Evaluating Variable-Length Multiple-Option Lists in Chatbots and Mobile Search

In recent years, the proliferation of smart mobile devices has lead to the gradual integration of search functionality within mobile platforms. This has created an incentive to move away from the "ten blue links'' metaphor, as mobile users are less likely to click on them, expecting to get the answer directly from the snippets. In turn, this has revived the interest in Question Answering. Then, along came chatbots, conversational systems, and messaging platforms, where the user needs could be better served with the system asking follow-up questions in order to better understand the user's intent. While typically a user would expect a single response at any utterance, a system could also return multiple options for the user to select from, based on different system understandings of the user's intent. However, this possibility should not be overused, as this practice could confuse and/or annoy the user. How to produce good variable-length lists, given the conflicting objectives of staying short while maximizing the likelihood of having a correct answer included in the list, is an underexplored problem. It is also unclear how to evaluate a system that tries to do that. Here we aim to bridge this gap. In particular, we define some necessary and some optional properties that an evaluation measure fit for this purpose should have. We further show that existing evaluation measures from the IR tradition are not entirely suitable for this setup, and we propose novel evaluation measures that address it satisfactorily.Comment: 4 pages, in Proceeding of SIGIR 201

An Axiomatic Analysis of Diversity Evaluation Metrics: Introducing the Rank-Biased Utility Metric

Many evaluation metrics have been defined to evaluate the effectiveness ad-hoc retrieval and search result diversification systems. However, it is often unclear which evaluation metric should be used to analyze the performance of retrieval systems given a specific task. Axiomatic analysis is an informative mechanism to understand the fundamentals of metrics and their suitability for particular scenarios. In this paper, we define a constraint-based axiomatic framework to study the suitability of existing metrics in search result diversification scenarios. The analysis informed the definition of Rank-Biased Utility (RBU) -- an adaptation of the well-known Rank-Biased Precision metric -- that takes into account redundancy and the user effort associated to the inspection of documents in the ranking. Our experiments over standard diversity evaluation campaigns show that the proposed metric captures quality criteria reflected by different metrics, being suitable in the absence of knowledge about particular features of the scenario under study.Comment: Original version: 10 pages. Preprint of full paper to appear at SIGIR'18: The 41st International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research & Development in Information Retrieval, July 8-12, 2018, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. ACM, New York, NY, US

QCBA: Postoptimization of Quantitative Attributes in Classifiers based on Association Rules

The need to prediscretize numeric attributes before they can be used in association rule learning is a source of inefficiencies in the resulting classifier. This paper describes several new rule tuning steps aiming to recover information lost in the discretization of numeric (quantitative) attributes, and a new rule pruning strategy, which further reduces the size of the classification models. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed methods on postoptimization of models generated by three state-of-the-art association rule classification algorithms: Classification based on Associations (Liu, 1998), Interpretable Decision Sets (Lakkaraju et al, 2016), and Scalable Bayesian Rule Lists (Yang, 2017). Benchmarks on 22 datasets from the UCI repository show that the postoptimized models are consistently smaller -- typically by about 50% -- and have better classification performance on most datasets