Overview of the INEX 2014 Interactive Social Book Search Track

Abstract. Users looking for books online are confronted with both pro-fessional meta-data and user-generated content. The goal of the Interac-tive Social Book Search Track was to investigate how users used these two sources of information, when looking for books in a leisure context. To this end participants recruited by four teams performed two different tasks using one of two book-search interfaces. Additionally one of the two interfaces also investigated whether user performance can be improved by providing a user-interface that supports multiple search stages.

The role of language skills in interactive social book search sessions

When searching for books, people frequently have to deal with content that is in a language different from their own. However, research on multilingual systems has generally focused on the user interface's language rather than the content language. In this paper, we describe and compare early results from the multilingual aspects in the Interactive Social Book Search (iSBS) task at CLEF 2014 and 2015. A preliminary analysis of usage patterns for native English and non-native English speakers indicates an influence of language skills on search behaviour during goal-oriented and casual leisure tasks. Based on previous experiences and results, strengths and challenges of IIR studies are discussed

Overview of the PAN'2016 - New Challenges for Authorship Analysis: Cross-genre Profiling, Clustering, Diarization, and Obfuscation

The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44564-9_28This paper presents an overview of the PAN/CLEF evaluation lab. During the last decade, PAN has been established as the main forum of digital text forensic research. PAN 2016 comprises three shared tasks: (i) author identification, addressing author clustering and diarization (or intrinsic plagiarism detection); (ii) author profiling, addressing age and gender prediction from a cross-genre perspective; and (iii) author obfuscation, addressing author masking and obfuscation evaluation. In total, 35 teams participated in all three shared tasks of PAN 2016 and, following the practice of previous editions, software submissions were required and evaluated within the TIRA experimentation framework.The work of the first author was partially supported by the Som EMBED TIN2015-71147-C2-1-P MINECO research project and by the Generalitat Valenciana under the grant ALMA MATER (Prometeo II/2014/030). The work of the second author was partially supported by Autoritas Consulting and by Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad de España under grant ECOPORTUNITY IPT-2012-1220-430000.Rosso, P.; Rangel-Pardo, FM.; Potthast, M.; Stamatatos, E.; Tschuggnall, M.; Stein, B. (2016). Overview of the PAN'2016 - New Challenges for Authorship Analysis: Cross-genre Profiling, Clustering, Diarization, and Obfuscation. En Experimental IR Meets Multilinguality, Multimodality, and Interaction. Springer Verlag (Germany). 332-350. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44564-9_28S332350Almishari, M., Tsudik, G.: Exploring linkability of user reviews. In: Foresti, S., Yung, M., Martinelli, F. (eds.) ESORICS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7459, pp. 307–324. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)Álvarez-Carmona, M.A., López-Monroy, A.P., Montes-Y-Gómez, M., Villaseñor-Pineda, L., Jair-Escalante, H.: INAOE’s Participation at PAN’15: author profiling task–notebook for PAN at CLEF 2015. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2015 Evaluation Labs. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1391 (2015)Amigó, E., Gonzalo, J., Artiles, J., Verdejo, F.: A comparison of extrinsic clustering evaluation metrics based on formal constraints. Inf. Retrieval 12(4), 461–486 (2009)Argamon, S., Juola, P.: Overview of the international authorship identification competition at PAN-2011. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2011 Evaluation Labs (2011)Argamon, S., Koppel, M., Fine, J., Shimoni, A.R.: Gender, genre, and writing style in formal written texts. TEXT 23, 321–346 (2003)Bagnall, D.: Author identification using multi-headed recurrent neural networks. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2015 Evaluation Labs. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1391 (2015)Bensalem, I., Boukhalfa, I., Rosso, P., Abouenour, L., Darwish, K., Chikhi, S.: Overview of the AraPlagDet PAN@ FIRE2015 shared task on arabic plagiarism detection. In: Notebook Papers of FIRE 2015. