Understanding and Modeling Success in Email Search

Email has been a dominant form of communication for many years, and email search is an important problem. In contrast to other search setting, such as web search, there have been few studies of user behavior and models of email search success. Research in email search is challenging for many reasons including the personal and private nature of the collection. Third party judges can not look at email search queries or email message content requiring new modeling techniques. In this study, we built an opt-in client application which monitors a user's email search activity and then pops up an in-situ survey when a search session is finished. We then merged the survey data with server-side behavioral logs. This approach allows us to study the relationship between session-level outcome and user behavior, and then build a model to predict success for email search based on behavioral interaction patterns. Our results show that generative models (MarkovChain) of success can predict the session-level success of email search better than baseline heuristics and discriminative models (RandomForest). The success model makes use of email-specific log activities such as reply, forward and move, as well as generic signals such as click with long dwell time. The learned model is highly interpretable, and reusable in that it can be applied to unlabeled interaction logs in the future.

[1]  Ahmed Hassan Awadallah,et al.  Beyond DCG: user behavior as a predictor of a successful search , 2010, WSDM '10.

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

[3]  Gobinda G. Chowdhury,et al.  TREC: Experiment and Evaluation in Information Retrieval , 2007 .

[4]  Wendy E. Mackay,et al.  Diversity in the use of electronic mail: a preliminary inquiry , 1988, TOIS.

[5]  Filip Radlinski,et al.  Large-scale validation and analysis of interleaved search evaluation , 2012, TOIS.

[6]  Susan T. Dumais,et al.  Characterizing Email Search using Large-scale Behavioral Logs and Surveys , 2017, WWW.

[7]  Andrew P. Bradley,et al.  The use of the area under the ROC curve in the evaluation of machine learning algorithms , 1997, Pattern Recognit..

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

[9]  Steve Fox,et al.  Evaluating implicit measures to improve web search , 2005, TOIS.

[10]  Yue Wang,et al.  Beyond Ranking: Optimizing Whole-Page Presentation , 2016, WSDM.

[11]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Random Forests , 2001, Machine Learning.

[12]  Ryen W. White,et al.  Modeling dwell time to predict click-level satisfaction , 2014, WSDM.

[13]  Milad Shokouhi,et al.  Finding Email in a Multi-Account, Multi-Device World , 2016, CHI.

[14]  Candace L. Sidner,et al.  Email overload: exploring personal information management of email , 1996, CHI.

[15]  Yang Song,et al.  A task level metric for measuring web search satisfaction and its application on improving relevance estimation , 2011, CIKM '11.

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

[17]  Susan T. Dumais,et al.  Large-Scale Analysis of Email Search and Organizational Strategies , 2017, CHIIR.

[18]  Susan T. Dumais,et al.  Stuff I've Seen: A System for Personal Information Retrieval and Re-Use , 2003, SIGF.

[19]  Ahmed Hassan Awadallah A semi-supervised approach to modeling web search satisfaction , 2012 .

[20]  Gordon V. Cormack,et al.  Spam Corpus Creation for TREC , 2005, CEAS.