Query-level loss functions for information retrieval

Information Processing and Management

Volumn 44, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 838-855

  Qin, Tao ^a   Zhang, Xu Dong ^a   Tsai, Ming Feng ^c   Wang, De Sheng ^a   Liu, Tie Yan ^b   Li, Hang ^b  

^a TSINGHUA UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b MICROSOFT RESEARCH ASIA   (China)

^c NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Information retrieval; Learning to rank; Query level loss function; RankCosine

Indexed keywords

INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; NEURAL NETWORKS; PROBLEM SOLVING; QUERY PROCESSING;

LOSS FUNCTIONS; QUERY-LEVEL LOSS FUNCTIONS;

LEARNING SYSTEMS;

EID: 39649119873     PISSN: 03064573     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ipm.2007.07.016     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Baeza-Yates R., and Ribeiro-Neto B. Modern information retrieval (1999), Addison Wesley
2. Borlund P. The concept of relevance in IR. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 54 10 (2003) 913-925
3. Burges, C. J. C., Shaked, T., Renshaw, E., Lazier, A., Deeds, M., Hamilton, N., & Hullender, G. (2005). Learning to rank using gradient descent. In 22nd international conference on machine learning, Bonn.
4. Cao, Z., Qin, T., Liu, T.-Y., Tsai, M.-F., & Li, H. (2007). Learning to rank: from pairwise approach to listwise approach. In Proceedings of the 17th annual international conference on machine learning (ICML2007), Oregon, US, 2007.
5. Cao Y., Xu J., Liu T.Y., Li H., Huang Y., and Hon H.W. Adapting ranking SVM to document retrieval. SIGIR 2006: proceedings of the 29th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (2006), Seattle, Washington, USA
6. Crammer, K., & Singer, Y. (2002). Pranking with ranking. NIPS 14.
7. Craswell, N., Hawking, D., Wilkinson, R., & Wu, M. (2003). Overview of the TREC 2003 web track. In NIST special publication 500-255: the twelfth text retrieval conference (TREC 2003) (pp. 78-92).
8. Dekel, O., Manning, C., & Singer, Y. (2004). Loglinear models for label-ranking. NIPS 16.
9. Freund Y., Iyer R., Schapire R., and Singer Y. An efficient boosting algorithm for combining preferences. Journal of Machine Learning Research 4 (2003)
10. Friedman, J., Hastie, T., & Tibshirani, R. (1998). Additive logistic regression: A statistical view of boosting. Dept. of Statistics, Stanford University Technical Report.
11. Herbrich, R., Graepel, T., & Obermayer, K. (2000). Large margin rank boundaries for ordinal regression. Advances in Large Margin Classiers. MIT Press, pp. 115-132.
12. Hersh, W. R., Buckley, C., Leone, T. J., & Hickam, D. H. (1994). OHSUMED: An interactive retrieval evaluation and new large test collection for research. In Proceedings of the 17th Annual ACM SIGIR Conference (pp. 192-201).
13. Jarvelin, K., & Kekalainen, J. (2000). IR evaluation methods for retrieving highly relevant documents. In Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGIR.
14. Jarvelin K., and Kekalainen J. Cumulated gain-based evaluation of IR techniques. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (2002)
15. Joachims T. Making large-scale SVM learning practical. In: Schölkopf B., Burges C., and Smola A. (Eds). Advances in kernel methods - Support vector learning (1999), MIT Press
16. Joachims T. Optimizing search engines using clickthrough data. Proceedings of the ACM conference on knowledge discovery and data mining (KDD) (2002), ACM
17. Matveeva, I., Burges, C., Burkard, T., Laucius, A., & Wong, L. (2006). High accuracy retrieval with multiple nested ranker. In Proceedings of SIGIR 2006 (pp. 437-444).
18. Nallapati, R. (2004). Discriminative models for information retrieval. In SIGIR 2004 (pp. 64-71).
19. Page, L., Brin, S., Motwani, R., & Winograd, T. (1998). The PageRank citation ranking: Bringing order to the web. Technical report. Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
20. Qin, T., Liu, T.-Y., Lai, W., Zhang, X.-D., Wang, D.-S., & Li, H. (2007). Ranking with multiple hyperplanes. In: Proceedings of SIGIR 2007: Proceedings of the 30th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval.
21. Qin T., Liu T.Y., Zhang X.D., Chen Z., and Ma W.Y. A study of relevance propagation for web search. SIGIR 2005: Proceedings of the 28th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (2005), ACM Press, New York, NY, USA 408-415
22. Robertson S.E. Overview of the okapi projects. Journal of Documentation 53 1 (1997) 3-7
23. Robertson, S., & Hull, D. A. (2000). The TREC-9 filtering track final report. In Proceedings of the 9th text retrieval conference (pp. 25-40).
24. Song, R., Wen, J. R., Shi, S. M., Xin, G. M., Liu, T. Y., Qin, T., Zheng, X., Zhang, J. Y., Xue, G. R., & Ma, W. Y. (2004). Microsoft Research Asia at Web Track and Terabyte Track of TREC 2004, in the 13th TREC.
25. Sormunen, E. (2002). Liberal relevance criteria of TREC-Counting on negligible documents? In: Proceedings of the 25th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval.
26. Tsai, M.-F., Liu, T.-Y., Qin, T., Chen, H.-H., & Ma, W.-Y. (2007). Frank: A ranking method with fidelity loss. In Proceedings of SIGIR 2007: Proceedings of the 30th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval.
27. Vapnik V. Statistical learning theory (1998), Wiley
28. Voorhees E.M., and Harman D.K. TREC: Experiment and evaluation in information retrieval (2005), MIT Press
29. Xue, G. R., Yang, Q., Zeng, H. J., Yu, Y., & Chen, Z. (2005). Exploiting the hierarchical structure for link analysis. In Proceedings of the 28th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval Salvador, Brazil.