arXiv subjects

Maarten de Rijke

Publications and source records attributed to Maarten de Rijke.

At least 127 records · Page 7Linked to original sources

arXiv2024

Robust Information Retrieval

Beyond effectiveness, the robustness of an information retrieval (IR) system is increasingly attracting attention. When deployed, a critical technology such as IR should not only deliver strong performance on average but also have the ability to handle a variety of exceptional situations. In recent years, research into the robustness of IR has seen significant growth, with numerous researchers offering extensive analyses and proposing myriad strategies to address robustness challenges. In this tutorial, we first provide background information covering the basics and a taxonomy of robustness in IR. Then, we examine adversarial robustness and out-of-distribution (OOD) robustness within IR-specific contexts, extensively reviewing recent progress in methods to enhance robustness. The tutorial concludes with a discussion on the robustness of IR in the context of large language models (LLMs), highlighting ongoing challenges and promising directions for future research. This tutorial aims to generate broader attention to robustness issues in IR, facilitate an understanding of the relevant literature, and lower the barrier to entry for interested researchers and practitioners.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

Are Large Language Models Good at Utility Judgments?

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is considered to be a promising approach to alleviate the hallucination issue of large language models (LLMs), and it has received widespread attention from researchers recently. Due to the limitation in the semantic understanding of retrieval models, the success of RAG heavily lies on the ability of LLMs to identify passages with utility. Recent efforts have explored the ability of LLMs to assess the relevance of passages in retrieval, but there has been limited work on evaluating the utility of passages in supporting question answering. In this work, we conduct a comprehensive study about the capabilities of LLMs in utility evaluation for open-domain QA. Specifically, we introduce a benchmarking procedure and collection of candidate passages with different characteristics, facilitating a series of experiments with five representative LLMs. Our experiments reveal that: (i) well-instructed LLMs can distinguish between relevance and utility, and that LLMs are highly receptive to newly generated counterfactual passages. Moreover, (ii) we scrutinize key factors that affect utility judgments in the instruction design. And finally, (iii) to verify the efficacy of utility judgments in practical retrieval augmentation applications, we delve into LLMs' QA capabilities using the evidence judged with utility and direct dense retrieval results. (iv) We propose a k-sampling, listwise approach to reduce the dependency of LLMs on the sequence of input passages, thereby facilitating subsequent answer generation. We believe that the way we formalize and study the problem along with our findings contributes to a critical assessment of retrieval-augmented LLMs. Our code and benchmark can be found at \url{https://github.com/ict-bigdatalab/utility_judgments}.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

Let Me Do It For You: Towards LLM Empowered Recommendation via Tool Learning

Conventional recommender systems (RSs) face challenges in precisely capturing users' fine-grained preferences. Large language models (LLMs) have shown capabilities in commonsense reasoning and leveraging external tools that may help address these challenges. However, existing LLM-based RSs suffer from hallucinations, misalignment between the semantic space of items and the behavior space of users, or overly simplistic control strategies (e.g., whether to rank or directly present existing results). To bridge these gap, we introduce ToolRec, a framework for LLM-empowered recommendations via tool learning that uses LLMs as surrogate users, thereby guiding the recommendation process and invoking external tools to generate a recommendation list that aligns closely with users' nuanced preferences. We formulate the recommendation process as a process aimed at exploring user interests in attribute granularity. The process factors in the nuances of the context and user preferences. The LLM then invokes external tools based on a user's attribute instructions and probes different segments of the item pool. We consider two types of attribute-oriented tools: rank tools and retrieval tools. Through the integration of LLMs, ToolRec enables conventional recommender systems to become external tools with a natural language interface. Extensive experiments verify the effectiveness of ToolRec, particularly in scenarios that are rich in semantic content.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

Unbiased Learning to Rank Meets Reality: Lessons from Baidu's Large-Scale Search Dataset

Unbiased learning-to-rank (ULTR) is a well-established framework for learning from user clicks, which are often biased by the ranker collecting the data. While theoretically justified and extensively tested in simulation, ULTR techniques lack empirical validation, especially on modern search engines. The Baidu-ULTR dataset released for the WSDM Cup 2023, collected from Baidu's search engine, offers a rare opportunity to assess the real-world performance of prominent ULTR techniques. Despite multiple submissions during the WSDM Cup 2023 and the subsequent NTCIR ULTRE-2 task, it remains unclear whether the observed improvements stem from applying ULTR or other learning techniques. In this work, we revisit and extend the available experiments on the Baidu-ULTR dataset. We find that standard unbiased learning-to-rank techniques robustly improve click predictions but struggle to consistently improve ranking performance, especially considering the stark differences obtained by choice of ranking loss and query-document features. Our experiments reveal that gains in click prediction do not necessarily translate to enhanced ranking performance on expert relevance annotations, implying that conclusions strongly depend on how success is measured in this benchmark.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

