Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3234944.3234958acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesictirConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

A Formal Account of Effectiveness Evaluation and Ranking Fusion

Published: 10 September 2018 Publication History

Abstract

This paper proposes a theoretical framework which models the information provided by retrieval systems in terms of Information Theory. The proposed framework allows to formalize: (i) system effectiveness as an information theoretic similarity between system outputs and human assessments, and (ii) ranking fusion as an information quantity measure. As a result, the proposed effectiveness metric improves popular metrics in terms of formal constraints. In addition, our empirical experiments suggest that it captures quality aspects from traditional metrics, while the reverse is not true. Our work also advances the understanding of theoretical foundations of the empirically known phenomenon of effectiveness increase when combining retrieval system outputs in an unsupervised manner.

References

[1]
Enrique Amigó, Fernando Giner, Julio Gonzalo, and Felisa Verdejo . 2017. A Formal and Empirical Study of Unsupervised Signal Combination for Textual Similarity Tasks. In Proceedings of ECIR'17. 369--382.
[2]
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).
[3]
Enrique Amigó, Julio Gonzalo, and Felisa Verdejo . 2013. A General Evaluation Measure for Document Organization Tasks Proceedings of SIGIR'13. 643--652.
[4]
Enrique Amigó, Damiano Spina, and Jorge Carrillo-de Albornoz . 2018. An Axiomatic Analysis of Diversity Evaluation Metrics: Introducing the Rank-Biased Utility Metric. In Proceedings of SIGIR'18. 625--634.
[5]
Yael Anava, Anna Shtok, Oren Kurland, and Ella Rabinovich . 2016. A Probabilistic Fusion Framework. In Proceedings of CIKM'16. 1463--1472.
[6]
Javed A. Aslam and Robert Savell . 2003. On the Effectiveness of Evaluating Retrieval Systems in the Absence of Relevance Judgments. In Proceedings of SIGIR'03. 361--362.
[7]
David Austen-Smith and Jeffrey S. Banks . 1996. Information Aggregation, Rationality, and the Condorcet Jury Theorem. American Political Science Review Vol. 90, 1 (1996), 34--45.
[8]
Ashraf Bah Rabiou and Ben Carterette . 2016. A Probabilistic Data Fusion Framework for Retrieval and Ranking Proceedings of ICTIR'16. 31--39.
[9]
Luca Busin and Stefano Mizzaro . 2013. Axiometrics: An Axiomatic Approach to Information Retrieval Effectiveness Metrics Proceedings of ICTIR'13. 22--29.
[10]
Olivier Chapelle, Donald Metzler, Ya Zhang, and Pierre Grinspan . 2009. Expected Reciprocal Rank for Graded Relevance. In Proceedings of CIKM'09. 621--630.
[11]
Charles L.A. Clarke, Nick Craswell, and Ian Soboroff . 2004. Overview of the TREC 2004 Terabyte Track. In Proceedings of TREC'04.
[12]
Marquis de Condorcet . 1785. Essay on the Application of Analysis to the Probability of Majority Decisions. Paris: Imprimerie Royale (. 1785).
[13]
Wagner Teixeira da Silva and Ruy Luiz Milidiú . 1993. Belief Function Model for information retrieval. Journal of the American Society for Information Science Vol. 44, 1 (1993), 10--18.
[14]
Arthur P. Dempster . 1967. Upper and Lower Probabilities Induced by a Multivalued Mapping. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics (1967), 325--339.
[15]
Marco Ferrante, Nicola Ferro, and Maria Maistro . 2015. Towards a Formal Framework for Utility-oriented Measurements of Retrieval Effectiveness. In Proceedings of ICTIR'15. New York, NY, USA, 21--30.
[16]
Marco Ferrante, Nicola Ferro, and Silvia Pontarollo . 2018. A General Theory of IR Evaluation Measures. IEEE Trans. on Knowl. and Data Eng. (2018).
[17]
Peter B. Golbus, Javed A. Aslam, and Charles L. A. Clarke . 2013. Increasing Evaluation Sensitivity to Diversity. Inf. Retr. Vol. 16, 4 (2013), 530--555.
[18]
Lars K. Hansen and Peter Salamon . 1990. Neural Network Ensembles. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. Vol. 12, 10 (1990), 993--1001.
[19]
David A. Hull, Jan O. Pedersen, and Hinrich Schütze . 1996. Method Combination for Document Filtering. In Proceedings of SIGIR'96. 279--287.
[20]
Kalervo J"arvelin and Jaana Kek"al"ainen . 2002. Cumulated Gain-Based Evaluation of IR Techniques. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Vol. 20 (2002), 422--446.
[21]
Serguei Kaniovski and Alexander Zaigraev . 2011. Optimal Jury Design for Homogeneous Juries with Correlated Votes. Theory and Decision Vol. 71, 4 (2011), 439--459.
[22]
Anders Krogh and Jesper Vedelsby . 1995. Neural Network Ensembles, Cross Validation, and Active Learning Proceedings of NIPS'95. 231--238.
