Comparison of balancing techniques for multimedia IR over imbalanced datasets

A promising method to improve the performance of information retrieval systems is to approach retrieval tasks as a supervised classification problem. Previous user interactions, e.g. gathered from a thorough log file analysis, can be used to train classifiers which aim to inference relevance of retrieved documents based on user interactions. A problem in this approach is, however, the large imbalance ratio between relevant and non-relevant documents in the collection. In standard test collection as used in academic evaluation frameworks such as TREC, non-relevant documents outnumber relevant documents by far. In this work, we address this imbalance problem in the multimedia domain. We focus on the logs of two multimedia user studies which are highly imbalanced. We compare a na¨ıve solution of randomly deleting documents belonging to the majority class with various balancing algorithms coming from different fields: data classification and text classification. Our experiments indicate that all algorithms improve the classification performance of just deleting at random from the dominant class.

[1]  Rudolf Kruse,et al.  Relevance Feedback for Association Rules by Leveraging Concepts from Information Retrieval , 2007, SGAI Conf..

[2]  Micheline Hancock-Beaulieu,et al.  An Evaluation of Automatic Query Expansion in an Online Library Catalogue , 1992, J. Documentation.

[3]  José Luis Vicedo González,et al.  TREC: Experiment and evaluation in information retrieval , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[4]  Martin Halvey,et al.  Search trails using user feedback to improve video search , 2008, ACM Multimedia.

[5]  David M. Nichols,et al.  How people find videos , 2008, JCDL '08.

[6]  Adam Kowalczyk,et al.  Extreme re-balancing for SVMs: a case study , 2004, SKDD.

[7]  Stephen W. Smoliar,et al.  An integrated system for content-based video retrieval and browsing , 1997, Pattern Recognit..

[8]  Robert Villa,et al.  Comparison of Feature Construction Methods for Video Relevance Prediction , 2009, MMM.

[9]  Tao Qin,et al.  Feature selection for ranking , 2007, SIGIR.

[10]  Nitesh V. Chawla,et al.  SMOTE: Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique , 2002, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[11]  F. Wilcoxon Individual Comparisons by Ranking Methods , 1945 .

[12]  Paul Over,et al.  Evaluation campaigns and TRECVid , 2006, MIR '06.

[13]  Robert Villa,et al.  A study of awareness in multimedia search , 2008, JCDL '08.

[14]  Nitesh V. Chawla,et al.  Editorial: special issue on learning from imbalanced data sets , 2004, SKDD.

[15]  José A. Gámez,et al.  Improving KNN-based e-mail classification into folders generating class-balanced datasets. , 2008 .

[16]  Gary M. Weiss Mining with rarity: a unifying framework , 2004, SKDD.

[17]  Andrew McCallum,et al.  A comparison of event models for naive bayes text classification , 1998, AAAI 1998.

[18]  Jaime Teevan,et al.  Implicit feedback for inferring user preference: a bibliography , 2003, SIGF.

[19]  Marcel Worring,et al.  Content-Based Image Retrieval at the End of the Early Years , 2000, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[20]  Nathalie Japkowicz,et al.  The Class Imbalance Problem: Significance and Strategies , 2000 .

[21]  Susan T. Dumais,et al.  Improving Web Search Ranking by Incorporating User Behavior Information , 2019, SIGIR Forum.

[22]  J. J. Rocchio,et al.  Relevance feedback in information retrieval , 1971 .

[23]  Gerard Salton,et al.  The SMART Retrieval System—Experiments in Automatic Document Processing , 1971 .