Online selection of diverse results

WSDM 2012
Online selection of diverse results
Debmalya Panigrahi, Atish Das Sarma, Gagan Aggarwal, Andrew Tomkins
Abstract

The phenomenal growth in the volume of easily accessible information via various web-based services has made it essential for service providers to provide users with personalized representative summaries of such information.

Further, online commercial services including social networking and micro-blogging websites, e-commerce portals, leisure and entertainment websites, etc. recommend interesting content to users that is simultaneously diverse on many different axes such as topic, geographic specificity, etc.

The key algorithmic question in all these applications is the generation of a succinct, representative, and relevant summary from a large stream of data coming from a variety of sources. In this paper, we formally model this optimization problem, identify its key structural characteristics, and use these observations to design an extremely scalable and efficient algorithm.

We analyze the algorithm using theoretical techniques to show that it always produces a nearly optimal solution. In addition, we perform large-scale experiments on both real-world and synthetically generated datasets, which confirm that our algorithm performs even better than its analytical guarantees in practice, and also outperforms other candidate algorithms for the problem by a wide margin.

Another publication from the same category: Machine Learning and Data Science

WWW '17 Perth Australia April 2017

Drawing Sound Conclusions from Noisy Judgments

David Goldberg, Andrew Trotman, Xiao Wang, Wei Min, Zongru Wan

The quality of a search engine is typically evaluated using hand-labeled data sets, where the labels indicate the relevance of documents to queries. Often the number of labels needed is too large to be created by the best annotators, and so less accurate labels (e.g. from crowdsourcing) must be used. This introduces errors in the labels, and thus errors in standard precision metrics (such as P@k and DCG); the lower the quality of the judge, the more errorful the labels, consequently the more inaccurate the metric. We introduce equations and algorithms that can adjust the metrics to the values they would have had if there were no annotation errors.

This is especially important when two search engines are compared by comparing their metrics. We give examples where one engine appeared to be statistically significantly better than the other, but the effect disappeared after the metrics were corrected for annotation error. In other words the evidence supporting a statistical difference was illusory, and caused by a failure to account for annotation error.

Keywords