skip to main content
10.1145/3308558.3313447acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswwwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open Access

Unbiased LambdaMART: An Unbiased Pairwise Learning-to-Rank Algorithm

Published:13 May 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Recently a number of algorithms under the theme of 'unbiased learning-to-rank' have been proposed, which can reduce position bias, the major type of bias in click data, and train a high-performance ranker with click data. Most of the existing algorithms, based on the inverse propensity weighting (IPW) principle, first estimate the click bias at each position, and then train an unbiased ranker with the estimated biases using a learning-to-rank algorithm. However, there has not been a method for unbiased pairwise learning-to-rank that can simultaneously conduct debiasing of click data and training of a ranker using a pairwise loss function. In this paper, we propose a novel framework to accomplish the goal and apply this framework to the state-of-the-art pairwise learning-to-rank algorithm, LambdaMART. Our algorithm named Unbiased LambdaMART can jointly estimate the biases at click positions and the biases at unclick positions, and learn an unbiased ranker. Experiments on benchmark data show that Unbiased LambdaMART can significantly outperform existing algorithms by large margins. In addition, an online A/B Testing at a commercial search engine shows that Unbiased LambdaMART can effectively conduct debiasing of click data and enhance relevance ranking.

References

  1. Qingyao Ai, Keping Bi, Cheng Luo, Jiafeng Guo, and W. Bruce Croft. 2018. Unbiased Learning to Rank with Unbiased Propensity Estimation. In The 41st International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research & Development in Information Retrieval, SIGIR 2018, Ann Arbor, MI, USA, July 08-12, 2018. 385-394. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Qingyao Ai, Jiaxin Mao, Yiqun Liu, and W. Bruce Croft. 2018. Unbiased Learning to Rank: Theory and Practice. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, CIKM 2018. ACM, 2305-2306. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Chris J.C. Burges. 2010. From RankNet to LambdaRank to LambdaMART: An Overview. Technical Report.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Christopher J. C. Burges, Robert Ragno, and Quoc Viet Le. 2006. Learning to Rank with Nonsmooth Cost Functions. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, NIPS 2006, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, December 4-7, 2006. 193-200. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Olivier Chapelle and Yi Chang. 2011. Yahoo! Learning to Rank Challenge Overview. In Proceedings of the Yahoo! Learning to Rank Challenge, held at ICML 2010, Haifa, Israel, June 25, 2010. 1-24. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Jerome H. Friedman. 2000. Greedy Function Approximation: A Gradient Boosting Machine. Annals of Statistics 29(2000), 1189-1232.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Kalervo Järvelin and Jaana Kekäläinen. 2002. Cumulated gain-based evaluation of IR techniques. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. 20, 4 (2002), 422-446. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Thorsten Joachims, Laura A. Granka, Bing Pan, Helene Hembrooke, and Geri Gay. 2005. Accurately interpreting clickthrough data as implicit feedback. In SIGIR 2005: Proceedings of the 28th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Salvador, Brazil, August 15-19, 2005. 154-161. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Thorsten Joachims, Adith Swaminathan, and Tobias Schnabel. 2017. Unbiased Learning-to-Rank with Biased Feedback. In Proceedings of the Tenth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, WSDM 2017, Cambridge, United Kingdom, February 6-10, 2017. 781-789. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Guolin Ke, Qi Meng, Thomas Finley, Taifeng Wang, Wei Chen, Weidong Ma, Qiwei Ye, and Tie-Yan Liu. 2017. LightGBM: A Highly Efficient Gradient Boosting Decision Tree. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, NIPS 2017, 4-9 December 2017, Long Beach, CA, USA. 3149-3157. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Hang Li. 2011. A Short Introduction to Learning to Rank. IEICE Transactions 94-D, 10 (2011), 1854-1862.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Hang Li. 2014. Learning to Rank for Information Retrieval and Natural Language Processing, Second Edition. Morgan & Claypool Publishers.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Tie-Yan Liu. 2009. Learning to Rank for Information Retrieval. Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval 3, 3 (2009), 225-331. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Matthew Richardson, Ewa Dominowska, and Robert Ragno. 2007. Predicting clicks: estimating the click-through rate for new ads. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on World Wide Web, WWW 2007, Banff, Alberta, Canada, May 8-12, 2007. 521-530. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Paul R. Rosenbaum and Donald B. Rubin. 1983. The Central Role of the Propensity Score in Observational Studies for Causal Effects. Biometrika 70(1983), 41-55.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Xuanhui Wang, Michael Bendersky, Donald Metzler, and Marc Najork. 2016. Learning to Rank with Selection Bias in Personal Search. In Proceedings of the 39th International ACM SIGIR conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, SIGIR 2016, Pisa, Italy, July 17-21, 2016. 115-124. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Xuanhui Wang, Nadav Golbandi, Michael Bendersky, Donald Metzler, and Marc Najork. 2018. Position Bias Estimation for Unbiased Learning to Rank in Personal Search. In Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, WSDM 2018, Marina Del Rey, CA, USA, February 5-9, 2018. 610-618. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Qiang Wu, Christopher J. C. Burges, Krysta Marie Svore, and Jianfeng Gao. 2010. Adapting boosting for information retrieval measures. Inf. Retr. 13, 3 (2010), 254-270. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Yisong Yue, Rajan Patel, and Hein Roehrig. 2010. Beyond position bias: examining result attractiveness as a source of presentation bias in clickthrough data. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on World Wide Web, WWW 2010, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA, April 26-30, 2010. 1011-1018. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

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 Other conferences
    WWW '19: The World Wide Web Conference
    May 2019
    3620 pages
    ISBN:9781450366748
    DOI:10.1145/3308558

    Copyright © 2019 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: 13 May 2019

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate1,899of8,196submissions,23%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format