Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userLearning to Rank Academic Experts in the DBLP Dataset
172
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Catarina Moreira
Publication date
2015
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Expert finding is an information retrieval task that is concerned with the search for the most knowledgeable people with respect to a specific topic, and the search is based on documents that describe peoples activities. The task involves taking a user query as input and returning a list of people who are sorted by their level of expertise with respect to the user query. Despite recent interest in the area, the current state-of-the-art techniques lack in principled approaches for optimally combining different sources of evidence. This article proposes two frameworks for combining multiple estimators of expertise. These estimators are derived from textual contents, from graph-structure of the citation patterns for the community of experts, and from profile information about the experts. More specifically, this article explores the use of supervised learning to rank methods, as well as rank aggregation approaches, for combing all of the estimators of expertise. Several supervised learning algorithms, which are representative of the pointwise, pairwise and listwise approaches, were tested, and various state-of-the-art data fusion techniques were also explored for the rank aggregation framework. Experiments that were performed on a dataset of academic publications from the Computer Science domain attest the adequacy of the proposed approaches.
rate research
Read More
The task of expert finding has been getting increasing attention in information retrieval literature. However, the current state-of-the-art is still lacking in principled approaches for combining different sources of evidence in an optimal way. This paper explores the usage of learning to rank methods as a principled approach for combining multiple estimators of expertise, derived from the textual contents, from the graph-structure with the citation patterns for the community of experts, and from profile information about the experts. Experiments made over a dataset of academic publications, for the area of Computer Science, attest for the adequacy of the proposed approaches.
How to obtain an unbiased ranking model by learning to rank with biased user feedback is an important research question for IR. Existing work on unbiased learning to rank (ULTR) can be broadly categorized into two groups -- the studies on unbiased learning algorithms with logged data, namely the textit{offline} unbiased learning, and the studies on unbiased parameters estimation with real-time user interactions, namely the textit{online} learning to rank. While their definitions of textit{unbiasness} are different, these two types of ULTR algorithms share the same goal -- to find the best models that rank documents based on their intrinsic relevance or utility. However, most studies on offline and online unbiased learning to rank are carried in parallel without detailed comparisons on their background theories and empirical performance. In this paper, we formalize the task of unbiased learning to rank and show that existing algorithms for offline unbiased learning and online learning to rank are just the two sides of the same coin. We evaluate six state-of-the-art ULTR algorithms and find that most of them can be used in both offline settings and online environments with or without minor modifications. Further, we analyze how different offline and online learning paradigms would affect the theoretical foundation and empirical effectiveness of each algorithm on both synthetic and real search data. Our findings could provide important insights and guideline for choosing and deploying ULTR algorithms in practice.
Online Learning to Rank (OL2R) algorithms learn from implicit user feedback on the fly. The key of such algorithms is an unbiased estimation of gradients, which is often (trivially) achieved by uniformly sampling from the entire parameter space. This unfortunately introduces high-variance in gradient estimation, and leads to a worse regret of model estimation, especially when the dimension of parameter space is large. In this paper, we aim at reducing the variance of gradient estimation in OL2R algorithms. We project the selected updating direction into a space spanned by the feature vectors from examined documents under the current query (termed the document space for short), after interleaved test. Our key insight is that the result of interleaved test solely is governed by a users relevance evaluation over the examined documents. Hence, the true gradient introduced by this test result should lie in the constructed document space, and components orthogonal to the document space in the proposed gradient can be safely removed for variance reduction. We prove that the projected gradient is an unbiased estimation of the true gradient, and show that this lower-variance gradient estimation results in significant regret reduction. Our proposed method is compatible with all existing OL2R algorithms which rank documents using a linear model. Extensive experimental comparisons with several state-of-the-art OL2R algorithms have confirmed the effectiveness of our proposed method in reducing the variance of gradient estimation and improving overall performance.
Ranked search results have become the main mechanism by which we find content, products, places, and people online. Thus their ordering contributes not only to the satisfaction of the searcher, but also to career and business opportunities, educational placement, and even social success of those being ranked. Researchers have become increasingly concerned with systematic biases in data-driven ranking models, and various post-processing methods have been proposed to mitigate discrimination and inequality of opportunity. This approach, however, has the disadvantage that it still allows an unfair ranking model to be trained. In this paper we explore a new in-processing approach: DELTR, a learning-to-rank framework that addresses potential issues of discrimination and unequal opportunity in rankings at training time. We measure these problems in terms of discrepancies in the average group exposure and design a ranker that optimizes search results in terms of relevance and in terms of reducing such discrepancies. We perform an extensive experimental study showing that being colorblind can be among the best or the worst choices from the perspective of relevance and exposure, depending on how much and which kind of bias is present in the training set. We show that our in-processing method performs better in terms of relevance and exposure than a pre-processing and a post-processing method across all tested scenarios.
Interpretability of learning-to-rank models is a crucial yet relatively under-examined research area. Recent progress on interpretable ranking models largely focuses on generating post-hoc explanations for existing black-box ranking models, whereas the alternative option of building an intrinsically interpretable ranking model with transparent and self-explainable structure remains unexplored. Developing fully-understandable ranking models is necessary in some scenarios (e.g., due to legal or policy constraints) where post-hoc methods cannot provide sufficiently accurate explanations. In this paper, we lay the groundwork for intrinsically interpretable learning-to-rank by introducing generalized additive models (GAMs) into ranking tasks. Generalized additive models (GAMs) are intrinsically interpretable machine learning models and have been extensively studied on regression and classification tasks. We study how to extend GAMs into ranking models which can handle both item-level and list-level features and propose a novel formulation of ranking GAMs. To instantiate ranking GAMs, we employ neural networks instead of traditional splines or regression trees. We also show that our neural ranking GAMs can be distilled into a set of simple and compact piece-wise linear functions that are much more efficient to evaluate with little accuracy loss. We conduct experiments on three data sets and show that our proposed neural ranking GAMs can achieve significantly better performance than other traditional GAM baselines while maintaining similar interpretability.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