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1587 (2015)Burger, J.D., Henderson, J., Kim, G., Zarrella, G.: Discriminating gender on twitter. In: Proceedings of EMNLP 2011 (2011)Burrows, S., Potthast, M., Stein, B.: Paraphrase acquisition via crowdsourcing and machine learning. ACM TIST 4(3), 43:1–43:21 (2013)Castillo, E., Cervantes, O., Vilariño, D., Pinto, D., León, S.: Unsupervised method for the authorship identification task. In: CLEF 2014 Labs and Workshops, Notebook Papers. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1180 (2014)Chaski, C.E.: Who’s at the keyboard: authorship attribution in digital evidence invesigations. Int. J. Digit. Evid. 4, 1–13 (2005)Clarke, C.L., Craswell, N., Soboroff, I., Voorhees, E.M.: Overview of the TREC 2009 web track. In: DTIC Document (2009)Flores, E., Rosso, P., Moreno, L., Villatoro, E.: On the detection of source code re-use. In: ACM FIRE 2014 Post Proceedings of the Forum for Information Retrieval Evaluation, pp. 21–30 (2015)Flores, E., Rosso, P., Villatoro, E., Moreno, L., Alcover, R., Chirivella, V.: PAN@FIRE: overview of CL-SOCO track on the detection of cross-language source code re-use. In: Notebook Papers of FIRE 2015. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1587 (2015)Fréry, J., Largeron, C., Juganaru-Mathieu, M.: UJM at clef in author identification. In: CLEF 2014 Labs and Workshops, Notebook Papers. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1180 (2014)Gollub, T., Potthast, M., Beyer, A., Busse, M., Rangel, F., Rosso, P., Stamatatos, E., Stein, B.: Recent trends in digital text forensics and its evaluation. In: Forner, P., Müller, H., Paredes, R., Rosso, P., Stein, B. (eds.) CLEF 2013. LNCS, vol. 8138, pp. 282–302. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)Gollub, T., Stein, B., Burrows, S.: Ousting Ivory tower research: towards a web framework for providing experiments as a service. In: Proceedings of SIGIR 12. ACM (2012)Hagen, M., Potthast, M., Stein, B.: Source retrieval for plagiarism detection from large web corpora: recent approaches. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2015 Evaluation Labs. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1391 (2015)van Halteren, H.: Linguistic profiling for author recognition and verification. In: Proceedings of ACL 2004 (2004)Holmes, J., Meyerhoff, M.: The Handbook of Language and Gender. Blackwell Handbooks in Linguistics, Wiley (2003)Iqbal, F., Binsalleeh, H., Fung, B.C.M., Debbabi, M.: Mining writeprints from anonymous e-mails for forensic investigation. Digit. Investig. 7(1–2), 56–64 (2010)Jankowska, M., Keselj, V., Milios, E.: CNG text classification for authorship profiling task-notebook for PAN at CLEF 2013. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2013 Evaluation Labs. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1179 (2013)Juola, P.: An overview of the traditional authorship attribution subtask. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2012 Evaluation Labs (2012)Juola, P.: Authorship attribution. Found. Trends Inf. Retrieval 1, 234–334 (2008)Juola, P.: How a computer program helped reveal J.K. rowling as author of a Cuckoo’s calling. In: Scientific American (2013)Juola, P., Stamatatos, E.: Overview of the author identification task at PAN-2013. In:Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2013 Evaluation Labs. CEUR-WS.org vol. 1179 (2013)Keswani, Y., Trivedi, H., Mehta, P., Majumder, P.: Author masking through translation-notebook for PAN at CLEF 2016. In: Conference and Labs of the Evaluation Forum, CLEF (2016)Koppel, M., Argamon, S., Shimoni, A.R.: Automatically categorizing written texts by author gender. Literary Linguist. Comput. 17(4), 401–412 (2002)Koppel, M., Schler, J., Bonchek-Dokow, E.: Measuring differentiability: unmasking pseudonymous authors. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 8, 1261–1276 (2007)Koppel, M., Winter, Y.: Determining if two documents are written by the same author. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 65(1), 178–187 (2014)Layton, R., Watters, P., Dazeley, R.: Automated unsupervised authorship analysis using evidence accumulation clustering. Nat. Lang. Eng. 19(1), 95–120 (2013)López-Monroy, A.P., Montes-y Gómez, M., Jair-Escalante, H., Villasenor-Pineda, L.V.: Using intra-profile information for author profiling-notebook for PAN at CLEF 2014. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2014 Evaluation Labs. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1180 (2014)López-Monroy, A.P., Montes-y Gómez, M., Jair-Escalante, H., Villasenor-Pineda, L., Villatoro-Tello, E.: INAOE’s participation at PAN’13: author profiling task-notebook for PAN at CLEF 2013. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2013 Evaluation Labs. