tutorial

Fusion in Information Retrieval: SIGIR 2018 Half-Day Tutorial

Authors:

J. Shane CulpepperAuthors Info & Claims

SIGIR '18: The 41st International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research & Development in Information Retrieval

Pages 1383 - 1386

https://doi.org/10.1145/3209978.3210186

Published: 27 June 2018 Publication History

Abstract

Fusion is an important and central concept in Information Retrieval. The goal of fusion methods is to merge different sources of information so as to address a retrieval task. For example, in the adhoc retrieval setting, fusion methods have been applied to merge multiple document lists retrieved for a query. The lists could be retrieved using different query representations, document representations, ranking functions and corpora. The goal of this half day, intermediate-level, tutorial is to provide a methodological view of the theoretical foundations of fusion approaches, the numerous fusion methods that have been devised and a variety of applications for which fusion techniques have been applied.

References

[1]

N. Ailon . 2010. Aggregation of Partial Rankings, p-Ratings and Top-m Lists. Algorithmica, Vol. 57, 2 (2010), 284--300.

[2]

G. Amati, C. Carpineto, and G. Romano . 2004. Query difficulty, robustness, and selective application of query expansion Proc. SIGIR. 127--137.

[3]

Y. Anava, A. Shtok, O. Kurland, and E. Rabinovich . 2016. A Probabilistic Fusion Framework. In Proc. CIKM. 1463--1472.

Digital Library

[4]

A. Arampatzis and J. Kamps . 2009. A signal-to-noise approach to score normalization. Proc. CIKM. 797--806.

Digital Library

[5]

A. Arampatzis and S. Robertson . 2011. Modeling score distributions in information retrieval. Inf. Retr., Vol. 14, 1 (2011), 26--46.

Digital Library

[6]

J. A. Aslam and M. Montague . 2001. Models for metasearch Proc. SIGIR. 276--284.

Digital Library

[7]

J. A. Aslam and V. Pavlu . 2007. Query Hardness Estimation Using Jensen-Shannon Divergence Among Multiple Scoring Functions Proc. ECIR. 198--209.

Digital Library

[8]

J. A. Aslam, V. Pavlu, and R. Savell . 2003. A unified model for metasearch and the efficient evaluation of retrieval systems via the hedge algorithm. In Proc. SIGIR. 393--394.

Digital Library

[9]

J. A. Aslam, V. Pavlu, and E. Yilmaz . 2005. Measure-based Metasearch. In Proc. SIGIR. 571--572.

Digital Library

[10]

P. Bailey, A. Moffat, F. Scholer, and P. Thomas . 2016. UQV100: A test collection with query variability Proc. SIGIR. 725--728.

Digital Library

[11]

P. Bailey, A. Moffat, F. Scholer, and P. Thomas . 2017. Retrieval consistency in the presence of query variations Proc. SIGIR. 395--404.

Digital Library

[12]

N. Balasubramanian and J. Allan . 2010. Learning to select rankers. In Proc. SIGIR. 855--856.

Digital Library

[13]

J. Bartholdi, C. A. Tovey, and M. A. Trick . 1989. Voting schemes for which it can be difficult to tell who won the election. Social Choice and Welfare Vol. 6, 2 (1989), 157--165.

[14]

S. M. Beitzel, E. C. Jensen, A. Chowdhury, O. Frieder, D. A. Grossman, and N. Goharian . 2003. Disproving the Fusion Hypothesis: An Analysis of Data Fusion via Effective Information Retrieval Strategies. In Proc. SAC. 823--827.

Digital Library

[15]

S. M. Beitzel, E. C. Jensen, O. Frieder, A. Chowdhury, and G. Pass . 2005. Surrogate scoring for improved metasearch precision Proc. SIGIR. 583--584.

Digital Library

[16]

N. J. Belkin, C. Cool, W. B. Croft, and J. P. Callan . 1993. The Effect of Multiple Query Variations on Information Retrieval System Performance Proc. SIGIR. 339--346.

