skip to main content
10.1145/2600428.2609607acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesirConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Modeling action-level satisfaction for search task satisfaction prediction

Published:03 July 2014Publication History

ABSTRACT

Search satisfaction is a property of a user's search process. Understanding it is critical for search providers to evaluate the performance and improve the effectiveness of search engines. Existing methods model search satisfaction holistically at the search-task level, ignoring important dependencies between action-level satisfaction and overall task satisfaction. We hypothesize that searchers' latent action-level satisfaction (i.e., whether they believe they were satisfied with the results of a query or click) influences their observed search behaviors and contributes to overall search satisfaction. We conjecture that by modeling search satisfaction at the action level, we can build more complete and more accurate predictors of search-task satisfaction. To do this, we develop a latent structural learning method, whereby rich structured features and dependency relations unique to search satisfaction prediction are explored. Using in-situ search satisfaction judgments provided by searchers, we show that there is significant value in modeling action-level satisfaction in search-task satisfaction prediction. In addition, experimental results on large-scale logs from Bing.com demonstrate clear benefit from using inferred action satisfaction labels for other applications such as document relevance estimation and query suggestion.

References

  1. M. Ageev, Q. Guo, D. Lagun, and E. Agichtein. Find it if you can: a game for modeling different types of web search success using interaction data. In SIGIR'11, pages 345--354. ACM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. E. Agichtein, E. Brill, S. Dumais, and R. Ragno. Learning user interaction models for predicting web search result preferences. In SIGIR'06, pages 3--10. ACM, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. A. Aula, R. M. Khan, and Z. Guan. How does search behavior change as search becomes more difficult? In CHI'10, pages 35--44. ACM, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. R. Baeza-Yates and B. Ribeiro-Neto. Modern information retrieval, volume 463. ACM Press New York, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. P. Boldi, F. Bonchi, C. Castillo, D. Donato, A. Gionis, and S. Vigna. The query-flow graph: model and applications. In CIKM'08, pages 609--618. ACM, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. C. Burges. From ranknet to lambdarank to lambdamart: An overview. Microsoft Research Technical Report MSR-TR-2010--82, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. M. Chang, D. Goldwasser, D. Roth, and V. Srikumar. Structured output learning with indirect supervision. In ICML'10, pages 199--206, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. H. T. Dang, D. Kelly, and J. J. Lin. Overview of the trec 2007 question answering track. In TREC, volume 7, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. G. Dupret and C. Liao. A model to estimate intrinsic document relevance from the clickthrough logs of a web search engine. In WSDM'12, pages 181--190. ACM, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. H. Feild and J. Allan. Task-aware query recommendation. In SIGIR'13, pages 83--92. ACM, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. H. A. Feild, J. Allan, and R. Jones. Predicting searcher frustration. In SIGIR'10, pages 34--41. ACM, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. S. Fox, K. Karnawat, M. Mydland, S. Dumais, and T. White. Evaluating implicit measures to improve web search. TOIS, 23(2):147--168, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Q. Guo, R. W. White, Y. Zhang, B. Anderson, and S. T. Dumais. Why searchers switch: understanding and predicting engine switching rationales. In SIGIR'11, pages 335--344. ACM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. A. Hassan. A semi-supervised approach to modeling web search satisfaction. In SIGIR'12, pages 275--284. ACM, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. A. Hassan, R. Jones, and K. L. Klinkner. Beyond dcg: User behavior as a predictor of a successful search. In WSDM'10, pages 221--230. ACM, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. A. Hassan, Y. Song, and L.-w. He. A task level metric for measuring web search satisfaction and its application on improving relevance estimation. In CIKM'11, pages 125--134. ACM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. A. Hassan and R. W. White. Personalized models of search satisfaction. In CIKM'13, pages 2009--2018. ACM, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. S. B. Huffman and M. Hochster. How well does result relevance predict session satisfaction? In SIGIR'07, pages 567--574. ACM, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. T. Joachims, L. Granka, B. Pan, H. Hembrooke, and G. Gay. Accurately interpreting clickthrough data as implicit feedback. In SIGIR'05, pages 154--161. ACM, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. R. Jones and K. L. Klinkner. Beyond the session timeout: automatic hierarchical segmentation of search topics in query logs. In CIKM'08, pages 699--708. ACM, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Y. Kim, A. Hassan, R. W. White, and I. Zitouni. Modeling dwell time to predict click-level satisfaction. In WSDM'14, pages 193--202. ACM, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. D. Koller and N. Friedman. Probabilistic Graphical Models: Principles and Techniques. The MIT Press, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Z. Liao, Y. Song, L.-w. He, and Y. Huang. Evaluating the effectiveness of search task trails. In WWW'12, pages 489--498. ACM, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. S. J. Lopez and C. R. Snyder. The Oxford handbook of positive psychology. Oxford University Press, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. R. Navarro-Prieto, M. Scaife, and Y. Rogers. Cognitive strategies in web searching. In Human Factors & the Web, pages 43--56, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. R. L. Oliver. Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the consumer. ME Sharpe, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. C. L. Smith and P. B. Kantor. User adaptation: good results from poor systems. In SIGIR'08, pages 147--154. ACM, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Y. Song, D. Zhou, and L.-w. He. Query suggestion by constructing term-transition graphs. In WSDM'12, pages 353--362. ACM, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. H. Wang, Y. Song, M.-W. Chang, X. He, R. W. White, and W. Chu. Learning to extract cross-session search tasks. In WWW'13, pages 1353--1364. ACM, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. R. W. White and D. Morris. Investigating the querying and browsing behavior of advanced search engine users. In SIGIR'07, pages 255--262. ACM, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Y. Xu and D. Mease. Evaluating web search using task completion time. In SIGIR'09, pages 676--677. ACM, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Modeling action-level satisfaction for search task satisfaction prediction

    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
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      SIGIR '14: Proceedings of the 37th international ACM SIGIR conference on Research & development in information retrieval
      July 2014
      1330 pages
      ISBN:9781450322577
      DOI:10.1145/2600428

      Copyright © 2014 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: 3 July 2014

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader