Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3539813.3545153acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesictirConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

On the Effect of Ranking Axioms on IR Evaluation Metrics

Published: 25 August 2022 Publication History

Abstract

The study of IR evaluation metrics through axiomatic analysis enables a better understanding of their numerical properties. Some works have modelled the effectiveness of retrieval metrics with axioms that capture desirable properties on the set of rankings of documents. This paper formally explores the effect of these ranking axioms on the numerical values of some IR evaluation metrics. It focuses on the set of ranked lists of documents with multigrade relevance. The possible orderings in this set are derived from three commonly accepted ranking axioms on retrieval metrics; then, they are classified by their latticial properties. When relevant documents are prioritised, a subset of document rankings are identified: the join-irreducible elements, which have some resemblance to the concept of basis in vector space. It is possible to compute the precision, recall, RBP or DCG values of any ranking from their values in the join-irreducible elements. However this is not the case when the swapping of documents is considered.

References

[1]
Enrique Amigó, Hui Fang, Stefano Mizzaro, and ChengXiang Zhai. 2017. Axiomatic thinking for information retrieval: And related tasks. In Proceedings of the 40th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval. 1419--1420.
[2]
Enrique Amigó, Hui Fang, Stefano Mizzaro, and Chengxiang Zhai. 2020. Axiomatic thinking for information retrieval: introduction to special issue. Information Retrieval Journal 23, 3 (2020), 187--190.
[3]
Enrique Amigó, Fernando Giner, Julio Gonzalo, and Felisa Verdejo. 2017. An axiomatic account of similarity. In Proceedings of the SIGIR'17 Workshop on Axiomatic Thinking for Information Retrieval and Related Tasks (ATIR).
[4]
Enrique Amigó, Julio Gonzalo, Javier Artiles, and Felisa Verdejo. 2009. A comparison of extrinsic clustering evaluation metrics based on formal constraints. Information retrieval 12, 4 (2009), 461--486.
[5]
Enrique Amigó, Julio Gonzalo, and Felisa Verdejo. 2013. A general evaluation measure for document organization tasks. In Proceedings of the 36th international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval. 643-- 652.
[6]
Enrique Amigó and Stefano Mizzaro. 2020. On the nature of information access evaluation metrics: a unifying framework. Information Retrieval Journal 23, 3 (2020), 318--386.
[7]
Enrique Amigó, Damiano Spina, and Jorge Carrillo-de Albornoz. 2018. An axiomatic analysis of diversity evaluation metrics: Introducing the rank-biased utility metric. In The 41st International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research & Development in Information Retrieval. 625--634.
[8]
Garrett Birkhoff. 1940. Lattice theory. Vol. 25. American Mathematical Soc.
[9]
David C. Blair. 1979. Information Retrieval, 2nd ed. C.J. Van Rijsbergen. London: Butterworths; 1979: 208 pp. Price: $32.50. JASIS 30, 6 (1979), 374--375. https: //doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630300621
[10]
TS Blyth. 2005. Distributive lattices. Lattices and Ordered Algebraic Structures (2005), 65--76.
[11]
Peter Bollmann. 1984. Two axioms for evaluation measures in information retrieval. In SIGIR, Vol. 84. Citeseer, 233--245.
[12]
Peter Bollmann and Vladimir S. Cherniavsky. 1980. Measurement-theoretical investigation of the MZ-metric. In Proceedings of the 3rd annual ACM conference on Research and development in information retrieval. Citeseer, 256--267.
[13]
Luca Busin and Stefano Mizzaro. 2013. Axiometrics: An axiomatic approach to information retrieval effectiveness metrics. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on the Theory of Information Retrieval. 22--29.
[14]
Ben Carterette. 2011. System effectiveness, user models, and user utility: a conceptual framework for investigation. In Proceedings of the 34th international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval. 903-- 912.
[15]
Cyril Cleverdon. 1967. The Cranfield tests on index language devices. In Aslib proceedings, Vol. 19. MCB UP Ltd, 173--194.
[16]
Stéphane Clinchant and Eric Gaussier. 2011. Is document frequency important for PRF?. In Conference on the theory of information retrieval. Springer, 89--100.
[17]