Digital Library

[17]

N. J. Belkin, P. Kantor, E. A. Fox, and J. A. Shaw . 1995. Combining the evidence of multiple query representations for information retrieval. Inf. Proc. & Man., Vol. 31, 3 (1995), 431--448.

Digital Library

[18]

R. Benham and J. S. Culpepper . 2017. Risk-reward Trade-offs in Rank Fusion. In Proc. ADCS. Article bibinfoarticleno1, bibinfonumpages1:1--1:8 pages.

Digital Library

[19]

R. Benham, L. Gallagher, J. Mackenzie, T. T. Damessie, R.-C. Chen, F. Scholer, A. Moffat, and J. S. Culpepper . 2017. RMIT at the TREC 2017 CORE Track. In Proc. TREC.

[20]

F. Brandt, V. Conitzer, U. Endriss, J. Lang, and A. D. Procaccia (Eds.). . 2016. Handbook of Computational Social Choice. Cambridge University Press.

Digital Library

[21]

C. Buckley, D. Dimmick, I. Soboroff, and E. M. Voorhees . 2007. Bias and the limits of pooling for large collections. Inf. Retr. (2007), 491--508.

Digital Library

[22]

C. Buckley and J. Walz . 1999. The TREC-8 query track. In Proc. TREC.

[23]

C. Burges . 2010. From ranknet to lambdarank to lambdamart: An overview. Learning, Vol. 11, 23--581 (2010), 81.

[24]

J. Callan . 2000. Distributed information retrieval. Advances in information retrieval, bibfieldeditorW.B. Croft (Ed.). Kluwer Academic Publishers, Chapter 5, 127--150.

[25]

B. Carterette, V. Pavlu, E. Kanoulas, J. A. Aslam, and J. Allan . 2008. Evaluation over thousands of queries. In Proc. SIGIR. 651--658.

Digital Library

[26]

R.-C. Chen, L. Gallagher, R. Blanco, and J. S. Culpepper . 2017. Efficient cost-aware cascade ranking in multi-stage retrieval Proc. SIGIR. 445--454.

Digital Library

[27]

F. M. Choudhury, Z. Bao, J. S. Culpepper, and T. Sellis . 2017. Monitoring the Top-m Rank Aggregation of Spatial Objects in Streaming Queries Proc. ICDE. 585--596.

[28]

K. Collins-Thompson and J. Callan . 2007. Estimation and use of uncertainty in pseudo-relevance feedback Proc. SIGIR. 303--310.

Digital Library

[29]

G. V. Cormack, C. L. A. Clarke, and S. Büttcher . 2009. Reciprocal rank fusion outperforms Condorcet and individual rank learning methods Proc. SIGIR. 758--759.

Digital Library

[30]

N. Craswell, D. Hawking, and P. B. Thistlewaite . 1999. Merging results from isolated search engines. In Proc. ADC. 189--200.

[31]

W. B. Croft (Ed.). . 2000 a. Advances in Information Retrieval: Recent Research from the Center for Intelligent Information Retrieval. Number 7 in The Kluwer International Series on Information Retrieval. Kluwer.

Digital Library

[32]

W. B. Croft . 2000 b. Combining approaches to information retrieval. See citeNCroft:00a, Chapter 1, 1--36.

[33]

S. Cronen-Townsend, Y. Zhou, and W. B. Croft . 2004. A Language Modeling Framework for Selective Query Expansion. Technical Report IR-338. Center for Intelligent Information Retrieval, University of Massachusetts.

[34]

J. C. de Borda . 1784. Mémoire sur les élections au scrutin. Histoire de l'Academie Royale des Sciences pour 1781 (Paris, 1784) (. 1784).

[35]

F. Diaz . 2007. Regularizing query-based retrieval scores. Inf. Retr., Vol. 10, 6 (2007), 531--562.

Digital Library

[36]

T. G Dietterich . 2000. Ensemble methods in machine learning. In International Workshop on Multiple Classifier Systems. Springer, 1--15.

Digital Library

[37]

B. T. Dinccer, C. Macdonald, and I. Ounis . 2014. Hypothesis testing for the risk-sensitive evaluation of retrieval systems Proc. SIGIR. 23--32.

