BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Ilya Markov

Ilya Markov contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Information RetrievalMachine Learning

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Cascade Model-based Propensity Estimation for Counterfactual Learning to Rank

Unbiased CLTR requires click propensities to compensate for the difference between user clicks and true relevance of search results via IPS. Current propensity estimation methods assume that user click behavior follows the PBM and estimate click propensities based on this assumption. However, in reality, user clicks often follow the CM, where users scan search results from top to bottom and where each next click depends on the previous one. In this cascade scenario, PBM-based estimates of propensities are not accurate, which, in turn, hurts CLTR performance. In this paper, we propose a propensity estimation method for the cascade scenario, called CM-IPS. We show that CM-IPS keeps CLTR performance close to the full-information performance in case the user clicks follow the CM, while PBM-based CLTR has a significant gap towards the full-information. The opposite is true if the user clicks follow PBM instead of the CM. Finally, we suggest a way to select between CM- and PBM-based propensity estimation methods based on historical user clicks.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

MergeDTS: A Method for Effective Large-Scale Online Ranker Evaluation

Online ranker evaluation is one of the key challenges in information retrieval. While the preferences of rankers can be inferred by interleaving methods, the problem of how to effectively choose the ranker pair that generates the interleaved list without degrading the user experience too much is still challenging. On the one hand, if two rankers have not been compared enough, the inferred preference can be noisy and inaccurate. On the other, if two rankers are compared too many times, the interleaving process inevitably hurts the user experience too much. This dilemma is known as the exploration versus exploitation tradeoff. It is captured by the $K$-armed dueling bandit problem, which is a variant of the $K$-armed bandit problem, where the feedback comes in the form of pairwise preferences. Today's deployed search systems can evaluate a large number of rankers concurrently, and scaling effectively in the presence of numerous rankers is a critical aspect of $K$-armed dueling bandit problems. In this paper, we focus on solving the large-scale online ranker evaluation problem under the so-called Condorcet assumption, where there exists an optimal ranker that is preferred to all other rankers. We propose Merge Double Thompson Sampling (MergeDTS), which first utilizes a divide-and-conquer strategy that localizes the comparisons carried out by the algorithm to small batches of rankers, and then employs Thompson Sampling (TS) to reduce the comparisons between suboptimal rankers inside these small batches. The effectiveness (regret) and efficiency (time complexity) of MergeDTS are extensively evaluated using examples from the domain of online evaluation for web search. Our main finding is that for large-scale Condorcet ranker evaluation problems, MergeDTS outperforms the state-of-the-art dueling bandit algorithms.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Safe Exploration for Optimizing Contextual Bandits

Contextual bandit problems are a natural fit for many information retrieval tasks, such as learning to rank, text classification, recommendation, etc. However, existing learning methods for contextual bandit problems have one of two drawbacks: they either do not explore the space of all possible document rankings (i.e., actions) and, thus, may miss the optimal ranking, or they present suboptimal rankings to a user and, thus, may harm the user experience. We introduce a new learning method for contextual bandit problems, Safe Exploration Algorithm (SEA), which overcomes the above drawbacks. SEA starts by using a baseline (or production) ranking system (i.e., policy), which does not harm the user experience and, thus, is safe to execute, but has suboptimal performance and, thus, needs to be improved. Then SEA uses counterfactual learning to learn a new policy based on the behavior of the baseline policy. SEA also uses high-confidence off-policy evaluation to estimate the performance of the newly learned policy. Once the performance of the newly learned policy is at least as good as the performance of the baseline policy, SEA starts using the new policy to execute new actions, allowing it to actively explore favorable regions of the action space. This way, SEA never performs worse than the baseline policy and, thus, does not harm the user experience, while still exploring the action space and, thus, being able to find an optimal policy. Our experiments using text classification and document retrieval confirm the above by comparing SEA (and a boundless variant called BSEA) to online and offline learning methods for contextual bandit problems.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access