Local and global query expansion for hierarchical complex topics

In this work we study local and global methods for query expansion for multifaceted complex topics. We study word-based and entity-based expansion methods and extend these approaches to complex topics using fine-grained expansion on different elements of the hierarchical query structure. For a source of hierarchical complex topics we use the TREC Complex Answer Retrieval (CAR) benchmark data collection. We find that leveraging the hierarchical topic structure is needed for both local and global expansion methods to be effective. Further, the results demonstrate that entity-based expansion methods show significant gains over word-based models alone, with local feedback providing the largest improvement. The results on the CAR paragraph retrieval task demonstrate that expansion models that incorporate both the hierarchical query structure and entity-based expansion result in a greater than 20% improvement over word-based expansion approaches

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

Adaptive Document Retrieval for Deep Question Answering

State-of-the-art systems in deep question answering proceed as follows: (1) an initial document retrieval selects relevant documents, which (2) are then processed by a neural network in order to extract the final answer. Yet the exact interplay between both components is poorly understood, especially concerning the number of candidate documents that should be retrieved. We show that choosing a static number of documents -- as used in prior research -- suffers from a noise-information trade-off and yields suboptimal results. As a remedy, we propose an adaptive document retrieval model. This learns the optimal candidate number for document retrieval, conditional on the size of the corpus and the query. We report extensive experimental results showing that our adaptive approach outperforms state-of-the-art methods on multiple benchmark datasets, as well as in the context of corpora with variable sizes.Comment: EMNLP 201

ANTIQUE: A Non-Factoid Question Answering Benchmark

Considering the widespread use of mobile and voice search, answer passage retrieval for non-factoid questions plays a critical role in modern information retrieval systems. Despite the importance of the task, the community still feels the significant lack of large-scale non-factoid question answering collections with real questions and comprehensive relevance judgments. In this paper, we develop and release a collection of 2,626 open-domain non-factoid questions from a diverse set of categories. The dataset, called ANTIQUE, contains 34,011 manual relevance annotations. The questions were asked by real users in a community question answering service, i.e., Yahoo! Answers. Relevance judgments for all the answers to each question were collected through crowdsourcing. To facilitate further research, we also include a brief analysis of the data as well as baseline results on both classical and recently developed neural IR models

A pragmatic approach to semantic repositories benchmarking

The aim of this paper is to benchmark various semantic repositories in order to evaluate their deployment in a commercial image retrieval and browsing application. We adopt a two-phase approach for evaluating the target semantic repositories: analytical parameters such as query language and reasoning support are used to select the pool of the target repositories, and practical parameters such as load and query response times are used to select the best match to application requirements. In addition to utilising a widely accepted benchmark for OWL repositories (UOBM), we also use a real-life dataset from the target application, which provides us with the opportunity of consolidating our findings. A distinctive advantage of this benchmarking study is that the essential requirements for the target system such as the semantic expressivity and data scalability are clearly defined, which allows us to claim contribution to the benchmarking methodology for this class of applications

Using TREC for cross-comparison between classic IR and ontology-based search models at a Web scale

The construction of standard datasets and benchmarks to evaluate ontology-based search approaches and to compare then against baseline IR models is a major open problem in the semantic technologies community. In this paper we propose a novel evaluation benchmark for ontology-based IR models based on an adaptation of the well-known Cranfield paradigm (Cleverdon, 1967) traditionally used by the IR community. The proposed benchmark comprises: 1) a text document collection, 2) a set of queries and their corresponding document relevance judgments and 3) a set of ontologies and Knowledge Bases covering the query topics. The document collection and the set of queries and judgments are taken from one of the most widely used datasets in the IR community, the TREC Web track. As a use case example we apply the proposed benchmark to compare a real ontology-based search model (Fernandez, et al., 2008) against the best IR systems of TREC 9 and TREC 2001 competitions. A deep analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of this benchmark and a discussion of how it can be used to evaluate other ontology-based search systems is also included at the end of the paper