260 likes | 396 Views
Modern Information Retrieval. Chapter 3 Retrieval Evaluation. The most common measures of system performance are time and space an inherent tradeoff Data retrieval time and space indexing Information retrieval precision of the answer set also important. evaluation considerations
E N D
Modern Information Retrieval Chapter 3 Retrieval Evaluation
The most common measures of system performance are time and space • an inherent tradeoff • Data retrieval • time and space • indexing • Information retrieval • precision of the answer set also important
evaluation considerations • query with/without feedback • query interface design • real data/synthetic data • real life/laboratory environment • repeatability and scalability
recall and precision • recall: fraction of relevant documents which has been retrieved • precision: fraction of retrieved documents which is relevant
can we precisely compute precisions? can we precisely compute recalls?
precision versus recall curve: a standard evaluation strategy
interpolation procedure for generating the 11 standard recall levels • Rq={d3,d56,d129} where j is in {0,1,2,…,10} and P(r) is a known precision
to evaluate the retrieval strategy over all test queries, the precisions at each recall level are averaged
another approach: compute average precision at given relevant document cutoff values • advantages?
single value summary for each query • average precision at seen relevant documents • example in Figure 3.2 • favor systems which retrieve relevant documents quickly • can have a poor overall recall performance • R-precision • R: total number of relevant documents • examples in Figures 3.2 and 3.3
combining recall and precision • the harmonic mean • it assumes a high value only when both recall and precision are high
the E measure • b=1, complement of the harmonic mean • b>1, the user is more interested in precision • b<1, the user is more interested in recall
coverage ratio: fraction of the documents known to be relevant which has been retrieved • the system finds the relevant documents the user expected to see
novelty ratio: fraction of the relevant documents retrieved which was previously unknown to the user • the system reveals new relevant documents previously unknown to the user
relative recall: the ratio between the number of relevant documents found and the number of relevant documents the user expected to find • relative recall= • when the relative recall equals to 1 (the user finds enough relevant documents), the user stops searching
recall effort: the ratio between the number of relevant documents the user expected to find and the number of documents examined in an attempt to find the expected relevant documents • research in IR • lack a solid formal framework • lack robust and consistent testbeds and benchmarks • Text REtrieval Conference
retrieval techniques • methods using automatic thesauri • sophisticated term weighting • natural language techniques • relevance feedback • advanced pattern matching • document collection • over 1 million documents • newspaper, patents, etc. • topics • in natural language • conversion done by the system
relevant documents • the pooling method: for each topic, collect the top k documents generated by each participating system and decide their relevance by human assessors • the benchmark tasks • ad hoc task • filtering task • Chinese • cross languages • spoken document retrieval • high precision • very large collection
evaluation measures • summary table statistics: number of documents retrieved, number of relevant documents retrieved, number of relevant documents not retrieved, etc. • recall-precision averages • document level averages: average precision at seen relevant documents • average precision histogram