Stéphane Clinchant and Eric Gaussier. 2013. A theoretical analysis of pseudorelevance feedback models. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on the Theory of Information Retrieval. 6--13.
[18]
Byron E Dom. 2012. An information-theoretic external cluster-validity measure. arXiv preprint arXiv:1301.0565 (2012).
[19]
Hui Fang. 2007. An axiomatic approach to information retrieval. Technical Report.
[20]
Hui Fang, Tao Tao, and ChengXiang Zhai. 2004. A formal study of information retrieval heuristics. In Proceedings of the 27th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval. 49--56.
[21]
Hui Fang, Tao Tao, and Chengxiang Zhai. 2011. Diagnostic evaluation of information retrieval models. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS) 29, 2 (2011), 1--42.
[22]
Hui Fang and ChengXiang Zhai. 2005. An exploration of axiomatic approaches to information retrieval. In Proceedings of the 28th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval. 480--487.
[23]
Hui Fang and ChengXiang Zhai. 2006. Semantic term matching in axiomatic approaches to information retrieval. In Proceedings of the 29th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval. 115-- 122.
[24]
Marco Ferrante, Nicola Ferro, and Norbert Fuhr. 2021. Towards Meaningful Statements in IR Evaluation. Mapping Evaluation Measures to Interval Scales. arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.02668 (2021).
[25]
Marco Ferrante, Nicola Ferro, and Maria Maistro. 2015. Towards a formal framework for utility-oriented measurements of retrieval effectiveness. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on The Theory of Information Retrieval. 21--30.
[26]
Marco Ferrante, Nicola Ferro, and Silvia Pontarollo. 2018. A general theory of IR evaluation measures. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 31, 3 (2018), 409--422.
[27]
Norbert Fuhr. 2021. Proof by experimentation? towards better IR research. In ACM SIGIR Forum, Vol. 54. ACM New York, NY, USA, 1--4.
[28]
George Grätzer. 2002. General lattice theory. Springer Science & Business Media.
[29]
Matthias Hagen, Michael Völske, Steve Göring, and Benno Stein. 2016. Axiomatic result re-ranking. In Proceedings of the 25th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. 721--730.
[30]
Theodorus Wilhelmus Charles Huibers. 1996. An axiomatic theory for information retrieval. Ph. D. Dissertation.
[31]
Maryam Karimzadehgan and ChengXiang Zhai. 2012. Axiomatic analysis of translation language model for information retrieval. In European Conference on Information Retrieval. Springer, 268--280.
[32]
Jaana Kekäläinen and Kalervo Järvelin. 2002. Using graded relevance assessments in IR evaluation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 53, 13 (2002), 1120--1129.
[33]
David Krantz, Duncan Luce, Patrick Suppes, and Amos Tversky. 1971. Foundations of measurement, Vol. I: Additive and polynomial representations. (1971).
[34]
David H Krantz. 1989. Foundations of Measurement. Vol. II. Geometrical, Threshold and Probabilistic Representations. (1989).
[35]
Eddy Maddalena and Stefano Mizzaro. 2014. Axiometrics: Axioms of Information Retrieval Effectiveness Metrics. In EVIA@ NTCIR.
[36]
Marina Meil. 2007. Comparing clusterings-an information based distance. Journal of multivariate analysis 98, 5 (2007), 873--895.
[37]
Alistair Moffat. 2013. Seven numeric properties of effectiveness metrics. In Asia Information Retrieval Symposium. Springer, 1--12.
[38]
Alistair Moffat, Paul Thomas, and Falk Scholer. 2013. Users versus models: What observation tells us about effectiveness metrics. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM international conference on Information & Knowledge Management. 659--668.
[39]
Alistair Moffat and Justin Zobel. 2008. Rank-biased precision for measurement of retrieval effectiveness. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS) 27, 1 (2008), 1--27.
[40]
Ali Montazeralghaem, Hamed Zamani, and Azadeh Shakery. 2016. Axiomatic analysis for improving the log-logistic feedback model. In Proceedings of the 39th International ACM SIGIR conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 765--768.
[41]
Razieh Rahimi, Ali Montazeralghaem, and Azadeh Shakery. 2020. An axiomatic approach to corpus-based cross-language information retrieval. Information Retrieval Journal 23, 3 (2020), 191--215.
[42]
Fred S Roberts. 1985. Measurement theory. Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its applications 7 (1985).