[23]
Mounia Lalmas and Ian Ruthven . 1998. Representing and Retrieving Structured Documents using the Dempster-Shafer Theory of Evidence: Modelling and Evaluation. Journal of Documentation Vol. 54, 5 (1998), 529--565.
[24]
Joon Ho Lee . 1995. Combining Multiple Evidence from Different Properties of Weighting Schemes Proceedings of SIGIR'95. 180--188.
[25]
Gad Markovits, Anna Shtok, Oren Kurland, and David Carmel . 2012. Predicting Query Performance for Fusion-based Retrieval Proceedings of CIKM'12. 813--822.
[26]
Ofer Matan . 1996. On Voting Ensembles of Classifiers. In Proceedings of AAAI-96 Workshop on Integrating Multiple Learned Models. 84--88.
[27]
Alistair Moffat and Justin Zobel . 2008. Rank-Biased Precision for Measurement of Retrieval Effectiveness. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Vol. 27, 1, Article bibinfoarticleno2 (2008), bibinfonumpages2:1--2:27 pages.
[28]
Mark H. Montague and Javed A. Aslam . 2002. Condorcet Fusion for Improved Retrieval. In Proceedings of CIKM'02. 538--548.
[29]
Rabia Nuray-Turan and Fazli Can . 2006. Automatic Ranking of Retrieval Systems using Fusion Data. Vol. 42 (05 . 2006), 595--614.
[30]
Glenn Shafer . 1976. A Mathematical Theory of Evidence. Vol. Vol. 42. Princeton University Press.
[31]
Claude E. Shannon . 1948. A Mathematical Theory of Communication. The Bell System Technical Journal Vol. 27, 3 (7 . 1948), 379--423.
[32]
Joseph A. Shaw, Edward A. Fox, Joseph A. Shaw, and Edward A. Fox . 1994. Combination of Multiple Searches. In Proceedings of TREC-2. 243--252.
[33]
Ian Soboroff, Charles Nicholas, and Patrick Cahan . 2001. Ranking Retrieval Systems without Relevance Judgments Proceedings of SIGIR'01. 66--73.
[34]
Cornelis J. van Rijsbergen . 1979. Information Retrieval (bibinfoedition2nd ed.). Butterworth-Heinemann.
[35]
Christopher C. Vogt and Garrison W. Cottrell . 1998. Predicting the Performance of Linearly Combined IR Systems Proceedings of SIGIR'98. 190--196.
[36]
Ellen M. Voorhees . 1999. The TREC-8 Question Answering Track Report. In Proceedings of TREC-8. 77--82.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)MileCut: A Multi-view Truncation Framework for Legal Case RetrievalProceedings of the ACM Web Conference 202410.1145/3589334.3645349(1341-1349)Online publication date: 13-May-2024
  • (2022)Ranking InterruptusProceedings of the 45th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval10.1145/3477495.3532051(588-598)Online publication date: 6-Jul-2022
  • (2021)Evaluating Relevance Judgments with Pairwise Discriminative PowerProceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management10.1145/3459637.3482428(261-270)Online publication date: 26-Oct-2021
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. A Formal Account of Effectiveness Evaluation and Ranking Fusion

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    ICTIR '18: Proceedings of the 2018 ACM SIGIR International Conference on Theory of Information Retrieval
    September 2018
    238 pages
    ISBN:9781450356565
    DOI:10.1145/3234944
    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: 10 September 2018

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. evaluation
    2. information theory
    3. ranking fusion

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Funding Sources

    Conference

    ICTIR '18
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    ICTIR '18 Paper Acceptance Rate 19 of 47 submissions, 40%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 235 of 527 submissions, 45%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)11
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
    Reflects downloads up to 02 Feb 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)MileCut: A Multi-view Truncation Framework for Legal Case RetrievalProceedings of the ACM Web Conference 202410.1145/3589334.3645349(1341-1349)Online publication date: 13-May-2024
    • (2022)Ranking InterruptusProceedings of the 45th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval10.1145/3477495.3532051(588-598)Online publication date: 6-Jul-2022
    • (2021)Evaluating Relevance Judgments with Pairwise Discriminative PowerProceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management10.1145/3459637.3482428(261-270)Online publication date: 26-Oct-2021
    • (2019)Integrating learned and explicit document features for reputation monitoring in social mediaKnowledge and Information Systems10.1007/s10115-019-01383-wOnline publication date: 19-Jul-2019

    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