR, pages 460--467, 2009.
[15]
Z. Dou, R. Song, and J.-R. Wen. A large-scale evaluation and analysis of personalized search strategies. In WWW, pages 581--590, 2007.
[16]
E. N. Efthimiadis. Chapter: Query expansion. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 31:121--187, 1996.
[17]
J. H. Friedman. Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine. Annals of Statistics, 29:1189--1232, 2000.
[18]
X. Geng, T.-Y. Liu, T. Qin, A. Arnold, H. Li, and H.-Y. Shum. Query dependent ranking using k-nearest neighbor. In SIGIR, pages 115--122, 2008.
[19]
F. Gey. Inferring probability of relevance using the method of logistic regression. In Proc. 17th SIGIR Conference, 1994.
[20]
Q. Guo, R. W. White, S. Dumais, J. Wang, and B. Anderson. Predicting query performance using query, result, and user interaction features. In RIAO, 2010.
[21]
C. Hauff, D. Hiemstra, and F. de Jong. A survey of pre-retrieval query performance predictors. In CIKM, pages 1419--1420, 2008.
[22]
C. Kang, X. Wang, J. Chen, C. Liao, Y. Chang, B. L. Tseng, and Z. Zheng. Learning to re-rank web search results with multiple pairwise features. In WSDM'11, pages 735--744, 2011.
[23]
B. Knijnenburg, M. C. Willemsen, Z. Gantner, H. Soncu, and C. Newell. Explaining the user experience of recommender systems. J. of User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction (UMUAI), 22, 2011.
[24]
F. Li, X. Li, S. Ji, and Z. Zheng. Comparing both relevance and robustness in selection of web ranking functions. In SIGIR '09, pages 648--649, 2009.
[25]
T.-Y. Liu. Learning to rank for information retrieval. Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval, 3(3), 2009.
[26]
Y. Lv, C. Zhai, and W. Chen. A boosting approach to improving pseudo-relevance feedback. In SIGIR, pages 165--174, 2011.
[27]
D. Metzler and W. B. Croft. A Markov Random Field model for term dependencies. In Proc. 28th SIGIR Conference, pages 472--479, 2005.
[28]
J. Ponte and W. B. Croft. A language modeling approach to information retrieval. In Proc. 21st SIGIR Conference, pages 275--281, 1998.
[29]
S. Robertson, S. Walker, S. Jones, M. M. Hancock-Beaulieu, and M. Gatford. Okapi at TREC-3. In Proc. 3rd TREC Conference, pages 109--126, 1994.
[30]
R. Steuer. Multiple Criteria Optimization: Theory, Computation and Application. John Wiley, 1986.
[31]
K. M. Svore, M. N. Volkovs, and C. J. Burges. Learning to rank with multiple objective functions. In WWW, pages 367--376, 2011.
[32]
T. Tao and C. Zhai. An exploration of proximity measures in information retrieval. In Proc. 30th SIGIR Conference, 2007.
[33]
J. Teevan, S. T. Dumais, and E. Horvitz. Potential for personalization. ACM TOCHI, 17(1), 2010.
[34]
E. M. Voorhees. The trec robust retrieval track. SIGIR Forum, 39(1):11--20, June 2005.
[35]
J. Wang and J. Zhu. Portfolio theory of information retrieval. In SIGIR. ACM, 2009.
[36]
R. W. White, P. N. Bennett, and S. T. Dumais. Predicting short-term interests using activity-based search context. In CIKM, pages 1009--1018, 2010.
[37]
Q. Wu, C. J. Burges, K. M. Svore, and J. Gao. Adapting boosting for information retrieval measures. Information Retrieval, 13:254--270, June 2010.
[38]
Y. Zhou and W. B. Croft. Query performance prediction in web search environments. In Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pages 543--550, 2007.
[39]
J. Zhu, J. Wang, I. J. Cox, and M. J. Taylor. Risky business: modeling and exploiting uncertainty in information retrieval. In SIGIR. ACM, 2009.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Pessimistic EvaluationProceedings of the 2024 Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval in the Asia Pacific Region10.1145/3673791.3698428(115-124)Online publication date: 8-Dec-2024
  • (2023)Distributionally-Informed Recommender System EvaluationACM Transactions on Recommender Systems10.1145/36134552:1(1-27)Online publication date: 5-Aug-2023
  • (2023)Selective Query Processing: A Risk-Sensitive Selection of Search ConfigurationsACM Transactions on Information Systems10.1145/360847442:1(1-35)Online publication date: 21-Aug-2023
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Robust ranking models via risk-sensitive optimization

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    SIGIR '12: Proceedings of the 35th international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval
    August 2012
    1236 pages
    ISBN:9781450314725
    DOI:10.1145/2348283
    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 ACM 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: 12 August 2012

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. machine learning
    2. re-ranking
    3. robust algorithms

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Conference

    SIGIR '12
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 792 of 3,983 submissions, 20%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)18
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
    Reflects downloads up to 30 Dec 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Pessimistic EvaluationProceedings of the 2024 Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval in the Asia Pacific Region10.1145/3673791.3698428(115-124)Online publication date: 8-Dec-2024
    • (2023)Distributionally-Informed Recommender System EvaluationACM Transactions on Recommender Systems10.1145/36134552:1(1-27)Online publication date: 5-Aug-2023
    • (2023)Selective Query Processing: A Risk-Sensitive Selection of Search ConfigurationsACM Transactions on Information Systems10.1145/360847442:1(1-35)Online publication date: 21-Aug-2023
    • (2023)Post-hoc Selection of Pareto-Optimal Solutions in Search and RecommendationProceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management10.1145/3583780.3615010(2013-2023)Online publication date: 21-Oct-2023
    • (2023)Multi-Label Learning to Rank through Multi-Objective OptimizationProceedings of the 29th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining10.1145/3580305.3599870(4605-4616)Online publication date: 6-Aug-2023
    • (2022)Risk-Sensitive Deep Neural Learning to RankProceedings of the 45th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval10.1145/3477495.3532056(803-813)Online publication date: 6-Jul-2022
    • (2022)Managing Digital Platforms with Robust Multi-Sided Recommender SystemsJournal of Management Information Systems10.1080/07421222.2022.212744039:4(938-968)Online publication date: 11-Dec-2022
    • (2022)A bias–variance evaluation framework for information retrieval systemsInformation Processing and Management: an International Journal10.1016/j.ipm.2021.10274759:1Online publication date: 1-Jan-2022
    • (2021)Defining an Optimal Configuration Set for Selective Search Strategy - A Risk-Sensitive ApproachProceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management10.1145/3459637.3482422(1335-1345)Online publication date: 26-Oct-2021
    • (2021)Machine Learning-Based Classification of Academic Performance via Imaging SensorsIEEE Sensors Journal10.1109/JSEN.2020.304318921:22(24952-24958)Online publication date: 15-Nov-2021
    • Show More Cited By

    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