Paper detail

On Survivorship Bias in MS MARCO

Survivorship bias is the tendency to concentrate on the positive outcomes of a selection process and overlook the results that generate negative outcomes. We observe that this bias could be present in the popular MS MARCO dataset, given that annotators could not find answers to 38--45% of the queries, leading to these queries being discarded in training and evaluation processes. Although we find that some discarded queries in MS MARCO are ill-defined or otherwise unanswerable, many are valid questions that could be answered had the collection been annotated more completely (around two thirds using modern ranking techniques). This survivability problem distorts the MS MARCO collection in several ways. We find that it affects the natural distribution of queries in terms of the type of information needed. When used for evaluation, we find that the bias likely yields a significant distortion of the absolute performance scores observed. Finally, given that MS MARCO is frequently used for model training, we train models based on subsets of MS MARCO that simulates more survivorship bias. We find that models trained in this setting are up to 9.9% worse when evaluated on versions of the dataset with more complete annotations, and up to 3.5% worse at zero-shot transfer. Our findings are complementary to other recent suggestions for further annotation of MS MARCO, but with a focus on discarded queries. Code and data for reproducing the results of this paper are available in an online appendix.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.