skip to main content
research-article

Diagnostic Evaluation of Information Retrieval Models

Published:01 April 2011Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Developing effective retrieval models is a long-standing central challenge in information retrieval research. In order to develop more effective models, it is necessary to understand the deficiencies of the current retrieval models and the relative strengths of each of them. In this article, we propose a general methodology to analytically and experimentally diagnose the weaknesses of a retrieval function, which provides guidance on how to further improve its performance. Our methodology is motivated by the empirical observation that good retrieval performance is closely related to the use of various retrieval heuristics. We connect the weaknesses and strengths of a retrieval function with its implementations of these retrieval heuristics, and propose two strategies to check how well a retrieval function implements the desired retrieval heuristics. The first strategy is to formalize heuristics as constraints, and use constraint analysis to analytically check the implementation of retrieval heuristics. The second strategy is to define a set of relevance-preserving perturbations and perform diagnostic tests to empirically evaluate how well a retrieval function implements retrieval heuristics. Experiments show that both strategies are effective to identify the potential problems in implementations of the retrieval heuristics. The performance of retrieval functions can be improved after we fix these problems.

References

  1. Amati, G. and Rijsbergen, C. J. V. 2002. Probabilistic models of information retrieval based on measuring the divergence from randomness. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. 20, 4, 357--389. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Carterette, B. and Allan, J. 2005. Incremental test collections. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM’05). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Carterette, B., Allan, J., and Sitaraman, R. 2006. Minimal test collections for retrieval evaluation. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Cormack, G. V., Palmer, C. R., and Clarke, C. L. 1998. Efficient construction of large test collections. In Proceedings of the ACM-SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Fang, H. 2008. A re-examination of query expansion using lexical resources. In Proceedings of the 46th Annual Meetings of the Association for Computational Linguistics.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Fang, H., Tao, T., and Zhai, C. 2004. A formal study of information retrieval heuristics. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Fang, H. and Zhai, C. 2005. An exploration of axiomatic approaches to information retrieval. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Fang, H. and Zhai, C. 2006. Semantic term matching in axiomatic approaches to information retrieval. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Fuhr, N. 1992. Probabilistic models in information retrieval. Comput. J. 35, 3, 243--255. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Fuhr, N. 2001. Language models and uncertain inference in information retrieval. In Proceedings of the Language Modeling and IR Workshop. 6--11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Harman, D. and Buckley, C. 2004. Sigir 2004 workshop: Ria and where can ir go from here. SIGIR Forum 38, 2, 45--49. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. He, B. and Ounis, I. 2005. A study of the dirichlet priors for term frequency normalisation. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Hiemstra, D. 2000. A probabilistic justification for using tf-idf term wieghting in information retrieval. Int. J. Digital Libraries, 131--139.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Lafferty, J. and Zhai, C. 2003. Probabilistic relevance models based on document and query generation. In Language Modeling and Information Retrieval, W. B. Croft and J. Lafferty Eds., Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Lavrenko, V. and Croft, B. 2001. Relevance-Based language models. In Proceedings of the Annual ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 120--127. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Lopresti, D. and Zhou, J. 1996. Retrieval strategy for noisy text. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Document Analysis and Information Retrieval.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Ponte, J. and Croft, W. B. 1998. A language modeling approach to information retrieval. In Proceedings of the Annual ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 275--281. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Robertson, S. and Sparck Jones, K. 1976. Relevance weighting of search terms. J. Amer. Soc. Inf. Sci. 27, 129--146.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Robertson, S. and Walker, S. 1994. Some simple effective approximations to the 2-poisson model for probabilistic weighted retrieval. In Proceedings of the Annual ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 232--241. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Robertson, S. and Walker, S. 1997. On relevance weights with little relevance information. In Proceedings of the Annual ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 16--24. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Robertson, S. E., Walker, S., Jones, S., M.Hancock-Beaulieu, M., and Gatford, M. 1995. Okapi at TREC-3. In Proceedings of the 3rd Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-3). D. K. Harman Ed., 109--126.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Salton, G. 1989. Automatic Text Processing: The Transformation, Analysis and Retrieval of Information by Computer. Addison-Wesley. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Salton, G. and Buckley, C. 1988. Term-Weighting approaches in automatic text retrieval. Inf. Process. Manag. 24, 513--523. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Salton, G. and McGill, M. 1983. Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval. McGraw-Hill. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Salton, G., Yang, C. S., and Yu, C. T. 1975. A theory of term importance in automatic text analysis. J. Amer. Soc. Inf. Sci. 26, 1, 33--44.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Sanderson, M. and Joho, H. 2004. Forming test collections with no system pooling. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Shi, S., Wen, J.-R., Yu, Q., Song, R., and Ma, W.-Y. 2005. Gravitation-based model for information retrieval. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 488--495. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Singhal, A. 2001. Modern information retrieval: A brief overview. Bull. IEEE Comput. Soc. Techn. Committee Data Engin. 24, 4, 35--43.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Singhal, A., Buckley, C., and Mitra, M. 1996a. Pivoted document length normalization. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 21--29. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Singhal, A., Salton, G., and Buckley, C. 1996b. Length normalization in degraded text collections. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Document Analysis and Information Retrieval. 149--162.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Singhal, A., Choi, J., Hindle, D., Lewis, D. D., and Pereira, F. C. N. 1998. ATT at TREC-7. In Proceedings of the Text REtrieval Conference. 186--198.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Soboroff, I., Nicholas, C., and Cahan, P. 2001. Ranking retrieval systems without relevance judgements. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Sparck Jones, K. and Willett, P., Eds. 1997. Readings in Information Retrieval. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Tao, T. and Zhai, C. 2007. An exploration of proximity measures in information retrieval. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Turtle, H. and Croft, W. B. 1991. Evaluation of an inference network-based retrieval model. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. 9, 3, 187--222. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. van Rijbergen, C. J. 1977. A theoretical basis for theuse of co-occurrence data in information retrieval. J. Document., 106--119.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. van Rijsbergen, C. J. 1986. A non-classical logic for information retrieval. Comput. J. 29, 6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Voorhees, E. M. 2007. Trec: Continuing information retrieval’s tradition of experimentation. Comm. ACM 50, 11, 51--54. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Wong, K.-F., Song, D., Bruza, P., and Cheng, C.-H. 2001. Application of aboutness to func- tional benchmarking in information retrieval. ACM Trans. Infor. Syst. 19, 4, 337--370. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Wong, S. K. M. and Yao, Y. Y. 1995. On modeling information retrieval with probabilistic inference. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. 13, 1, 69--99. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Zhai, C. and Lafferty, J. 2001a. Model-based feedback in the language modeling approach to information retrieval. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM’01). 403--410. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Zhai, C. and Lafferty, J. 2001b. A study of smoothing methods for language models applied to ad hoc information retrieval. In Proceedings of the Annual ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 334--342. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Zhou, Y. and Croft, W. B. 2006. Ranking robustness: a novel framework to predict query performance. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM’06). 567. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Zobel, J. 1998. How reliable are the results of large-scale information retrieval experiments? In Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Zobel, J. and Moffat, A. 1998. Exploring the similarity space. SIGIR Forum 31, 1, 18--34. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Diagnostic Evaluation of Information Retrieval Models

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image ACM Transactions on Information Systems
      ACM Transactions on Information Systems  Volume 29, Issue 2
      April 2011
      193 pages
      ISSN:1046-8188
      EISSN:1558-2868
      DOI:10.1145/1961209
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2011 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 1 April 2011
      • Accepted: 1 March 2010
      • Revised: 1 September 2009
      • Received: 1 May 2007
      Published in tois Volume 29, Issue 2

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader