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

Unconfounded Propensity Estimation for Unbiased Ranking

The goal of unbiased learning to rank (ULTR) is to leverage implicit user feedback for optimizing learning-to-rank systems. Among existing solutions, automatic ULTR algorithms that jointly learn user bias models (i.e., propensity models) with unbiased rankers have received a lot of attention due to their superior performance and low deployment cost in practice. Despite their theoretical soundness, the effectiveness is usually justified under a weak logging policy, where the ranking model can barely rank documents according to their relevance to the query. However, when the logging policy is strong, e.g., an industry-deployed ranking policy, the reported effectiveness cannot be reproduced. In this paper, we first investigate ULTR from a causal perspective and uncover a negative result: existing ULTR algorithms fail to address the issue of propensity overestimation caused by the query-document relevance confounder. Then, we propose a new learning objective based on backdoor adjustment and highlight its differences from conventional propensity models, which reveal the prevalence of propensity overestimation. On top of that, we introduce a novel propensity model called Logging-Policy-aware Propensity (LPP) model and its distinctive two-step optimization strategy, which allows for the joint learning of LPP and ranking models within the automatic ULTR framework, and actualize the unconfounded propensity estimation for ULTR. Extensive experiments on two benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness and generalizability of the proposed method.Comment: 11 pages, 5 figure

Cascade Model-based Propensity Estimation for Counterfactual Learning to Rank

Unbiased CLTR requires click propensities to compensate for the difference between user clicks and true relevance of search results via IPS. Current propensity estimation methods assume that user click behavior follows the PBM and estimate click propensities based on this assumption. However, in reality, user clicks often follow the CM, where users scan search results from top to bottom and where each next click depends on the previous one. In this cascade scenario, PBM-based estimates of propensities are not accurate, which, in turn, hurts CLTR performance. In this paper, we propose a propensity estimation method for the cascade scenario, called CM-IPS. We show that CM-IPS keeps CLTR performance close to the full-information performance in case the user clicks follow the CM, while PBM-based CLTR has a significant gap towards the full-information. The opposite is true if the user clicks follow PBM instead of the CM. Finally, we suggest a way to select between CM- and PBM-based propensity estimation methods based on historical user clicks.Comment: 4 pages, 2 figures, 43rd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR '20

Estimating Position Bias without Intrusive Interventions

Presentation bias is one of the key challenges when learning from implicit feedback in search engines, as it confounds the relevance signal. While it was recently shown how counterfactual learning-to-rank (LTR) approaches \cite{Joachims/etal/17a} can provably overcome presentation bias when observation propensities are known, it remains to show how to effectively estimate these propensities. In this paper, we propose the first method for producing consistent propensity estimates without manual relevance judgments, disruptive interventions, or restrictive relevance modeling assumptions. First, we show how to harvest a specific type of intervention data from historic feedback logs of multiple different ranking functions, and show that this data is sufficient for consistent propensity estimation in the position-based model. Second, we propose a new extremum estimator that makes effective use of this data. In an empirical evaluation, we find that the new estimator provides superior propensity estimates in two real-world systems -- Arxiv Full-text Search and Google Drive Search. Beyond these two points, we find that the method is robust to a wide range of settings in simulation studies

Policy-Aware Unbiased Learning to Rank for Top-k Rankings

Counterfactual Learning to Rank (LTR) methods optimize ranking systems using logged user interactions that contain interaction biases. Existing methods are only unbiased if users are presented with all relevant items in every ranking. There is currently no existing counterfactual unbiased LTR method for top-k rankings. We introduce a novel policy-aware counterfactual estimator for LTR metrics that can account for the effect of a stochastic logging policy. We prove that the policy-aware estimator is unbiased if every relevant item has a non-zero probability to appear in the top-k ranking. Our experimental results show that the performance of our estimator is not affected by the size of k: for any k, the policy-aware estimator reaches the same retrieval performance while learning from top-k feedback as when learning from feedback on the full ranking. Lastly, we introduce novel extensions of traditional LTR methods to perform counterfactual LTR and to optimize top-k metrics. Together, our contributions introduce the first policy-aware unbiased LTR approach that learns from top-k feedback and optimizes top-k metrics. As a result, counterfactual LTR is now applicable to the very prevalent top-k ranking setting in search and recommendation.Comment: SIGIR 2020 full conference pape

Doubly-Robust Estimation for Unbiased Learning-to-Rank from Position-Biased Click Feedback

Clicks on rankings suffer from position bias: generally items on lower ranks are less likely to be examined - and thus clicked - by users, in spite of their actual preferences between items. The prevalent approach to unbiased click-based Learning-to-Rank (LTR) is based on counterfactual Inverse-Propensity-Scoring (IPS) estimation. Unique about LTR is the fact that standard Doubly-Robust (DR) estimation - which combines IPS with regression predictions - is inapplicable since the treatment variable - indicating whether a user examined an item - cannot be observed in the data. In this paper, we introduce a novel DR estimator that uses the expectation of treatment per rank instead. Our novel DR estimator has more robust unbiasedness conditions than the existing IPS approach, and in addition, provides enormous decreases in variance: our experimental results indicate it requires several orders of magnitude fewer datapoints to converge at optimal performance. For the unbiased LTR field, our DR estimator contributes both increases in state-of-the-art performance and the most robust theoretical guarantees of all known LTR estimators

Controlling Fairness and Bias in Dynamic Learning-to-Rank

Rankings are the primary interface through which many online platforms match users to items (e.g. news, products, music, video). In these two-sided markets, not only the users draw utility from the rankings, but the rankings also determine the utility (e.g. exposure, revenue) for the item providers (e.g. publishers, sellers, artists, studios). It has already been noted that myopically optimizing utility to the users, as done by virtually all learning-to-rank algorithms, can be unfair to the item providers. We, therefore, present a learning-to-rank approach for explicitly enforcing merit-based fairness guarantees to groups of items (e.g. articles by the same publisher, tracks by the same artist). In particular, we propose a learning algorithm that ensures notions of amortized group fairness, while simultaneously learning the ranking function from implicit feedback data. The algorithm takes the form of a controller that integrates unbiased estimators for both fairness and utility, dynamically adapting both as more data becomes available. In addition to its rigorous theoretical foundation and convergence guarantees, we find empirically that the algorithm is highly practical and robust.Comment: First two authors contributed equally. In Proceedings of the 43rd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval 202