On the role of novelty for search result diversification

Information Retrieval

Volumn 15, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 478-502

  Santos, Rodrygo L T ^a   Macdonald, Craig ^a   Ounis, Iadh ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Diversity; Relevance; Web search

Indexed keywords

EID: 84867075862     PISSN: 13864564     EISSN: 15737659     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10791-011-9180-x     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Agrawal, R., Gollapudi, S., Halverson, A., & Ieong, S. (2009). Diversifying search results. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM international conference on web search and data mining (pp. 5-14).
2. Amati, G., Ambrosi, E., Bianchi, M., Gaibisso, C., & Gambosi, G. (2007). FUB, IASI-CNR and University of Tor Vergata at TREC 2007 Blog track. In Proceedings of the 16th text REtrieval conference.
3. Carbonell, J., & Goldstein, J. (1998) The use of MMR, diversity-based reranking for reordering documents and producing summaries. In Proceedings of the 21st annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in informaion retrieval (pp. 335-336).
4. Carterette, B., & Chandar, P. (2009). Probabilistic models of ranking novel documents for faceted topic retrieval. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on information and knowledge management (pp. 1287-1296).
5. Chapelle, O., Metlzer, D., Zhang, Y., & Grinspan, P. (2009). Expected reciprocal rank for graded relevance. InProceedings of the 18th ACM conference on information and knowledge management (pp. 621-630).
6. Chen, H., & Karger, D. R. (2006). Less is more: probabilistic models for retrieving fewer relevant documents. In Proceedings of the 29th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 429-436).
7. Clarke, C. L. A., Kolla, M., Cormack, G. V., Vechtomova, O., Ashkan, A., Büttcher, S., et al. (2008). Novelty and diversity in information retrieval evaluation. In Proceedings of the 31st annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 659-666).
8. Clarke, C. L. A., Craswell, N., & Soboroff, I. (2009). Overview of the TREC 2009 web track. In Proceedings of the 18th text retrieval conference.
9. Clarke, C. L. A., Craswell, N., Soboroff, I., & Cormack, G. V. (2010). Preliminary overview of the TREC 2010 Web track. In Proceedings of the 19th text retrieval conference.
10. Clarke, C. L. A., Craswell, N., Soboroff, I., & Ashkan, A. (2011). A comparative analysis of cascade measures for novelty and diversity. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM international conference on web search and data mining (pp. 75-84).
11. Cooper, W. S. (1971). The inadequacy of probability of usefulness as a ranking criterion for retrieval system output. Technical report, University of California, Berkeley.
12. Craswell, N., Zoeter, O., Taylor, M., & Ramsey, B. (2008) An experimental comparison of click position-bias models. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM international conference on web search and data mining (pp. 87-94).
13. Goffman, W. (1964). On relevance as a measure. Information Storage and Retrieval, 2(3), 201-203.
14. Gordon, M. D., & Lenk, P. (1991). A utility theoretic examination of the probability ranking principle in information retrieval. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 42(10), 703-714.
15. Hochbaum, D. S. (Ed.). (1997). Approximation algorithms for NP-hard problems. Boston, MA, USA: PWS Publishing Co.
16. Järvelin, K., & Kekäläinen, J. (2002). Cumulated gain-based evaluation of IR techniques. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 20(4), 422-446.
17. Kirkpatrick, S., Gelatt, C. D., & Vecchi, M. P. (1983). Optimization by simulated annealing. Science, 220(4598), 671-680.
18. Manning, C. D., Raghavan, P., & Schütze, H. (2008). Introduction to Information Retrieval. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19. Radlinski, F., & Dumais, S. (2006). Improving personalized web search using result diversification. In Proceedings of the 29th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 691-692).
20. Rafiei, D., Bharat, K., & Shukla, A. (2010) Diversifying Web search results. In Proceedings of the 19th international conference on world wide web (pp. 781-790).
21. Robertson, S. E. (1977). The probability ranking principle in IR. Journal of Documentation, 33(4), 294-304.
22. Sakai, T., & Song, R. (2011). Evaluating diversified search results using per-intent graded relevance. In Proceedings of the 34th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 1043-1052).
23. Sanderson, M. (2008). Ambiguous queries: Test collections need more sense. In Proceedings of the 31st annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 499-506).
24. Santos, R. L. T., & Ounis, I. (2011). Diversifying for multiple information needs. In Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Diversity in Document Retrieval (pp. 37-41).
25. Santos, R. L. T., Macdonald, C., & Ounis, I. (2010a). Exploiting query reformulations for Web search result diversification. In Proceedings of the 19th international conference on world wide web (pp. 881-890).
26. Santos, R. L. T., Macdonald, C., & Ounis, I. (2010b). Selectively diversifying Web search results. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM international conference on information and knowledge management (pp. 1179-1188).
27. Santos, R. L. T., Peng, J., Macdonald, C., & Ounis, I. (2010c). Explicit search result diversification through sub-queries. In Proceedings of the 31st European conference on information retrieval (pp. 87-99).
28. Santos, R. L. T., Macdonald, C., & Ounis, I. (2011). Intent-aware search result diversification. In Proceedings of the 34th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 595-604).
29. Song, R., Luo, Z., Nie, J. Y., Yu, Y., Hon, H. W. (2009). Identification of ambiguous queries in web search. Information Processing and Management, 45(2), 216-229.
30. Spärck-Jones, K., Robertson, S. E., & Sanderson, M. (2007). Ambiguous requests: implications for retrieval tests, systems and theories. SIGIR Forum, 41(2), 8-17.
31. Turpin, A., & Scholer, F. (2006). User performance versus precision measures for simple search tasks. In Proceedings of the 29th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 11-18).
32. Wang, J., & Zhu, J. (2009). Portfolio theory of information retrieval. In Proceedings of the 32nd international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 115-122).
33. Zhai, C., Cohen, W. W., & Lafferty, J. (2003). Beyond independent relevance: methods and evaluation metrics for subtopic retrieval. In Proceedings of the 26th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in informaion retrieval (pp. 10-17).