Multi-Task Learning for Email Search Ranking with Auxiliary Query Clustering

User information needs vary significantly across different tasks, and therefore their queries will also differ considerably in their expressiveness and semantics. Many studies have been proposed to model such query diversity by obtaining query types and building query-dependent ranking models. These studies typically require either a labeled query dataset or clicks from multiple users aggregated over the same document. These techniques, however, are not applicable when manual query labeling is not viable, and aggregated clicks are unavailable due to the private nature of the document collection, e.g., in email search scenarios. In this paper, we study how to obtain query type in an unsupervised fashion and how to incorporate this information into query-dependent ranking models. We first develop a hierarchical clustering algorithm based on truncated SVD and varimax rotation to obtain coarse-to-fine query types. Then, we study three query-dependent ranking models, including two neural models that leverage query type information as additional features, and one novel multi-task neural model that views query type as the label for the auxiliary query cluster prediction task. This multi-task model is trained to simultaneously rank documents and predict query types. Our experiments on tens of millions of real-world email search queries demonstrate that the proposed multi-task model can significantly outperform the baseline neural ranking models, which either do not incorporate query type information or just simply feed query type as an additional feature.

[1]  Marc Najork,et al.  Learning from User Interactions in Personal Search via Attribute Parameterization , 2017, WSDM.

[2]  Ji-Rong Wen,et al.  Query clustering using user logs , 2002, TOIS.

[3]  Yann LeCun,et al.  Signature Verification Using A "Siamese" Time Delay Neural Network , 1993, Int. J. Pattern Recognit. Artif. Intell..

[4]  Lu Wang,et al.  Clustering query refinements by user intent , 2010, WWW '10.

[5]  Hang Li QRU-1 : A Public Dataset for Promoting Query Representation and Understanding Research , 2012 .

[6]  Gregory N. Hullender,et al.  Learning to rank using gradient descent , 2005, ICML.

[7]  Christopher D. Manning,et al.  Improved Semantic Representations From Tree-Structured Long Short-Term Memory Networks , 2015, ACL.

[8]  Latanya Sweeney,et al.  k-Anonymity: A Model for Protecting Privacy , 2002, Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl. Based Syst..

[9]  Hang Li,et al.  Convolutional Neural Network Architectures for Matching Natural Language Sentences , 2014, NIPS.

[10]  Heng-Tze Cheng,et al.  Wide & Deep Learning for Recommender Systems , 2016, DLRS@RecSys.

[11]  Jianfeng Gao,et al.  Modeling Interestingness with Deep Neural Networks , 2014, EMNLP.

[12]  David Carmel,et al.  Rank by Time or by Relevance?: Revisiting Email Search , 2015, CIKM.

[13]  Jia Li,et al.  Latent Cross: Making Use of Context in Recurrent Recommender Systems , 2018, WSDM.

[14]  Rabab Kreidieh Ward,et al.  Semantic Modelling with Long-Short-Term Memory for Information Retrieval , 2014, ArXiv.

[15]  H. Kaiser The varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysis , 1958 .

[16]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Semantic hashing , 2009, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[17]  Hamed Zamani,et al.  Situational Context for Ranking in Personal Search , 2017, WWW.

[18]  Xueqi Cheng,et al.  A Study of MatchPyramid Models on Ad-hoc Retrieval , 2016, ArXiv.

[19]  Filip Radlinski,et al.  Understanding and Modeling Success in Email Search , 2017, SIGIR.

[20]  Xiaodong Liu,et al.  Representation Learning Using Multi-Task Deep Neural Networks for Semantic Classification and Information Retrieval , 2015, NAACL.

[21]  Marc Najork,et al.  Position Bias Estimation for Unbiased Learning to Rank in Personal Search , 2018, WSDM.

[22]  Qiang Yang,et al.  Building bridges for web query classification , 2006, SIGIR.

[23]  Jimmy Ba,et al.  Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization , 2014, ICLR.

[24]  Enhong Chen,et al.  Context-aware query classification , 2009, SIGIR.

[25]  T. Landauer,et al.  Indexing by Latent Semantic Analysis , 1990 .

[26]  Nick Craswell,et al.  Learning to Match using Local and Distributed Representations of Text for Web Search , 2016, WWW.

[27]  Harry Shum,et al.  Query Dependent Ranking Using K-nearest Neighbor * , 2022 .

[28]  Christopher J. C. Burges,et al.  From RankNet to LambdaRank to LambdaMART: An Overview , 2010 .

[29]  Hang Li,et al.  A Deep Architecture for Matching Short Texts , 2013, NIPS.

[30]  In-Ho Kang,et al.  Query type classification for web document retrieval , 2003, SIGIR.

[31]  Andrei Broder,et al.  A taxonomy of web search , 2002, SIGF.

[32]  Nick Craswell,et al.  An experimental comparison of click position-bias models , 2008, WSDM '08.

[33]  Jiawei Han,et al.  Data Mining: Concepts and Techniques , 2000 .

[34]  W. Bruce Croft,et al.  Neural Ranking Models with Weak Supervision , 2017, SIGIR.

[35]  Rabab Kreidieh Ward,et al.  Deep Sentence Embedding Using Long Short-Term Memory Networks: Analysis and Application to Information Retrieval , 2015, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing.

[36]  Larry P. Heck,et al.  Learning deep structured semantic models for web search using clickthrough data , 2013, CIKM.

[37]  J. Friedman Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine. , 2001 .

[38]  Bhaskar Mitra,et al.  Neural Models for Information Retrieval , 2017, ArXiv.

[39]  Ophir Frieder,et al.  Varying approaches to topical web query classification , 2007, SIGIR.

[40]  Yoram Singer,et al.  Adaptive Subgradient Methods for Online Learning and Stochastic Optimization , 2011, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[41]  Marc Najork,et al.  Learning to Rank with Selection Bias in Personal Search , 2016, SIGIR.

[42]  Yelong Shen,et al.  Learning semantic representations using convolutional neural networks for web search , 2014, WWW.