Towards a Better Understanding of Query Reformulation Behavior in Web Search

As queries submitted by users directly affect search experiences, how to organize queries has always been a research focus in Web search studies. While search request becomes complex and exploratory, many search sessions contain more than a single query thus reformulation becomes a necessity. To help users better formulate their queries in these complex search tasks, modern search engines usually provide a series of reformulation entries on search engine result pages (SERPs), i.e., query suggestions and related entities. However, few existing work have thoroughly studied why and how users perform query reformulations in these heterogeneous interfaces. Therefore, whether search engines provide sufficient assistance for users in reformulating queries remains under-investigated. To shed light on this research question, we conducted a field study to analyze fine-grained user reformulation behaviors including reformulation type, entry, reason, and the inspiration source with various search intents. Different from existing efforts that rely on external assessors to make judgments, in the field study we collect both implicit behavior signals and explicit user feedback information. Analysis results demonstrate that query reformulation behavior in Web search varies with the type of search tasks. We also found that the current query suggestion/related query recommendations provided by search engines do not offer enough help for users in complex search tasks. Based on the findings in our field study, we design a supervised learning framework to predict: 1) the reason behind each query reformulation, and 2) how users organize the reformulated query, both of which are novel challenges in this domain. This work provides insight into complex query reformulation behavior in Web search as well as the guidance for designing better query suggestion techniques in search engines.

[1]  Oren Kurland,et al.  Query Reformulation in E-Commerce Search , 2020, SIGIR.

[2]  Yiqun Liu,et al.  Models Versus Satisfaction: Towards a Better Understanding of Evaluation Metrics , 2020, SIGIR.

[3]  M. de Rijke,et al.  Personalized query suggestion diversification in information retrieval , 2019, Frontiers of Computer Science.

[4]  Yiqun Liu,et al.  TianGong-ST: A New Dataset with Large-scale Refined Real-world Web Search Sessions , 2019, CIKM.

[5]  Yiqun Liu,et al.  Investigating Query Reformulation Behavior of Search Users , 2019, CCIR.

[6]  Tuukka Ruotsalo,et al.  Why do Users Issue Good Queries?: Neural Correlates of Term Specificity , 2019, SIGIR.

[7]  Yiqun Liu,et al.  The Influence of Image Search Intents on User Behavior and Satisfaction , 2019, WSDM.

[8]  Wei Wang,et al.  RIN: Reformulation Inference Network for Context-Aware Query Suggestion , 2018, CIKM.

[9]  Yiqun Liu,et al.  How Does Domain Expertise Affect Users’ Search Interaction and Outcome in Exploratory Search? , 2018, ACM Trans. Inf. Syst..

[10]  Tie-Yan Liu,et al.  LightGBM: A Highly Efficient Gradient Boosting Decision Tree , 2017, NIPS.

[11]  Enrique Alfonseca,et al.  Learning to Attend, Copy, and Generate for Session-Based Query Suggestion , 2017, CIKM.

[12]  Emine Yilmaz,et al.  User Behaviour and Task Characteristics: A Field Study of Daily Information Behaviour , 2017, CHIIR.

[13]  David Carmel,et al.  One Query, Many Clicks: Analysis of Queries with Multiple Clicks by the Same User , 2016, CIKM.

[14]  Chaoqun Ni,et al.  What Affects Word Changes in Query Reformulation During a Task-based Search Session? , 2016, CHIIR.

[15]  Tianqi Chen,et al.  XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System , 2016, KDD.

[16]  Sebastian Dungs,et al.  An Eye-Tracking Study of Query Reformulation , 2015, SIGIR.

[17]  Bhaskar Mitra,et al.  Exploring Session Context using Distributed Representations of Queries and Reformulations , 2015, SIGIR.

[18]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  A Hierarchical Recurrent Encoder-Decoder for Generative Context-Aware Query Suggestion , 2015, CIKM.

[19]  Ryen W. White,et al.  Understanding and Predicting Graded Search Satisfaction , 2015, WSDM.

[20]  Pu-Jen Cheng,et al.  Learning user reformulation behavior for query auto-completion , 2014, SIGIR.

[21]  Daqing He,et al.  Searching, browsing, and clicking in a search session: changes in user behavior by task and over time , 2014, SIGIR.

[22]  Ahmed Hassan Awadallah,et al.  Beyond clicks: query reformulation as a predictor of search satisfaction , 2013, CIKM.

[23]  Milad Shokouhi,et al.  Learning to personalize query auto-completion , 2013, SIGIR.

[24]  Craig MacDonald,et al.  Learning to rank query suggestions for adhoc and diversity search , 2012, Information Retrieval.

[25]  Umut Ozertem,et al.  Learning to suggest: a machine learning framework for ranking query suggestions , 2012, SIGIR '12.

[26]  Philip Sedgwick,et al.  Multiple significance tests: the Bonferroni correction , 2012, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[27]  Wei Gao,et al.  Exploiting query logs for cross-lingual query suggestions , 2010, TOIS.

[28]  Filip Radlinski,et al.  Inferring query intent from reformulations and clicks , 2010, WWW '10.

[29]  W. Bruce Croft,et al.  Query reformulation using anchor text , 2010, WSDM '10.

[30]  Jeff Huang,et al.  Analyzing and evaluating query reformulation strategies in web search logs , 2009, CIKM.

[31]  Huanhuan Cao,et al.  Towards context-aware search by learning a very large variable length hidden markov model from search logs , 2009, WWW '09.

[32]  ChengXiang Zhai,et al.  Mining term association patterns from search logs for effective query reformulation , 2008, CIKM '08.

[33]  Abdur Chowdhury,et al.  A picture of search , 2006, InfoScale '06.

[34]  Nivio Ziviani,et al.  Using association rules to discover search engines related queries , 2003, Proceedings of the IEEE/LEOS 3rd International Conference on Numerical Simulation of Semiconductor Optoelectronic Devices (IEEE Cat. No.03EX726).

[35]  Yen-Jen Oyang,et al.  Relevant term suggestion in interactive web search based on contextual information in query session logs , 2003, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[36]  O. J. Dunn Multiple Comparisons Using Rank Sums , 1964 .

[37]  W. Kruskal,et al.  Use of Ranks in One-Criterion Variance Analysis , 1952 .

[38]  Xiaojun Yuan,et al.  Domain knowledge, search behaviour, and search effectiveness of engineering and science students: an exploratory study , 2005, Inf. Res..

[39]  Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology (2009) , 2022 .