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1179 (2013)Luyckx, K., Daelemans, W.: Authorship attribution and verification with many authors and limited data. In: Proceedings of COLING (2008)Maharjan, S., Shrestha, P., Solorio, T., Hasan, R.: A straightforward author profiling approach in MapReduce. In: Bazzan, A.L.C., Pichara, K. (eds.) IBERAMIA 2014. LNCS, vol. 8864, pp. 95–107. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Mansoorizadeh, M.: Submission to the author obfuscation task at PAN 2016. In: Conference and Labs of the Evaluation Forum, CLEF (2016)Eissen, S.M., Stein, B.: Intrinsic plagiarism detection. In: Lalmas, M., MacFarlane, A., Rüger, S.M., Tombros, A., Tsikrika, T., Yavlinsky, A. (eds.) ECIR 2006. LNCS, vol. 3936, pp. 565–569. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Mihaylova, T., Karadjov, G., Nakov, P., Kiprov, Y., Georgiev, G., Koychev, I.: SU@PAN’2016: author obfuscation-notebook for PAN at CLEF 2016. In: Conference and Labs of the Evaluation Forum, CLEF (2016)Miro, X.A., Bozonnet, S., Evans, N., Fredouille, C., Friedland, G., Vinyals, O.: Speaker diarization: a review of recent research. Audio Speech Language Process. IEEE Trans. 20(2), 356–370 (2012)Moreau, E., Jayapal, A., Lynch, G., Vogel, C.: Author verification: basic stacked generalization applied to predictions from a set of heterogeneous learners. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2015 Evaluation Labs. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1391 (2015)Nguyen, D., Gravel, R., Trieschnigg, D., Meder, T.: How old do you think I am? a study of language and age in twitter. In: Proceedings of ICWSM 13. AAAI (2013)Peñas, A., Rodrigo, A.: A Simple measure to assess non-response. In: Proceedings of HLT 2011 (2011)Pennebaker, J.W., Mehl, M.R., Niederhoffer, K.G.: Psychological aspects of natural language use: our words, our selves. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 54(1), 547–577 (2003)Potthast, M., Barrón-Cedeño, A., Eiselt, A., Stein, B., Rosso, P.: Overview of the 2nd international competition on plagiarism detection. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2010 Evaluation Labs (2010)Potthast, M., Barrón-Cedeño, A., Stein, B., Rosso, P.: Cross-language plagiarism detection. Lang. Resour. Eval. (LREC) 45, 45–62 (2011)Potthast, M., Eiselt, A., Barrón-Cedeño, A., Stein, B., Rosso, P.: Overview of the 3rd international competition on plagiarism detection. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2011 Evaluation Labs (2011)Potthast, M., Gollub, T., Hagen, M., Graßegger, J., Kiesel, J., Michel, M., Oberländer, A., Tippmann, M., Barrón-Cedeño, A., Gupta, P., Rosso, P., Stein, B.: Overview of the 4th international competition on plagiarism detection. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2012 Evaluation Labs (2012)Potthast, M., Gollub, T., Hagen, M., Tippmann, M., Kiesel, J., Rosso, P., Stamatatos, E., Stein, B.: Overview of the 5th international competition on plagiarism detection. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2013 Evaluation Labs. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1179 (2013)Potthast, M., Gollub, T., Rangel, F., Rosso, P., Stamatatos, E., Stein, B.: Improving the reproducibility of PAN’s shared tasks: plagiarism detection, author identification, and author profiling. In: Kanoulas, E., Lupu, M., Clough, P., Sanderson, M., Hall, M., Hanbury, A., Toms, E. (eds.) CLEF 2014. LNCS, vol. 8685, pp. 268–299. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Potthast, M., Hagen, M., Beyer, A., Busse, M., Tippmann, M., Rosso, P., Stein, B.: Overview of the 6th international competition on plagiarism detection. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2014 Evaluation Labs. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1180 (2014)Potthast, M., Hagen, M., Stein, B.: Author obfuscation: attacking the state of the art in authorship verification. In: CLEF 2016 Working Notes. CEUR-WS.org (2016)Potthast, M., Göring, S., Rosso, P., Stein, B.: Towards data submissions for shared tasks: first experiences for the task of text alignment. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2015 Evaluation Labs. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1391 (2015)Potthast, M., Hagen, M., Stein, B., Graßegger, J., Michel, M., Tippmann, M., Welsch, C.: ChatNoir: a search engine for the ClueWeb09 corpus. In: Proceedings of SIGIR 12. ACM (2012)Potthast, M., Hagen, M., Völske, M., Stein, B.: Crowdsourcing interaction logs to understand text reuse from the web. In: Proceedings of ACL 13. ACL (2013)Potthast, M., Stein, B., Barrón-Cedeño, A., Rosso, P.: An evaluation framework for plagiarism detection. In: Proceedings of COLING 10. ACL (2010)Potthast, M., Stein, B., Eiselt, A., Barrón-Cedeño, A., Rosso, P.: Overview of the 1st international competition on plagiarism detection. In: Proceedings of PAN at SEPLN 09. CEUR-WS.org 502 (2009)Rangel, F., Rosso, P.: On the impact of emotions on author profiling. Inf. Process. Manage. Spec. Issue Emot. Sentiment Soc. Expressive Media 52(1), 73–92 (2016)Rangel, F., Rosso, P.: On the multilingual and genre robustness of emographs for author profiling in social media. In: Mothe, J., et al. (eds.) CLEF 2015. LNCS, vol. 9283, pp. 274–280. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-24027-5_28Rangel, F., Rosso, P., Celli, F., Potthast, M., Stein, B., Daelemans, W.: Overview of the 3rd author profiling task at PAN 2015. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2015 Evaluation Labs. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1391 (2015)Rangel, F., Rosso, P., Chugur, I., Potthast, M., Trenkmann, M., Stein, B., Verhoeven, B., Daelemans, W.: Overview of the 2nd author profiling task at PAN 2014. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2014 Evaluation Labs. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1180 (2014)Rangel, F., Rosso, P., Koppel, M., Stamatatos, E., Inches, G.: Overview of the author profiling task at PAN 2013–notebook for PAN at CLEF 2013. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2013 Evaluation Labs. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1179 (2013)Rangel, F., Rosso, P., Verhoeven, B., Daelemans, W., Potthast, M., Stein, B.: Overview of the 4th author profiling task at PAN 2016: cross-genre evaluations. In: CLEF 2016 Working Notes. CEUR-WS.org (2016)Samdani, R., Chang, K., Roth, D.: A discriminative latent variable model for online clustering. In: Proceedings of The 31st International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 1–9 (2014)Sapkota, U., Bethard, S., Montes-y-Gómez, M., Solorio, T.: Not all character N-grams are created equal: a study in authorship attribution. In: Proceedings of NAACL 15. ACL (2015)Sapkota, U., Solorio, T., Montes-y-Gómez, M., Bethard, S., Rosso, P.: Cross-topic authorship attribution: will out-of-topic data help? In: Proceedings of COLING 14 (2014)Schler, J., Koppel, M., Argamon, S., Pennebaker, J.W.: Effects of age and gender on blogging. In: AAAI Spring Symposium: Computational Approaches to Analyzing Weblogs. AAAI (2006)Schwartz, H.A., Eichstaedt, J.C., Kern, M.L., Dziurzynski, L., Ramones, S.M., Agrawal, M., Shah, A., Kosinski, M., Stillwell, D., Seligman, M.E., et al.: Personality, gender, and age in the language of social media: the open-vocabulary approach. PloS One 8(9), 773–791 (2013)Stamatatos, E.: A survey of modern authorship attribution methods. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 60, 538–556 (2009)Stamatatos, E.: On the robustness of authorship attribution based on character n-gram features. J. Law Policy 21, 421–439 (2013)Stamatatos, E., Tschuggnall, M., Verhoeven, B., Daelemans, W., Specht, G., Stein, B., Potthast, M.: Clustering by authorship within and across documents. In: CLEF 2016 Working Notes. CEUR-WS.org (2016)Stamatatos, E., Daelemans, W., Verhoeven, B., Juola, P., López-López, A., Potthast, M., Stein, B.: Overview of the author identification task at PAN-2015. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2015 Evaluation Labs. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1391 (2015)Stamatatos, E., Daelemans, W., Verhoeven, B., Stein, B., Potthast, M., Juola, P., Sánchez-Pérez, M.A., Barrón-Cedeño, A.: Overview of the author identification task at PAN 2014. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2014 Evaluation Labs. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1180 (2014)Stamatatos, E., Fakotakis, N., Kokkinakis, G.: Automatic text categorization in terms of genre and author. Comput. Linguist. 26(4), 471–495 (2000)Stein, B., Lipka, N., Prettenhofer, P.: Intrinsic plagiarism analysis. Lang. Resour. Eval. (LRE) 45, 63–82 (2011)Stein, B., Meyer zu Eißen, S.: Near Similarity Search and Plagiarism Analysis. In: Proceedings of GFKL 05. Springer, Heidelberg, pp. 430–437 (2006)Verhoeven, B., Daelemans, W.: Clips stylometry investigation (csi) corpus: a dutch corpus for the detection of age, gender, personality, sentiment and deception in text. In: Proceedings of LREC 2014 (2014)Verhoeven, B., Daelemans, W.: CLiPS stylometry investigation (CSI) corpus: a dutch corpus for the detection of age, gender, personality, sentiment and deception in text. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, LREC (2014)Weren, E., Kauer, A., Mizusaki, L., Moreira, V., de Oliveira, P., Wives, L.: Examining multiple features for author profiling. J. Inf. Data Manage. 5(3), 266–280 (2014)Zhang, C., Zhang, P.: Predicting Gender from Blog Posts. Technical Report. University of Massachusetts Amherst, USA (2010

Normalizing acronyms and abbreviations to aid patient understanding of clinical texts: ShARe/CLEF eHealth Challenge 2013, Task 2

Background: The ShARe/CLEF eHealth challenge lab aims to stimulate development of natural language processing and information retrieval technologies to aid patients in understanding their clinical reports. In clinical text, acronyms and abbreviations, also referenced as short forms, can be difficult for patients to understand. For one of three shared tasks in 2013 (Task 2), we generated a reference standard of clinical short forms normalized to the Unified Medical Language System. This reference standard can be used to improve patient understanding by linking to web sources with lay descriptions of annotated short forms or by substituting short forms with a more simplified, lay term. Methods: In this study, we evaluate 1) accuracy of participating systems’ normalizing short forms compared to a majority sense baseline approach, 2) performance of participants’ systems for short forms with variable majority sense distributions, and 3) report the accuracy of participating systems’ normalizing shared normalized concepts between the test set and the Consumer Health Vocabulary, a vocabulary of lay medical terms. Results: The best systems submitted by the five participating teams performed with accuracies ranging from 43 to 72 %. A majority sense baseline approach achieved the second best performance. The performance of participating systems for normalizing short forms with two or more senses with low ambiguity (majority sense greater than 80 %) ranged from 52 to 78 % accuracy, with two or more senses with moderate ambiguity (majority sense between 50 and 80 %) ranged from 23 to 57 % accuracy, and with two or more senses with high ambiguity (majority sense less than 50 %) ranged from 2 to 45 % accuracy. With respect to the ShARe test set, 69 % of short form annotations contained common concept unique identifiers with the Consumer Health Vocabulary. For these 2594 possible annotations, the performance of participating systems ranged from 50 to 75 % accuracy. Conclusion: Short form normalization continues to be a challenging problem. Short form normalization systems perform with moderate to reasonable accuracies. The Consumer Health Vocabulary could enrich its knowledge base with missed concept unique identifiers from the ShARe test set to further support patient understanding of unfamiliar medical terms.</p

INEX Tweet Contextualization Task: Evaluation, Results and Lesson Learned

Microblogging platforms such as Twitter are increasingly used for on-line client and market analysis. This motivated the proposal of a new track at CLEF INEX lab of Tweet Contextualization. The objective of this task was to help a user to understand a tweet by providing him with a short explanatory summary (500 words). This summary should be built automatically using resources like Wikipedia and generated by extracting relevant passages and aggregating them into a coherent summary. Running for four years, results show that the best systems combine NLP techniques with more traditional methods. More precisely the best performing systems combine passage retrieval, sentence segmentation and scoring, named entity recognition, text part-of-speech (POS) analysis, anaphora detection, diversity content measure as well as sentence reordering. This paper provides a full summary report on the four-year long task. While yearly overviews focused on system results, in this paper we provide a detailed report on the approaches proposed by the participants and which can be considered as the state of the art for this task. As an important result from the 4 years competition, we also describe the open access resources that have been built and collected. The evaluation measures for automatic summarization designed in DUC or MUC were not appropriate to evaluate tweet contextualization, we explain why and depict in detailed the LogSim measure used to evaluate informativeness of produced contexts or summaries. Finally, we also mention the lessons we learned and that it is worth considering when designing a task