Estimating the Hessian Matrix of Ranking Objectives for Stochastic Learning to Rank with Gradient Boosted Trees

Stochastic learning to rank (LTR) is a recent branch in the LTR field that concerns the optimization of probabilistic ranking models. Their probabilistic behavior enables certain ranking qualities that are impossible with deterministic models. For example, they can increase the diversity of displayed documents, increase fairness of exposure over documents, and better balance exploitation and exploration through randomization. A core difficulty in LTR is gradient estimation, for this reason, existing stochastic LTR methods have been limited to differentiable ranking models (e.g., neural networks). This is in stark contrast with the general field of LTR where Gradient Boosted Decision Trees (GBDTs) have long been considered the state-of-the-art. In this work, we address this gap by introducing the first stochastic LTR method for GBDTs. Our main contribution is a novel estimator for the second-order derivatives, i.e., the Hessian matrix, which is a requirement for effective GBDTs. To efficiently compute both the first and second-order derivatives simultaneously, we incorporate our estimator into the existing PL-Rank framework, which was originally designed for first-order derivatives only. Our experimental results indicate that stochastic LTR without the Hessian has extremely poor performance, whilst the performance is competitive with the current state-of-the-art with our estimated Hessian. Thus, through the contribution of our novel Hessian estimation method, we have successfully introduced GBDTs to stochastic LTR.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2024

Are We Really Achieving Better Beyond-Accuracy Performance in Next Basket Recommendation?

Next basket recommendation (NBR) is a special type of sequential recommendation that is increasingly receiving attention. So far, most NBR studies have focused on optimizing the accuracy of the recommendation, whereas optimizing for beyond-accuracy metrics, e.g., item fairness and diversity remains largely unexplored. Recent studies into NBR have found a substantial performance difference between recommending repeat items and explore items. Repeat items contribute most of the users' perceived accuracy compared with explore items. Informed by these findings, we identify a potential "short-cut" to optimize for beyond-accuracy metrics while maintaining high accuracy. To leverage and verify the existence of such short-cuts, we propose a plug-and-play two-step repetition-exploration (TREx) framework that treats repeat items and explores items separately, where we design a simple yet highly effective repetition module to ensure high accuracy, while two exploration modules target optimizing only beyond-accuracy metrics. Experiments are performed on two widely-used datasets w.r.t. a range of beyond-accuracy metrics, viz. five fairness metrics and three diversity metrics. Our experimental results verify the effectiveness of TREx. Prima facie, this appears to be good news: we can achieve high accuracy and improved beyond-accuracy metrics at the same time. However, we argue that the real-world value of our algorithmic solution, TREx, is likely to be limited and reflect on the reasonableness of the evaluation setup. We end up challenging existing evaluation paradigms, particularly in the context of beyond-accuracy metrics, and provide insights for researchers to navigate potential pitfalls and determine reasonable metrics to consider when optimizing for accuracy and beyond-accuracy metrics.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

A First Look at Selection Bias in Preference Elicitation for Recommendation

Preference elicitation explicitly asks users what kind of recommendations they would like to receive. It is a popular technique for conversational recommender systems to deal with cold-starts. Previous work has studied selection bias in implicit feedback, e.g., clicks, and in some forms of explicit feedback, i.e., ratings on items. Despite the fact that the extreme sparsity of preference elicitation interactions make them severely more prone to selection bias than natural interactions, the effect of selection bias in preference elicitation on the resulting recommendations has not been studied yet. To address this gap, we take a first look at the effects of selection bias in preference elicitation and how they may be further investigated in the future. We find that a big hurdle is the current lack of any publicly available dataset that has preference elicitation interactions. As a solution, we propose a simulation of a topic-based preference elicitation process. The results from our simulation-based experiments indicate (i) that ignoring the effect of selection bias early in preference elicitation can lead to an exacerbation of overrepresentation in subsequent item recommendations, and (ii) that debiasing methods can alleviate this effect, which leads to significant improvements in subsequent item recommendation performance. Our aim is for the proposed simulator and initial results to provide a starting point and motivation for future research into this important but overlooked problem setting.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

