Journals / Turkish Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science / 2020 / Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 3

Selective personalization and group profiles for improved web search Personalization

Pages
1631–1643
Publication Date
2020-05-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Experiments reveal that the proposed potential prediction method correlates with human query ambiguity judgments and the group profile-based ranking method improves the mean reciprocal rank by 8%.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Personalization is a common technique used in Web search engines to improve the effectiveness of retrieval.
📊
Key Findings & Data:While personalizing some queries yields significant improvements in user experience by providing a ranking in line with the user preferences, it fails to improve or even degrades the effectiveness for less ambiguous queries.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Experiments reveal that the proposed potential prediction method correlates with human query ambiguity judgments and the group profile-based ranking method improves the mean reciprocal rank by 8%.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Personalized web search · topical user model · latent Dirichlet allocation

Abstract

Personalization is a common technique used in Web search engines to improve the effectiveness of retrieval. While personalizing some queries yields significant improvements in user experience by providing a ranking in line with the user preferences, it fails to improve or even degrades the effectiveness for less ambiguous queries. A potential personalization metric could improve search engines by selectively applying personalization. One such measure, click entropy uses the query history and the clicked documents for the query, which might be sparse for some queries. In this article, the topic entropy measure is improved by integrating the user distribution into the metric, robust to the sparsity problem. Furthermore, a topic model-based ranking for the personalization method is proposed using grouped user profiles. Experiments reveal that the proposed potential prediction method correlates with human query ambiguity judgments and the group profile-based ranking method improves the mean reciprocal rank by 8%.

🔖

Cite This Article

MANSOUB, S. K., ERCAN, G., ÇİÇEKLİ, İ. (2020). Selective personalization and group profiles for improved web search Personalization. Turkish Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 3, 1631–1643. https://ajindex.com/articles/186616

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Teevan J, Dumais S, Horvitz E. Beyond the commons: investigating the value of personalizing web search. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on New Technologies for Personalized Information Access; Edinburgh, UK; 2005. pp. 84-92
  2. Dou Z, Song R, Wen J. A large-scale evaluation and analysis of personalized search strategies. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on World Wide Web; Banff, Canada; 2007. pp. 581-590
  3. Yano Y, Tagami Y, Tajima A. Quantifying query ambiguity with topic distributions. In: Proceedings of the 25th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management; Indianapolis, IN, USA; 2016. pp. 1877-1880
  4. Harvey M, Crestani F, Carman M. Building user profiles from topic models for personalised search. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management; San Francisco, CA, USA; 2013. pp. 2309-2314
  5. Carman M, Crestani F, Harvey M, Baillie M. Towards query log based personalization using topic models. In: Proceedings of the 19th ACM International conference on Information and Knowledge Management; Toronto, Canada; 2010. pp. 1849-1852
  6. Teevan J, Dumais S, Horvitz E. Potential for personalization. In: ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction; 2010. pp. 1-31
  7. Teevan J, Dumais S, Liebling D. To personalize or not to personalize: modeling queries with variation in user intent. In: Proceedings of the 31st Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval; Singapore; 2008. pp. 163-170
  8. Cronen-Townsend S, Zhou Y, Croft W. Predicting query performance. In: Proceedings of the 25th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval; Tampere, Finland; 2002. pp. 299-306
  9. Wang Y, Agichtein E. Query ambiguity revisited: clickthrough measures for distinguishing informational and ambiguous queries. In: HLT ’10 Human Language Technologies: 2010 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics; 2010. pp. 361-364
  10. Song R, Luo Z, Wen J, Yu Y, Hon H. Identifying ambiguous queries in web search. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on World Wide Web; Banff, Canada; 2007. pp. 1169-1170
  11. Matthijs N, Radlinski F. Personalizing web search using long term browsing history. In: Proceedings of the Fourth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining; Hong Kong; 2011. pp. 25-34
  12. Sieg A, Mobas