University of Amsterdam at TREC 2019:Complex Answer Retrieval Track

This paper documents the University of Amsterdam’s participation in the TREC 2019 Complex Answer Retrieval Track. This is the first year we actively participate in TREC CAR, attracted by the introduction to the limited “budget” of 20 passages per heading in the outline. We conducted initial exploratory experiments on making each heading contain a unique set of passages within the outline, and even do this hierarchical for each subtree and main title/article level, hence remove any redundancy between passages for different “queries” within the same title. We experimented with top-down and bottom-up filtering approaches. At the time of writing we are still in the process of analyzing the results. Some initial observations are the following. First, the restriction makes the task very challenging, as assigning any passage to the right heading in the outline is highly non-trivial. Qualitative analysis shows that our simple heuristics often make a different decision than the editorial judges on the heading under which a passage relevant to the title’s topic is assigned. Second, the fraction of judged and relevant passages per individual query or leave node is very small, making it hard to draw any definite conclusions on our experiments, and also resulting in a too small recall base to evaluate our non-pooled runs in a meaningful way. Third, when aggregating all qrels and runs to the title level, there is reasonable effectiveness of the underlying BM25 rankings, showing that the underlying passage ranking is not unreasonable, and that the hard and interesting problem is in the exact assignment of passages to the “right” headings

University of Amsterdam at TREC 2019:Complex Answer Retrieval Track

This paper documents the University of Amsterdam’s participation in the TREC 2019 Complex Answer Retrieval Track. This is the first year we actively participate in TREC CAR, attracted by the introduction to the limited “budget” of 20 passages per heading in the outline. We conducted initial exploratory experiments on making each heading contain a unique set of passages within the outline, and even do this hierarchical for each subtree and main title/article level, hence remove any redundancy between passages for different “queries” within the same title. We experimented with top-down and bottom-up filtering approaches. At the time of writing we are still in the process of analyzing the results. Some initial observations are the following. First, the restriction makes the task very challenging, as assigning any passage to the right heading in the outline is highly non-trivial. Qualitative analysis shows that our simple heuristics often make a different decision than the editorial judges on the heading under which a passage relevant to the title’s topic is assigned. Second, the fraction of judged and relevant passages per individual query or leave node is very small, making it hard to draw any definite conclusions on our experiments, and also resulting in a too small recall base to evaluate our non-pooled runs in a meaningful way. Third, when aggregating all qrels and runs to the title level, there is reasonable effectiveness of the underlying BM25 rankings, showing that the underlying passage ranking is not unreasonable, and that the hard and interesting problem is in the exact assignment of passages to the “right” headings