Digital Library

[38]

C. Dwork, R. Kumar, M. Naor, and D. Sivakumar . 2001. Rank Aggregation Methods for the Web. In Proc. WWW. 613--622.

Digital Library

[39]

M. Efron . 2009. Generative model-based metasearch for data fusion in information retrieval Proc. JCDL. 153--162.

Digital Library

[40]

E. A. Fox and J. A. Shaw . 1994. Combination of multiple searches. In Proc. TREC.

[41]

H. D. Frank and I. Taksa . 2005. Comparing rank and score combination methods for data fusion in information retrieval. Inf. Retr., Vol. 8, 3 (2005), 449--480.

Digital Library

[42]

L. Gallagher, J. Mackenzie, R. Benham, R.-C. Chen, F. Scholer, and J. S. Culpepper . 2017. RMIT at the NTCIR-13 We Want Web task. Proc. NTCIR.

[43]

N. P. Gopalan and K. Batri . 2007. Adaptive Selection of Top- m Retrieval Strategies for Data Fusion in Information Retrieval. Intl. J. of Soft Computing Vol. 2, 1 (2007).

[44]

S. Huo, M. Zhang, Y. Liu, and S. Ma . 2014. Improving tail query performance by fusion model. Proc. CIKM. 559--658.

Digital Library

[45]

A. Juárez-González, M. Montes-y-Gómez, L. V. Pineda, and D. O. Arroyo . 2009. On the Selection of the Best Retrieval Result Per Query - An Alternative Approach to Data Fusion Proc. FQAS. 111--121.

Digital Library

[46]

A. Juárez-González, M. Montes-y-Gómez, L. V. Pineda, D. P. Avenda no, and M. A. Pérez-Couti no . 2010. Selecting the N-Top Retrieval Result Lists for an Effective Data Fusion Proc. CICLing. 580--589.

Digital Library

[47]

Y. Kim, J. Callan, J. S. Culpepper, and A. Moffat . 2017. Efficient distributed selective search. Inf. Retr., Vol. 20, 3 (2017), 221--252.

Digital Library

[48]

A. Klementiev, D. Roth, and K. Small . 2008. Unsupervised rank aggregation with distance-based models Proc. ICML. 472--479.

Digital Library

[49]

A. K. Kozorovitzky and O. Kurland . 2009. From "Identical" to "Similar": Fusing Retrieved Lists Based on Inter-document Similarities Proc. ICTIR. 212--223.

Digital Library

[50]

A. K. Kozorovitzky and O. Kurland . 2011 a. Cluster-based fusion of retrieved lists. In Proc. SIGIR. 893--902.

Digital Library

[51]

A. K. Kozorovitzky and O. Kurland . 2011 b. From "Identical" to "Similar": Fusing Retrieved Lists Based on Inter-document Similarities. J. of AI Res. Vol. 41 (2011).

Digital Library

[52]

K.-L. Kwok, L. Grunfeld, and P. Deng . 2005. Improving weak ad-hoc retrieval by web assistance and data fusion Proc. AIRS. 17--30.

Digital Library

[53]

M. Lalmas . 2002. A Formal Model for Data Fusion. In Proc. FQAS. 274--288.

Digital Library

[54]

G. Lebanon and J. D. Lafferty . 2002. Cranking: Combining Rankings Using Conditional Probability Models on Permutations Proc. ICML. 363--370.

Digital Library

[55]

C.-J. Lee, Q. Ai, W. B. Croft, and D. Sheldon . 2015. An Optimization Framework for Merging Multiple Result Lists Proc. CIKM. 303--312.

Digital Library

[56]

J. H. Lee . 1995. Combining multiple evidence from different properties of weighting schemes Proc. SIGIR. 180--188.

Digital Library

[57]

J. H. Lee . 1997. Analyses of multiple evidence combination. In Proc. SIGIR. 267--276.

Digital Library

[58]

O. Levi, F. Raiber, O. Kurland, and I. Guy . 2016. Selective Cluster-Based Document Retrieval. In Proc. CIKM. 1473--1482.

