Ranking under temporal constraints

This paper introduces the notion of temporally constrained ranked retrieval, which, given a query and a time constraint, produces the best possible ranked list within the specified time limit. Naturally, more time should translate into better results, but the ranking algorithm should always produce some results. This property is desirable from a number of perspectives: to cope with diverse users and information needs, as well as to better manage system load and variance in query execution times. We propose two temporally constrained ranking algorithms based on a class of probabilistic prediction models that can naturally incorporate efficiency constraints: one that makes independent feature selection decisions, and the other that makes joint feature selection decisions. Experiments on three different test collections show that both ranking algorithms are able to satisfy imposed time constraints, although the joint model outperforms the independent model in being able to deliver more effective results, especially under tight time constraints, due to its ability to capture feature dependencies.

[1]  Stephen E. Robertson,et al.  Okapi at TREC-3 , 1994, TREC.

[2]  D. Edwards.  Introduction to graphical modelling , 1995 .

[3]  Stephen E. Robertson,et al.  GatfordCentre for Interactive Systems ResearchDepartment of Information , 1996 .

[4]  Matthew Lease.  An improved markov random field model for supporting verbose queries , 2009, SIGIR.

[5]  John D. Lafferty,et al.  A study of smoothing methods for language models applied to Ad Hoc information retrieval , 2001, SIGIR '01.

[6]  Aristides Gionis,et al.  The impact of caching on search engines , 2007, SIGIR.

[7]  Jimmy J. Lin,et al.  Of Ivory and Smurfs: Loxodontan MapReduce Experiments for Web Search , 2009, TREC.

[8]  Ronald Fagin,et al.  Static index pruning for information retrieval systems , 2001, SIGIR '01.

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

[10]  W. Bruce Croft,et al.  Optimization strategies for complex queries , 2005, SIGIR '05.

[11]  W. Bruce Croft,et al.  Learning concept importance using a weighted dependence model , 2010, WSDM '10.

[12]  Berkant Barla Cambazoglu,et al.  Early exit optimizations for additive machine learned ranking systems , 2010, WSDM '10.

[13]  Dan Roth,et al.  Integer linear programming inference for conditional random fields , 2005, ICML.

[14]  Charles L. A. Clarke,et al.  Term proximity scoring for ad-hoc retrieval on very large text collections , 2006, SIGIR.

[15]  Lidan Wang,et al.  Learning to efficiently rank , 2010, SIGIR.

[16]  Donald Metzler,et al.  Automatic feature selection in the markov random field model for information retrieval , 2007, CIKM '07.

[17]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  An Introduction to Variational Methods for Graphical Models , 1999, Machine Learning.

[18]  Mark S. Boddy,et al.  An Analysis of Time-Dependent Planning , 1988, AAAI.

[19]  W. Bruce Croft,et al.  A language modeling approach to information retrieval , 1998, SIGIR '98.

[20]  Tie-Yan Liu,et al.  Learning to Rank for Information Retrieval , 2011 .

[21]  Ben Carterette,et al.  Million Query Track 2007 Overview , 2008, TREC.

[22]  Michael I. Jordan.  Graphical Models , 2003 .

[23]  Jianfeng Gao,et al.  Dependence language model for information retrieval , 2004, SIGIR '04.

[24]  Alexandros Ntoulas,et al.  Pruning policies for two-tiered inverted index with correctness guarantee , 2007, SIGIR.

[25]  Alistair Moffat,et al.  Vector-space ranking with effective early termination , 2001, SIGIR '01.

[26]  Kevyn Collins-Thompson,et al.  Reducing the risk of query expansion via robust constrained optimization , 2009, CIKM.

[27]  W. Bruce Croft,et al.  A Markov random field model for term dependencies , 2005, SIGIR '05.

[28]  Gerhard Weikum,et al.  Best-Effort Top-k Query Processing Under Budgetary Constraints , 2009, 2009 IEEE 25th International Conference on Data Engineering.

[29]  Stephen J. Wright,et al.  Numerical Optimization , 2018, Fundamental Statistical Inference.