[43]
Andrew Rosenberg and Julia Hirschberg. 2007. V-measure: A conditional entropybased external cluster evaluation measure. In Proceedings of the 2007 joint conference on empirical methods in natural language processing and computational natural language learning (EMNLP-CoNLL). 410--420.
[44]
Corby Rosset, Bhaskar Mitra, Chenyan Xiong, Nick Craswell, Xia Song, and Saurabh Tiwary. 2019. An axiomatic approach to regularizing neural ranking models. In Proceedings of the 42nd international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval. 981--984.
[45]
Gian-Carlo Rota. 1971. On the combinatorics of the Euler characteristic. In Studies in Pure Mathematics (Presented to Richard Rado). Academic Press London, 221--233.
[46]
Tetsuya Sakai. 2021. On Fuhr's guideline for IR evaluation. In ACM SIGIR Forum, Vol. 54. ACM New York, NY, USA, 1--8.
[47]
Tetsuya Sakai and Noriko Kando. 2008. On information retrieval metrics designed for evaluation with incomplete relevance assessments. Information Retrieval 11, 5 (2008), 447--470.
[48]
Fabrizio Sebastiani. 2015. An axiomatically derived measure for the evaluation of classification algorithms. In Proceedings of the 2015 international conference on the theory of information retrieval. 11--20.
[49]
Fabrizio Sebastiani. 2020. Evaluation measures for quantification: An axiomatic approach. Information Retrieval Journal 23, 3 (2020), 255--288.
[50]
Marina Sokolova. 2006. Assessing invariance properties of evaluation measures. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Testing of Deployable Learning and Decision Systems, the 19th Neural Information Processing Systems Conference (NIPS 2006).
[51]
John A Swets. 1963. Information retrieval systems. Science 141, 3577 (1963), 245--250.
[52]
Cornelis Joost Van Rijsbergen. 1974. Foundation of evaluation. Journal of documentation 30, 4 (1974), 365--373.
[53]
Michael Völske, Alexander Bondarenko, Maik Fröbe, Benno Stein, Jaspreet Singh, Matthias Hagen, and Avishek Anand. 2021. Towards Axiomatic Explanations for Neural Ranking Models. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM SIGIR International Conference on Theory of Information Retrieval. 13--22.
[54]
YY Yao. 1995. Measuring retrieval effectiveness based on user preference of documents. Journal of the American Society for Information science 46, 2 (1995), 133--145.
[55]
ChengXiang Zhai and Hui Fang. 2013. Axiomatic analysis and optimization of information retrieval models. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on the Theory of Information Retrieval. 3--3.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)How much freedom does an effectiveness metric really have?Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology10.1002/asi.2487475:6(686-703)Online publication date: 15-Feb-2024
  • (2023)Electronic Waste Collection Incentivization Scheme Based on the BlockchainSustainability10.3390/su15131020915:13(10209)Online publication date: 27-Jun-2023

Index Terms

  1. On the Effect of Ranking Axioms on IR Evaluation Metrics

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    ICTIR '22: Proceedings of the 2022 ACM SIGIR International Conference on Theory of Information Retrieval
    August 2022
    289 pages
    ISBN:9781450394123
    DOI:10.1145/3539813
    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: 25 August 2022

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. evaluation metric
    2. information retrieval
    3. lattice theory

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Conference

    ICTIR '22
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    ICTIR '22 Paper Acceptance Rate 32 of 80 submissions, 40%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 235 of 527 submissions, 45%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)12
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)4
    Reflects downloads up to 02 Feb 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)How much freedom does an effectiveness metric really have?Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology10.1002/asi.2487475:6(686-703)Online publication date: 15-Feb-2024
    • (2023)Electronic Waste Collection Incentivization Scheme Based on the BlockchainSustainability10.3390/su15131020915:13(10209)Online publication date: 27-Jun-2023

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Figures

    Tables

    Media

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media