Digital Library

[59]

J. Li, C. Huang, X. Wang, and S Wu . 2015. Balancing efficiency and effectiveness for fusion-based search engines in the 'big data' environment. Information Research, 21(2), paper 710. (2015).

[60]

S. Liang and M. de Rijke . 2015. Burst-aware data fusion for microblog search. Inf. Proc. & Man., Vol. 51, 2 (2015), 89--113.

[61]

S. Liang, M. de Rijke, and M. Tsagkias . 2013. Late Data Fusion for Microblog Search. In Proc. ECIR. 743--746.

Digital Library

[62]

S. Liang, I. Markov, Z. Ren, and M. de Rijke . 2018. Manifold Learning for Rank Aggregation. In Proc. WWW. 1735--1744.

Digital Library

[63]

S. Liang, Z. Ren, and M. de Rijke . 2014 a. Fusion helps diversification. In Proc. SIGIR. 303--312.

Digital Library

[64]

S. Liang, Z. Ren, and M. de Rijke . 2014 b. The Impact of Semantic Document Expansion on Cluster-Based Fusion for Microblog Search Proc. ECIR. 493--499.

[65]

D. Lillis, F. Toolan, R. W. Collier, and J. Dunnion . 2006. ProbFuse: a probabilistic approach to data fusion. Proc. SIGIR. 139--146.

Digital Library

[66]

D. Lillis, F. Toolan, R. W. Collier, and J. Dunnion . 2008. Extending Probabilistic Data Fusion Using Sliding Windows Proc. ECIR. 358--369.

Digital Library

[67]

D. Lillis, L. Zhang, F. Toolan, R. W. Collier, D. Leonard, and J. Dunnion . 2010. Estimating Probabilities for Effective Data Fusion Proc. SIGIR. 347--354.

Digital Library

[68]

D. E. Losada, J. Parapar, and A. Barreiro . 2017. Multi-armed bandits for adjudicating documents in pooling-based evaluation of information retrieval systems. Inf. Proc. & Man., Vol. 53, 5 (2017), 1005--1025.

[69]

X. Lu, A. Moffat, and J. S. Culpepper . 2016 a. The effect of pooling and evaluation depth on IR metrics. Inf. Retr., Vol. 19, 4 (2016), 416--445.

Digital Library

[70]

X. Lu, A. Moffat, and J. S. Culpepper . 2016 b. Modeling relevance as a function of retrieval rank Proc. AIRS. 3--15.

[71]

X. Lu, A. Moffat, and J. S. Culpepper . 2017. Can deep effectiveness metrics be evaluated using shallow judgment pools? Proc. SIGIR. 35--44.

Digital Library

[72]

J. Mackenzie, F. M. Choudhury, and J. S. Culpepper . 2015. Efficient location-aware web search. In Proc. ADCS. 4.1--4.8.

Digital Library

[73]

R. Manmatha and H. Sever . 2002. A formal approach to score normalization for meta-search Proc. of HLT. 98--103.

Digital Library

[74]

I. Markov, A. Arampatzis, and F. Crestani . 2012. Unsupervised linear score normalization revisited. Proc. SIGIR. 1161--1162.

Digital Library

[75]

G. Markovits, A. Shtok, O. Kurland, and D. Carmel . 2012. Predicting query performance for fusion-based retrieval Proc. CIKM.

Digital Library

[76]

D. Metzler and W. B. Croft . 2005. A Markov random field model for term dependencies Proc. SIGIR. 472--479.

Digital Library

[77]

M. Montague and J. A. Aslam . 2002. Condorcet fusion for improved retrieval. In Proc. CIKM. 538--548.

Digital Library

[78]

M. H. Montague and J. A. Aslam . 2001. Relevance Score Normalization for Metasearch. In Proc. CIKM. 427--433.

Digital Library

[79]

A. Mourao, F. Martins, and J. Magalhaes . 2013. NovaSearch at TREC 2013 Federated Web Search Track: Experiments with rank fusion. Proc. TREC.

