Paper detail

An Improved Multileaving Algorithm for Online Ranker Evaluation

Online ranker evaluation is a key challenge in information retrieval. An important task in the online evaluation of rankers is using implicit user feedback for inferring preferences between rankers. Interleaving methods have been found to be efficient and sensitive, i.e. they can quickly detect even small differences in quality. It has recently been shown that multileaving methods exhibit similar sensitivity but can be more efficient than interleaving methods. This paper presents empirical results demonstrating that existing multileaving methods either do not scale well with the number of rankers, or, more problematically, can produce results which substantially differ from evaluation measures like NDCG. The latter problem is caused by the fact that they do not correctly account for the similarities that can occur between rankers being multileaved. We propose a new multileaving method for handling this problem and demonstrate that it substantially outperforms existing methods, in some cases reducing errors by as much as 50%.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.