Combining relevance information in a synchronous collaborative information retrieval environment

Traditionally information retrieval (IR) research has focussed on a single user interaction modality, where a user searches to satisfy an information need. Recent advances in both web technologies, such as the sociable web of Web 2.0, and computer hardware, such as tabletop interface devices, have enabled multiple users to collaborate on many computer-related tasks. Due to these advances there is an increasing need to support two or more users searching together at the same time, in order to satisfy a shared information need, which we refer to as Synchronous Collaborative Information Retrieval. Synchronous Collaborative Information Retrieval (SCIR) represents a significant paradigmatic shift from traditional IR systems. In order to support an effective SCIR search, new techniques are required to coordinate users' activities. In this chapter we explore the effectiveness of a sharing of knowledge policy on a collaborating group. Sharing of knowledge refers to the process of passing relevance information across users, if one user finds items of relevance to the search task then the group should benefit in the form of improved ranked lists returned to each searcher. In order to evaluate the proposed techniques we simulate two users searching together through an incremental feedback system. The simulation assumes that users decide on an initial query with which to begin the collaborative search and proceed through the search by providing relevance judgments to the system and receiving a new ranked list. In order to populate these simulations we extract data from the interaction logs of various experimental IR systems from previous Text REtrieval Conference (TREC) workshops

Learning to Rank Academic Experts in the DBLP Dataset

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 people's 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.Comment: Expert Systems, 2013. arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1302.041

Characterizing Question Facets for Complex Answer Retrieval

Complex answer retrieval (CAR) is the process of retrieving answers to questions that have multifaceted or nuanced answers. In this work, we present two novel approaches for CAR based on the observation that question facets can vary in utility: from structural (facets that can apply to many similar topics, such as 'History') to topical (facets that are specific to the question's topic, such as the 'Westward expansion' of the United States). We first explore a way to incorporate facet utility into ranking models during query term score combination. We then explore a general approach to reform the structure of ranking models to aid in learning of facet utility in the query-document term matching phase. When we use our techniques with a leading neural ranker on the TREC CAR dataset, our methods rank first in the 2017 TREC CAR benchmark, and yield up to 26% higher performance than the next best method.Comment: 4 pages; SIGIR 2018 Short Pape

Climate change adaptation and vulnerability assessment of water resources systems in developing countries: a generalized framework and a feasibility study in Bangladesh

Water is the primary medium through which climate change influences the Earth’s ecosystems and therefore people’s livelihoods and wellbeing. Besides climatic change, current demographic trends, economic development and related land use changes have direct impact on increasing demand for freshwater resources. Taken together, the net effect of these supply and demand changes is affecting the vulnerability of water resources. The concept of ‘vulnerability’ is not straightforward as there is no universally accepted approach for assessing vulnerability. In this study, we review the evolution of approaches to vulnerability assessment related to water resources. From the current practices, we identify research gaps, and approaches to overcome these gaps a generalized assessment framework is developed. A feasibility study is then presented in the context of the Lower Brahmaputra River Basin (LBRB). The results of the feasibility study identify the current main constraints (e.g., lack of institutional coordination) and opportunities (e.g., adaptation) of LBRB. The results of this study can be helpful for innovative research and management initiatives and the described framework can be widely used as a guideline for the vulnerability assessment of water resources systems, particularly in developing countries

a simple algorithm for the lexical classification of comparable adjectives

Abstract Lexical classification is one of the most widely investigated fields in (computational) linguistic and Natural language Processing. Adjectives play a significant role both in classification tasks and in applications as sentiment analysis. In this paper a simple algorithm for lexical classification of comparable adjectives, called MORE (coMparable fORm dEtector), is proposed. The algorithm is efficient in time. The method is a specific unsupervised learning technique. Results are verified against a reference standard built from 80 manually annotated lists of adjective. The algorithm exhibits an accuracy of 76%

A collaborative approach to IR evaluation

textIn this thesis we investigate two main problems: 1) inferring consensus from disparate inputs to improve quality of crowd contributed data; and 2) developing a reliable crowd-aided IR evaluation framework. With regard to the first contribution, while many statistical label aggregation methods have been proposed, little comparative benchmarking has occurred in the community making it difficult to determine the state-of-the-art in consensus or to quantify novelty and progress, leaving modern systems to adopt simple control strategies. To aid the progress of statistical consensus and make state-of-the-art methods accessible, we develop a benchmarking framework in SQUARE, an open source shared task framework including benchmark datasets, defined tasks, standard metrics, and reference implementations with empirical results for several popular methods. Through the development of SQUARE we propose a crowd simulation model that emulates real crowd environments to enable rapid and reliable experimentation of collaborative methods with different crowd contributions. We apply the findings of the benchmark to develop reliable crowd contributed test collections for IR evaluation. As our second contribution, we describe a collaborative model for distributing relevance judging tasks between trusted assessors and crowd judges. Based on prior work's hypothesis of judging disagreements on borderline documents, we train a logistic regression model to predict assessor disagreement, prioritizing judging tasks by expected disagreement. Judgments are generated from different crowd models and intelligently aggregated. Given a priority queue, a judging budget, and a ratio for expert vs. crowd judging costs, critical judging tasks are assigned to trusted assessors with the crowd supplying remaining judgments. Results on two TREC datasets show significant judging burden can be confidently shifted to the crowd, achieving high rank correlation and often at lower cost vs. exclusive use of trusted assessors.Computer Science