[80]

A. Mourao, F. Martins, and J. Magalhaes . 2014. Inverse square rank fusion for multimodal search. Proc. CBMI. 1--6.

[81]

K. B. Ng and P. P. Kantor . 1998. An Investigation of the Preconditions for Effective Data Fusion in Information Retrieval: A Pilot Study. (1998).

[82]

D. Parikh and R. Polikar . 2007. An ensemble-based incremental learning approach to data fusion. IEEE Trans. on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics), Vol. 37, 2 (2007), 437--450.

Digital Library

[83]

T. Qin, X. Geng, and T.-Y. Liu . 2010. A New Probabilistic Model for Rank Aggregation. In Proc. NIPS. 1948--1956.

Digital Library

[84]

E. Rabinovich, O. Rom, and O. Kurland . 2014. Utilizing relevance feedback in fusion-based retrieval Proc. SIGIR. 313--322.

Digital Library

[85]

F. Raiber and O. Kurland . 2014. Query-performance prediction: setting the expectations straight Proc. SIGIR. 13--22.

Digital Library

[86]

M. Sanderson . 2010. Test Collection Based Evaluation of Information Retrieval Systems. Found. Trends in Inf. Ret. Vol. 4, 4 (2010), 247--375.

[87]

S. B. Selvadurai . 2007. Implementing a metasearch framework with content-directed result merging. Master's thesis. bibinfoschoolNorth Carolina State University.

[88]

D. Sheldon, M. Shokouhi, M. Szummer, and N. Craswell . 2011. LambdaMerge: Merging the results of query reformulations Proc. WSDM. 795--804.

Digital Library

[89]

M. Shokouhi . 2007. Segmentation of Search Engine Results for Effective Data-Fusion Proc. ECIR. 185--197.

Digital Library

[90]

M. Shokouhi and L. Si . 2011. Federated Search. Found. Trends in Inf. Ret. Vol. 5, 1 (2011), 1--102.

Digital Library

[91]

X. M. Shou and M. Sanderson . 2002. Experiments on data fusion using headline information Proc. SIGIR. 413--414.

Digital Library

[92]

A. Shtok, O. Kurland, and D. Carmel . 2016. Query Performance Prediction Using Reference Lists. ACM Trans. Inf. Sys., Vol. 34, 4 (2016), 19:1--19:34.

Digital Library

[93]

S. Tulyakov, S. Jaeger, V. Govindaraju, and D. S. Doermann . 2008. Review of Classifier Combination Methods. Machine Learning in Document Analysis and Recognition. 361--386.

[94]

C. C. Vogt . 2000. How much more is better? Characterising the effects of adding more IR Systems to a combination. In Proc. RIAO. 457--475.

Digital Library

[95]

C. C. Vogt and G. W. Cottrell . 1998. Predicting the Performance of Linearly Combined IR Systems Proc. SIGIR. 190--196.

Digital Library

[96]

C. C. Vogt and G. W. Cottrell . 1999. Fusion via linear combination of scores. Inf. Retr., Vol. 1, 3 (1999), 151--173.

Digital Library

[97]

E. M. Voorhees and D. K. Harman . 2005. TREC: Experiment and Evaluation in Information Retrieval. The MIT Press.

Digital Library

[98]

W. Webber, A. Moffat, and J. Zobel . 2010. The Effect of Pooling and Evaluation Depth on Metric Stability Proc. EVIA. 7--15.

[99]

S. Wu . 2007. A Geometric probabilistic framework for data fusion in information retrieval Proc. FUSION. 1--8.

[100]

S. Wu . 2009. Applying statistical principles to data fusion in information retrieval. Expert Syst. Appl., Vol. 36, 2 (2009), 2997--3006.

Digital Library

[101]

S. Wu . 2012 a. Applying the data fusion technique to blog opinion retrieval. Expert Syst. Appl., Vol. 39, 1 (2012), 1346--1353.

Digital Library

[102]

S. Wu . 2012 b. Linear combination of component results in information retrieval. Data Knowl. Eng., Vol. 71, 1 (2012), 114--126.