The Impact of Group Membership Bias on the Quality and Fairness of Exposure in Ranking

When learning to rank from user interactions, search and recommender systems must address biases in user behavior to provide a high-quality ranking. One type of bias that has recently been studied in the ranking literature is when sensitive attributes, such as gender, have an impact on a user's judgment about an item's utility. For example, in a search for an expertise area, some users may be biased towards clicking on male candidates over female candidates. We call this type of bias group membership bias. Increasingly, we seek rankings that are fair to individuals and sensitive groups. Merit-based fairness measures rely on the estimated utility of the items. With group membership bias, the utility of the sensitive groups is under-estimated, hence, without correcting for this bias, a supposedly fair ranking is not truly fair. In this paper, first, we analyze the impact of group membership bias on ranking quality as well as merit-based fairness metrics and show that group membership bias can hurt both ranking and fairness. Then, we provide a correction method for group bias that is based on the assumption that the utility score of items in different groups comes from the same distribution. This assumption has two potential issues of sparsity and equality-instead-of-equity; we use an amortized approach to address these. We show that our correction method can consistently compensate for the negative impact of group membership bias on ranking quality and fairness metrics.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

Rethinking the Evaluation of Dialogue Systems: Effects of User Feedback on Crowdworkers and LLMs

In ad-hoc retrieval, evaluation relies heavily on user actions, including implicit feedback. In a conversational setting such signals are usually unavailable due to the nature of the interactions, and, instead, the evaluation often relies on crowdsourced evaluation labels. The role of user feedback in annotators' assessment of turns in a conversational perception has been little studied. We focus on how the evaluation of task-oriented dialogue systems (TDSs), is affected by considering user feedback, explicit or implicit, as provided through the follow-up utterance of a turn being evaluated. We explore and compare two methodologies for assessing TDSs: one includes the user's follow-up utterance and one without. We use both crowdworkers and large language models (LLMs) as annotators to assess system responses across four aspects: relevance, usefulness, interestingness, and explanation quality. Our findings indicate that there is a distinct difference in ratings assigned by both annotator groups in the two setups, indicating user feedback does influence system evaluation. Workers are more susceptible to user feedback on usefulness and interestingness compared to LLMs on interestingness and relevance. User feedback leads to a more personalized assessment of usefulness by workers, aligning closely with the user's explicit feedback. Additionally, in cases of ambiguous or complex user requests, user feedback improves agreement among crowdworkers. These findings emphasize the significance of user feedback in refining system evaluations and suggest the potential for automated feedback integration in future research. We publicly release the annotated data to foster research in this area.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

Going Beyond Popularity and Positivity Bias: Correcting for Multifactorial Bias in Recommender Systems

Two typical forms of bias in user interaction data with recommender systems (RSs) are popularity bias and positivity bias, which manifest themselves as the over-representation of interactions with popular items or items that users prefer, respectively. Debiasing methods aim to mitigate the effect of selection bias on the evaluation and optimization of RSs. However, existing debiasing methods only consider single-factor forms of bias, e.g., only the item (popularity) or only the rating value (positivity). This is in stark contrast with the real world where user selections are generally affected by multiple factors at once. In this work, we consider multifactorial selection bias in RSs. Our focus is on selection bias affected by both item and rating value factors, which is a generalization and combination of popularity and positivity bias. While the concept of multifactorial bias is intuitive, it brings a severe practical challenge as it requires substantially more data for accurate bias estimation. As a solution, we propose smoothing and alternating gradient descent techniques to reduce variance and improve the robustness of its optimization. Our experimental results reveal that, with our proposed techniques, multifactorial bias corrections are more effective and robust than single-factor counterparts on real-world and synthetic datasets.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

Ranked List Truncation for Large Language Model-based Re-Ranking

We study ranked list truncation (RLT) from a novel "retrieve-then-re-rank" perspective, where we optimize re-ranking by truncating the retrieved list (i.e., trim re-ranking candidates). RLT is crucial for re-ranking as it can improve re-ranking efficiency by sending variable-length candidate lists to a re-ranker on a per-query basis. It also has the potential to improve re-ranking effectiveness. Despite its importance, there is limited research into applying RLT methods to this new perspective. To address this research gap, we reproduce existing RLT methods in the context of re-ranking, especially newly emerged large language model (LLM)-based re-ranking. In particular, we examine to what extent established findings on RLT for retrieval are generalizable to the "retrieve-then-re-rank" setup from three perspectives: (i) assessing RLT methods in the context of LLM-based re-ranking with lexical first-stage retrieval, (ii) investigating the impact of different types of first-stage retrievers on RLT methods, and (iii) investigating the impact of different types of re-rankers on RLT methods. We perform experiments on the TREC 2019 and 2020 deep learning tracks, investigating 8 RLT methods for pipelines involving 3 retrievers and 2 re-rankers. We reach new insights into RLT methods in the context of re-ranking.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

ExcluIR: Exclusionary Neural Information Retrieval

Exclusion is an important and universal linguistic skill that humans use to express what they do not want. However, in information retrieval community, there is little research on exclusionary retrieval, where users express what they do not want in their queries. In this work, we investigate the scenario of exclusionary retrieval in document retrieval for the first time. We present ExcluIR, a set of resources for exclusionary retrieval, consisting of an evaluation benchmark and a training set for helping retrieval models to comprehend exclusionary queries. The evaluation benchmark includes 3,452 high-quality exclusionary queries, each of which has been manually annotated. The training set contains 70,293 exclusionary queries, each paired with a positive document and a negative document. We conduct detailed experiments and analyses, obtaining three main observations: (1) Existing retrieval models with different architectures struggle to effectively comprehend exclusionary queries; (2) Although integrating our training data can improve the performance of retrieval models on exclusionary retrieval, there still exists a gap compared to human performance; (3) Generative retrieval models have a natural advantage in handling exclusionary queries. To facilitate future research on exclusionary retrieval, we share the benchmark and evaluation scripts on \url{https://github.com/zwh-sdu/ExcluIR}.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

Context Does Matter: Implications for Crowdsourced Evaluation Labels in Task-Oriented Dialogue Systems

Crowdsourced labels play a crucial role in evaluating task-oriented dialogue systems (TDSs). Obtaining high-quality and consistent ground-truth labels from annotators presents challenges. When evaluating a TDS, annotators must fully comprehend the dialogue before providing judgments. Previous studies suggest using only a portion of the dialogue context in the annotation process. However, the impact of this limitation on label quality remains unexplored. This study investigates the influence of dialogue context on annotation quality, considering the truncated context for relevance and usefulness labeling. We further propose to use large language models (LLMs) to summarize the dialogue context to provide a rich and short description of the dialogue context and study the impact of doing so on the annotator's performance. Reducing context leads to more positive ratings. Conversely, providing the entire dialogue context yields higher-quality relevance ratings but introduces ambiguity in usefulness ratings. Using the first user utterance as context leads to consistent ratings, akin to those obtained using the entire dialogue, with significantly reduced annotation effort. Our findings show how task design, particularly the availability of dialogue context, affects the quality and consistency of crowdsourced evaluation labels.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Multi-granular Adversarial Attacks against Black-box Neural Ranking Models

Adversarial ranking attacks have gained increasing attention due to their success in probing vulnerabilities, and, hence, enhancing the robustness, of neural ranking models. Conventional attack methods employ perturbations at a single granularity, e.g., word or sentence level, to target documents. However, limiting perturbations to a single level of granularity may reduce the flexibility of adversarial examples, thereby diminishing the potential threat of the attack. Therefore, we focus on generating high-quality adversarial examples by incorporating multi-granular perturbations. Achieving this objective involves tackling a combinatorial explosion problem, which requires identifying an optimal combination of perturbations across all possible levels of granularity, positions, and textual pieces. To address this challenge, we transform the multi-granular adversarial attack into a sequential decision-making process, where perturbations in the next attack step build on the perturbed document in the current attack step. Since the attack process can only access the final state without direct intermediate signals, we use reinforcement learning to perform multi-granular attacks. During the reinforcement learning process, two agents work cooperatively to identify multi-granular vulnerabilities as attack targets and organize perturbation candidates into a final perturbation sequence. Experimental results show that our attack method surpasses prevailing baselines in both attack effectiveness and imperceptibility.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

SARDINE: A Simulator for Automated Recommendation in Dynamic and Interactive Environments

