A survey on the use of relevance feedback for information access systems

Users of online search engines often find it difficult to express their need for information in the form of a query. However, if the user can identify examples of the kind of documents they require then they can employ a technique known as relevance feedback. Relevance feedback covers a range of techniques intended to improve a user's query and facilitate retrieval of information relevant to a user's information need. In this paper we survey relevance feedback techniques. We study both automatic techniques, in which the system modifies the user's query, and interactive techniques, in which the user has control over query modification. We also consider specific interfaces to relevance feedback systems and characteristics of searchers that can affect the use and success of relevance feedback systems

Combining and selecting characteristics of information use

In this paper we report on a series of experiments designed to investigate the combination of term and document weighting functions in Information Retrieval. We describe a series of weighting functions, each of which is based on how information is used within documents and collections, and use these weighting functions in two types of experiments: one based on combination of evidence for ad-hoc retrieval, the other based on selective combination of evidence within a relevance feedback situation. We discuss the difficulties involved in predicting good combinations of evidence for ad-hoc retrieval, and suggest the factors that may lead to the success or failure of combination. We also demonstrate how, in a relevance feedback situation, the relevance assessments can provide a good indication of how evidence should be selected for query term weighting. The use of relevance information to guide the combination process is shown to reduce the variability inherent in combination of evidence

Preliminary Experiments using Subjective Logic for the Polyrepresentation of Information Needs

According to the principle of polyrepresentation, retrieval accuracy may improve through the combination of multiple and diverse information object representations about e.g. the context of the user, the information sought, or the retrieval system. Recently, the principle of polyrepresentation was mathematically expressed using subjective logic, where the potential suitability of each representation for improving retrieval performance was formalised through degrees of belief and uncertainty. No experimental evidence or practical application has so far validated this model. We extend the work of Lioma et al. (2010), by providing a practical application and analysis of the model. We show how to map the abstract notions of belief and uncertainty to real-life evidence drawn from a retrieval dataset. We also show how to estimate two different types of polyrepresentation assuming either (a) independence or (b) dependence between the information objects that are combined. We focus on the polyrepresentation of different types of context relating to user information needs (i.e. work task, user background knowledge, ideal answer) and show that the subjective logic model can predict their optimal combination prior and independently to the retrieval process

Unsupervised, Efficient and Semantic Expertise Retrieval

We introduce an unsupervised discriminative model for the task of retrieving experts in online document collections. We exclusively employ textual evidence and avoid explicit feature engineering by learning distributed word representations in an unsupervised way. We compare our model to state-of-the-art unsupervised statistical vector space and probabilistic generative approaches. Our proposed log-linear model achieves the retrieval performance levels of state-of-the-art document-centric methods with the low inference cost of so-called profile-centric approaches. It yields a statistically significant improved ranking over vector space and generative models in most cases, matching the performance of supervised methods on various benchmarks. That is, by using solely text we can do as well as methods that work with external evidence and/or relevance feedback. A contrastive analysis of rankings produced by discriminative and generative approaches shows that they have complementary strengths due to the ability of the unsupervised discriminative model to perform semantic matching.Comment: WWW2016, Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on World Wide Web. 201