Digital Library

[103]

S. Wu . 2013. The weighted Condorcet fusion in information retrieval. Inf. Proc.&Man., Vol. 49, 1 (2013), 108--122.

Digital Library

[104]

S. Wu, Y. Bi, and S. I. McClean . 2007. Regression Relevance Models for Data Fusion. In Proc. DEXA. 264--268.

Digital Library

[105]

S. Wu, Y. Bi, and X. Zeng . 2011. The Linear Combination Data Fusion Method in Information Retrieval Proc. DEXA. 219--233.

Digital Library

[106]

S. Wu, Y. Bi, X. Zeng, and L. Han . 2009. Assigning appropriate weights for the linear combination data fusion method in information retrieval. Inf. Proc. & Man., Vol. 45, 4 (2009), 413--426.

Digital Library

[107]

S. Wu and F. Crestani . 2002. Data fusion with estimated weights. In Proc. CIKM. 648--651.

Digital Library

[108]

S. Wu, F. Crestani, and Y. Bi . 2006. Evaluating Score Normalization Methods in Data Fusion Proc. AIRS. 642--648.

Digital Library

[109]

S. Wu and C. Huang . 2014. Search result diversification via data fusion. In Proc. SIGIR. 827--830.

Digital Library

[110]

S. Wu, J. Li, X. Zeng, and Y. Bi . 2014. Adaptive data fusion methods in information retrieval. JASIST, Vol. 65, 10 (2014), 2048--2061.

Digital Library

[111]

S. Wu and S. McClean . 2006. Performance prediction of data fusion for information retrieval. Inf. Proc. & Man., Vol. 42, 4 (2006), 899--915.

Digital Library

[112]

J. Xia, C. Xu, and S. Wu . 2016. Differential Evolution-Based Fusion and Its Properties for Web Search Proc. WISA. 67--70.

[113]

X. Xue and W. B. Croft . 2013. Modeling reformulation using query distributions. ACM Trans. Inf. Sys., Vol. 31, 2 (2013), 6:1--6:34.

Digital Library

[114]

M. Yasukawa, J. S. Culpepper, and F. Scholer . 2015. Data fusion for Japanese term and character n -gram search. Proc. ADCS. 10.1--10.4.

Digital Library

[115]

H. P. Young . 1988. Condorcet's theory of voting. American Political Science Review Vol. 82, 4 (1988), 1231--1244.

[116]

C. Zhang and Y. Ma . 2012. Ensemble machine learning: methods and applications. Springer.

Cited By

Khramtsova EZhuang SBaktashmotlagh MZuccon GHui Yang GWang HHan SHauff CZuccon GZhang Y(2024)Leveraging LLMs for Unsupervised Dense Retriever RankingProceedings of the 47th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval10.1145/3626772.3657798(1307-1317)Online publication date: 10-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3626772.3657798
Łajewska WBalog K(2024)Towards Reliable and Factual Response Generation: Detecting Unanswerable Questions in Information-Seeking ConversationsAdvances in Information Retrieval10.1007/978-3-031-56063-7_25(336-344)Online publication date: 23-Mar-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-56063-7_25
Abdullahi TMercurio LSingh REickhoff C(2023)Retrieval-based Diagnostic Decision Support (Preprint)JMIR Medical Informatics10.2196/50209Online publication date: 25-Jun-2023
https://doi.org/10.2196/50209
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Fusion in Information Retrieval: SIGIR 2018 Half-Day Tutorial
1. Information systems
  1. Information retrieval
    1. Retrieval models and ranking
      1. Rank aggregation

Recommendations

Cluster-based fusion of retrieved lists
SIGIR '11: Proceedings of the 34th international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in Information Retrieval

Methods for fusing document lists that were retrieved in response to a query often use retrieval scores (or ranks) of documents in the lists. We present a novel probabilistic fusion approach that utilizes an additional source of rich information, namely,...
Utilizing Pseudo-Relevance Feedback in Fusion-based Retrieval
ICTIR '18: Proceedings of the 2018 ACM SIGIR International Conference on Theory of Information Retrieval