Simulators can provide valuable insights for researchers and practitioners who wish to improve recommender systems, because they allow one to easily tweak the experimental setup in which recommender systems operate, and as a result lower the cost of identifying general trends and uncovering novel findings about the candidate methods. A key requirement to enable this accelerated improvement cycle is that the simulator is able to span the various sources of complexity that can be found in the real recommendation environment that it simulates. With the emergence of interactive and data-driven methods - e.g., reinforcement learning or online and counterfactual learning-to-rank - that aim to achieve user-related goals beyond the traditional accuracy-centric objectives, adequate simulators are needed. In particular, such simulators must model the various mechanisms that render the recommendation environment dynamic and interactive, e.g., the effect of recommendations on the user or the effect of biased data on subsequent iterations of the recommender system. We therefore propose SARDINE, a flexible and interpretable recommendation simulator that can help accelerate research in interactive and data-driven recommender systems. We demonstrate its usefulness by studying existing methods within nine diverse environments derived from SARDINE, and even uncover novel insights about them.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

Generative Retrieval as Multi-Vector Dense Retrieval

Generative retrieval generates identifiers of relevant documents in an end-to-end manner using a sequence-to-sequence architecture for a given query. The relation between generative retrieval and other retrieval methods, especially those based on matching within dense retrieval models, is not yet fully comprehended. Prior work has demonstrated that generative retrieval with atomic identifiers is equivalent to single-vector dense retrieval. Accordingly, generative retrieval exhibits behavior analogous to hierarchical search within a tree index in dense retrieval when using hierarchical semantic identifiers. However, prior work focuses solely on the retrieval stage without considering the deep interactions within the decoder of generative retrieval. In this paper, we fill this gap by demonstrating that generative retrieval and multi-vector dense retrieval share the same framework for measuring the relevance to a query of a document. Specifically, we examine the attention layer and prediction head of generative retrieval, revealing that generative retrieval can be understood as a special case of multi-vector dense retrieval. Both methods compute relevance as a sum of products of query and document vectors and an alignment matrix. We then explore how generative retrieval applies this framework, employing distinct strategies for computing document token vectors and the alignment matrix. We have conducted experiments to verify our conclusions and show that both paradigms exhibit commonalities of term matching in their alignment matrix.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

Listwise Generative Retrieval Models via a Sequential Learning Process

Recently, a novel generative retrieval (GR) paradigm has been proposed, where a single sequence-to-sequence model is learned to directly generate a list of relevant document identifiers (docids) given a query. Existing GR models commonly employ maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) for optimization: this involves maximizing the likelihood of a single relevant docid given an input query, with the assumption that the likelihood for each docid is independent of the other docids in the list. We refer to these models as the pointwise approach in this paper. While the pointwise approach has been shown to be effective in the context of GR, it is considered sub-optimal due to its disregard for the fundamental principle that ranking involves making predictions about lists. In this paper, we address this limitation by introducing an alternative listwise approach, which empowers the GR model to optimize the relevance at the docid list level. Specifically, we view the generation of a ranked docid list as a sequence learning process: at each step we learn a subset of parameters that maximizes the corresponding generation likelihood of the $i$-th docid given the (preceding) top $i-1$ docids. To formalize the sequence learning process, we design a positional conditional probability for GR. To alleviate the potential impact of beam search on the generation quality during inference, we perform relevance calibration on the generation likelihood of model-generated docids according to relevance grades. We conduct extensive experiments on representative binary and multi-graded relevance datasets. Our empirical results demonstrate that our method outperforms state-of-the-art GR baselines in terms of retrieval performance.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

Measuring Bias in a Ranked List using Term-based Representations

In most recent studies, gender bias in document ranking is evaluated with the NFaiRR metric, which measures bias in a ranked list based on an aggregation over the unbiasedness scores of each ranked document. This perspective in measuring the bias of a ranked list has a key limitation: individual documents of a ranked list might be biased while the ranked list as a whole balances the groups' representations. To address this issue, we propose a novel metric called TExFAIR (term exposure-based fairness), which is based on two new extensions to a generic fairness evaluation framework, attention-weighted ranking fairness (AWRF). TExFAIR assesses fairness based on the term-based representation of groups in a ranked list: (i) an explicit definition of associating documents to groups based on probabilistic term-level associations, and (ii) a rank-biased discounting factor (RBDF) for counting non-representative documents towards the measurement of the fairness of a ranked list. We assess TExFAIR on the task of measuring gender bias in passage ranking, and study the relationship between TExFAIR and NFaiRR. Our experiments show that there is no strong correlation between TExFAIR and NFaiRR, which indicates that TExFAIR measures a different dimension of fairness than NFaiRR. With TExFAIR, we extend the AWRF framework to allow for the evaluation of fairness in settings with term-based representations of groups in documents in a ranked list.

cs.CL↗