Probabilistic models of ranking novel documents for faceted topic retrieval

International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 1287-1296

  Carterette, Ben ^a   Chandar, Praveen ^a  

^a University of Delaware   (United States)

Author keywords

Diversity; Information retrieval; Novelty; Probabilistic models

Indexed keywords

DIRECT OPTIMIZATION; EVALUATION MEASURES; INFORMATION NEED; NOVEL INFORMATION; OPTIMIZATION METHOD; PROBABILISTIC MODELS; RELEVANCE JUDGMENT; RETRIEVAL MODELS; RETRIEVAL SYSTEMS; RETRIEVED DOCUMENTS;

INFORMATION SERVICES; KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT;

INFORMATION RETRIEVAL;

EID: 74549143201     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1645953.1646116     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (17)

1. R. Agrawal, S. Gollapudi, H. Halverson, and S. Ieong. Diversifying search results. In Proceedings of WSDM '09, pages 5-14.
2. J. Allan, B. Carterette, and J. Lewis. When will information retrieval be "good enough"? In Proceedings of SIGIR, pages 433-440, 2005.
3. D. M. Blei, A. Y. Ng, and M. I. Jordan. Latent dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3:993-1022, Jan. 2003.
4. J. Carbonell and J. Goldstein. The user of mmr, diversity-based reranking for reordering documents and producing summaries. In Proceedings of SIGIR, pages 335-336, 1998.
5. H. Chen and D. R. Karger. Less is more: Probabilistic models for retrieving fewer relevant documents. In Proceedings of SIGIR, pages 429-436, 2006.
6. C. L. A. Clarke, M. Kolla, G. V. Cormack, O. Vechtomova, A. Ashkan, S. Büttcher, and I. MacKinnon. Novelty and diversity in information retrieval evaluation. In Proceedings of SIGIR, pages 659-666, 2008.
7. W. Dakka and P. G. Ipeirotis. Automatic extraction of useful facet hierarchies from text databases. Data Engineering, International Conference on, 0:466-475, 2008.
8. W. Goffman. On relevance as a measure. Information Storage and Retrieval, 2(3):201-203, 1964.
9. M. D. Gordan and P. Lenk. A utility theoretic examination of the probability ranking principle in information retrieval. JASIS, 42:703-714, 1991.
10. K. Järvelin and J. Kekäläinen. Ir evaluation methods for retrieving highly relevant documents. In Proceedings of SIGIR, pages 23-28, 2000.
11. V. Lavrenko and W. B. Croft. Relevance-based language models. In Proceedings of SIGIR, pages 120-127, 2001.
12. F. Radlinski, R. Kleinberg, and T. Joachims. Learning diverse rankings with multi-armed bandits. In Proceedings of ICML '08, pages 784-791.
13. S. E. Robertson. The probability ranking principle in ir. Journal of Documentation, 33(4):294-304, Dec. 1977.
14. M. Sanderson. Ambiguous queries: Test collections need more sense. In Proceedings of SIGIR, pages 499-506, 2008.
15. E. M. Voorhees and D. K. Harman, editors. TREC: Experiment and Evaluation in Information Retrieval. MIT Press, 2005.
16. C. Zhai, W. W. Cohen, and J. Lafferty. Beyond independent relevance: Methods and evaluation metrics for subtopic retrieval. In Proceedings of SIGIR, pages 10-17, 2003.
17. Y. Zhang, J. Callan, and T. Minka. Novelty and redundancy detection in adaptive filtering. In Proceedings of SIGIR, pages 81-88, 2002.