The usage of positive relevance feedback in fusion-based retrieval was previously shown to be very useful. Yet, in many retrieval use-cases, no actual relevance feedback may be available. With the absence of relevance data, pseudo-relevance feedback ...
Utilizing relevance feedback in fusion-based retrieval
SIGIR '14: Proceedings of the 37th international ACM SIGIR conference on Research & development in information retrieval

Work on using relevance feedback for retrieval has focused on the single retrieved list setting. That is, an initial document list is retrieved in response to the query and feedback for the most highly ranked documents is used to perform a second ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

SIGIR '18: The 41st International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research & Development in Information Retrieval

June 2018

1509 pages

ISBN:9781450356572

DOI:10.1145/3209978

General Chairs:
Kevyn Collins-Thompson
University of Michigan, United States
,
Qiaozhu Mei
University of Michigan, United States
,
Program Chairs:
Brian Davison
Lehigh University, United States
,
Yiqun Liu
Tsinghua University, China
,
Emine Yilmaz
University College London, United Kingdom

Copyright © 2018 Owner/Author.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all 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 third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

Sponsors

SIGIR: ACM Special Interest Group on Information Retrieval

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 27 June 2018

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Tutorial

Funding Sources

ARC (Australian Research Council)

Conference

SIGIR '18

Sponsor:

SIGIR

SIGIR '18: The 41st International ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in Information Retrieval

July 8 - 12, 2018

MI, Ann Arbor, USA

Acceptance Rates

SIGIR '18 Paper Acceptance Rate 86 of 409 submissions, 21%;

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

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

18
Total Citations
View Citations
345
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)19
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

Reflects downloads up to 20 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Khramtsova EZhuang SBaktashmotlagh MZuccon GHui Yang GWang HHan SHauff CZuccon GZhang Y(2024)Leveraging LLMs for Unsupervised Dense Retriever RankingProceedings of the 47th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval10.1145/3626772.3657798(1307-1317)Online publication date: 10-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3626772.3657798
Łajewska WBalog K(2024)Towards Reliable and Factual Response Generation: Detecting Unanswerable Questions in Information-Seeking ConversationsAdvances in Information Retrieval10.1007/978-3-031-56063-7_25(336-344)Online publication date: 23-Mar-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-56063-7_25
Abdullahi TMercurio LSingh REickhoff C(2023)Retrieval-based Diagnostic Decision Support (Preprint)JMIR Medical Informatics10.2196/50209Online publication date: 25-Jun-2023
https://doi.org/10.2196/50209
Mothe JUllah M(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
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3608474
De Biasio AMonaro MOneto LBallan LNavarin N(2023)On the problem of recommendation for sensitive users and influential itemsKnowledge-Based Systems10.1016/j.knosys.2023.110699275:COnline publication date: 5-Sep-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.knosys.2023.110699
Zhang ZWu S(2023)Data Fusion Performance Prophecy: A Random Forest RevelationInformation Integration and Web Intelligence10.1007/978-3-031-48316-5_20(192-200)Online publication date: 22-Nov-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-48316-5_20
Yoshida MTanaka KYamamoto RIwata D(2023)Active Semantic Localization with Graph Neural EmbeddingPattern Recognition10.1007/978-3-031-47634-1_17(216-230)Online publication date: 5-Nov-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47634-1_17
Wagenpfeil SMc Kevitt PCheddad AHemmje M(2022)Explainable Multimedia Feature Fusion for Medical ApplicationsJournal of Imaging10.3390/jimaging80401048:4(104)Online publication date: 8-Apr-2022
https://doi.org/10.3390/jimaging8040104
Bassani ERomelli LAl Hasan MXiong L(2022)ranx.fuse: A Python Library for MetasearchProceedings of the 31st ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management10.1145/3511808.3557207(4808-4812)Online publication date: 17-Oct-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3511808.3557207
Roitero KChecco AMizzaro SDemartini G(2022)Preferences on a Budget: Prioritizing Document Pairs when Crowdsourcing Relevance JudgmentsProceedings of the ACM Web Conference 202210.1145/3485447.3511960(319-327)Online publication date: 25-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3485447.3511960
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten