Generalized Team Draft Interleaving

Interleaving is an online evaluation method that compares two ranking functions by mixing their results and interpret- ing the users' click feedback. An important property of an interleaving method is its sensitivity, i.e. the ability to obtain reliable comparison outcomes with few user interac- tions. Several methods have been proposed so far to im- prove interleaving sensitivity, which can be roughly divided into two areas: (a) methods that optimize the credit assign- ment function (how the click feedback is interpreted), and (b) methods that achieve higher sensitivity by controlling the interleaving policy (how often a particular interleaved result page is shown). In this paper, we propose an interleaving framework that generalizes the previously studied interleaving methods in two aspects. First, it achieves a higher sensitivity by per- forming a joint data-driven optimization of the credit as- signment function and the interleaving policy. Second, we formulate the framework to be general w.r.t. the search do- main where the interleaving experiment is deployed, so that it can be applied in domains with grid-based presentation, such as image search. In order to simplify the optimization, we additionally introduce a stratifed estimate of the exper- iment outcome. This stratifcation is also useful on its own, as it reduces the variance of the outcome and thus increases the interleaving sensitivity. We perform an extensive experimental study using large- scale document and image search datasets obtained from a commercial search engine. The experiments show that our proposed framework achieves marked improvements in sensitivity over efective baselines on both datasets

Optimizing Ranking Models in an Online Setting

Online Learning to Rank (OLTR) methods optimize ranking models by directly interacting with users, which allows them to be very efficient and responsive. All OLTR methods introduced during the past decade have extended on the original OLTR method: Dueling Bandit Gradient Descent (DBGD). Recently, a fundamentally different approach was introduced with the Pairwise Differentiable Gradient Descent (PDGD) algorithm. To date the only comparisons of the two approaches are limited to simulations with cascading click models and low levels of noise. The main outcome so far is that PDGD converges at higher levels of performance and learns considerably faster than DBGD-based methods. However, the PDGD algorithm assumes cascading user behavior, potentially giving it an unfair advantage. Furthermore, the robustness of both methods to high levels of noise has not been investigated. Therefore, it is unclear whether the reported advantages of PDGD over DBGD generalize to different experimental conditions. In this paper, we investigate whether the previous conclusions about the PDGD and DBGD comparison generalize from ideal to worst-case circumstances. We do so in two ways. First, we compare the theoretical properties of PDGD and DBGD, by taking a critical look at previously proven properties in the context of ranking. Second, we estimate an upper and lower bound on the performance of methods by simulating both ideal user behavior and extremely difficult behavior, i.e., almost-random non-cascading user models. Our findings show that the theoretical bounds of DBGD do not apply to any common ranking model and, furthermore, that the performance of DBGD is substantially worse than PDGD in both ideal and worst-case circumstances. These results reproduce previously published findings about the relative performance of PDGD vs. DBGD and generalize them to extremely noisy and non-cascading circumstances.Comment: European Conference on Information Retrieval (ECIR) 201

Sensitive and Scalable Online Evaluation with Theoretical Guarantees

Multileaved comparison methods generalize interleaved comparison methods to provide a scalable approach for comparing ranking systems based on regular user interactions. Such methods enable the increasingly rapid research and development of search engines. However, existing multileaved comparison methods that provide reliable outcomes do so by degrading the user experience during evaluation. Conversely, current multileaved comparison methods that maintain the user experience cannot guarantee correctness. Our contribution is two-fold. First, we propose a theoretical framework for systematically comparing multileaved comparison methods using the notions of considerateness, which concerns maintaining the user experience, and fidelity, which concerns reliable correct outcomes. Second, we introduce a novel multileaved comparison method, Pairwise Preference Multileaving (PPM), that performs comparisons based on document-pair preferences, and prove that it is considerate and has fidelity. We show empirically that, compared to previous multileaved comparison methods, PPM is more sensitive to user preferences and scalable with the number of rankers being compared.Comment: CIKM 2017, Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Conference on Information and Knowledge Managemen

Differentiable Unbiased Online Learning to Rank

Online Learning to Rank (OLTR) methods optimize rankers based on user interactions. State-of-the-art OLTR methods are built specifically for linear models. Their approaches do not extend well to non-linear models such as neural networks. We introduce an entirely novel approach to OLTR that constructs a weighted differentiable pairwise loss after each interaction: Pairwise Differentiable Gradient Descent (PDGD). PDGD breaks away from the traditional approach that relies on interleaving or multileaving and extensive sampling of models to estimate gradients. Instead, its gradient is based on inferring preferences between document pairs from user clicks and can optimize any differentiable model. We prove that the gradient of PDGD is unbiased w.r.t. user document pair preferences. Our experiments on the largest publicly available Learning to Rank (LTR) datasets show considerable and significant improvements under all levels of interaction noise. PDGD outperforms existing OLTR methods both in terms of learning speed as well as final convergence. Furthermore, unlike previous OLTR methods, PDGD also allows for non-linear models to be optimized effectively. Our results show that using a neural network leads to even better performance at convergence than a linear model. In summary, PDGD is an efficient and unbiased OLTR approach that provides a better user experience than previously possible.Comment: Conference on Information and Knowledge Management 201

Unbiased Learning to Rank with Unbiased Propensity Estimation

Learning to rank with biased click data is a well-known challenge. A variety of methods has been explored to debias click data for learning to rank such as click models, result interleaving and, more recently, the unbiased learning-to-rank framework based on inverse propensity weighting. Despite their differences, most existing studies separate the estimation of click bias (namely the \textit{propensity model}) from the learning of ranking algorithms. To estimate click propensities, they either conduct online result randomization, which can negatively affect the user experience, or offline parameter estimation, which has special requirements for click data and is optimized for objectives (e.g. click likelihood) that are not directly related to the ranking performance of the system. In this work, we address those problems by unifying the learning of propensity models and ranking models. We find that the problem of estimating a propensity model from click data is a dual problem of unbiased learning to rank. Based on this observation, we propose a Dual Learning Algorithm (DLA) that jointly learns an unbiased ranker and an \textit{unbiased propensity model}. DLA is an automatic unbiased learning-to-rank framework as it directly learns unbiased ranking models from biased click data without any preprocessing. It can adapt to the change of bias distributions and is applicable to online learning. Our empirical experiments with synthetic and real-world data show that the models trained with DLA significantly outperformed the unbiased learning-to-rank algorithms based on result randomization and the models trained with relevance signals extracted by click models

Taking the Counterfactual Online: Efficient and Unbiased Online Evaluation for Ranking

Counterfactual evaluation can estimate Click-Through-Rate (CTR) differences between ranking systems based on historical interaction data, while mitigating the effect of position bias and item-selection bias. We introduce the novel Logging-Policy Optimization Algorithm (LogOpt), which optimizes the policy for logging data so that the counterfactual estimate has minimal variance. As minimizing variance leads to faster convergence, LogOpt increases the data-efficiency of counterfactual estimation. LogOpt turns the counterfactual approach - which is indifferent to the logging policy - into an online approach, where the algorithm decides what rankings to display. We prove that, as an online evaluation method, LogOpt is unbiased w.r.t. position and item-selection bias, unlike existing interleaving methods. Furthermore, we perform large-scale experiments by simulating comparisons between thousands of rankers. Our results show that while interleaving methods make systematic errors, LogOpt is as efficient as interleaving without being biased.Comment: ICTIR 202

Learning from User Interactions with Rankings: A Unification of the Field

Ranking systems form the basis for online search engines and recommendation services. They process large collections of items, for instance web pages or e-commerce products, and present the user with a small ordered selection. The goal of a ranking system is to help a user find the items they are looking for with the least amount of effort. Thus the rankings they produce should place the most relevant or preferred items at the top of the ranking. Learning to rank is a field within machine learning that covers methods which optimize ranking systems w.r.t. this goal. Traditional supervised learning to rank methods utilize expert-judgements to evaluate and learn, however, in many situations such judgements are impossible or infeasible to obtain. As a solution, methods have been introduced that perform learning to rank based on user clicks instead. The difficulty with clicks is that they are not only affected by user preferences, but also by what rankings were displayed. Therefore, these methods have to prevent being biased by other factors than user preference. This thesis concerns learning to rank methods based on user clicks and specifically aims to unify the different families of these methods. As a whole, the second part of this thesis proposes a framework that bridges many gaps between areas of online, counterfactual, and supervised learning to rank. It has taken approaches, previously considered independent, and unified them into a single methodology for widely applicable and effective learning to rank from user clicks.Comment: PhD Thesis of Harrie Oosterhuis defended at the University of Amsterdam on November 27th 202