Seesaw Personalized Web Search Jaime Teevan, MIT with Susan T. Dumais and Eric Horvitz, MSR.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Chapter 5: Introduction to Information Retrieval
Advertisements

Personalization and Search Jaime Teevan Microsoft Research.
Web Search - Summer Term 2006 II. Information Retrieval (Basics Cont.)
Information Retrieval in Practice
Search Engines and Information Retrieval
Personalizing Search via Automated Analysis of Interests and Activities Jaime Teevan Susan T.Dumains Eric Horvitz MIT,CSAILMicrosoft Researcher Microsoft.
PROBLEM BEING ATTEMPTED Privacy -Enhancing Personalized Web Search Based on:  User's Existing Private Data Browsing History s Recent Documents 
Seesaw Personalized Web Search Jaime Teevan, MIT with Susan T. Dumais and Eric Horvitz, MSR.
Modern Information Retrieval
Re-ranking Documents Segments To Improve Access To Relevant Content in Information Retrieval Gary Madden Applied Computational Linguistics Dublin City.
Patent Search QUERY Log Analysis Shariq Bashir Department of Software Technology and Interactive Systems Vienna.
Affinity Rank Yi Liu, Benyu Zhang, Zheng Chen MSRA.
University of Kansas Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Dr. Susan Gauch April 2005 I T T C Dr. Susan Gauch Personalized Search Based.
An investigation of query expansion terms Gheorghe Muresan Rutgers University, School of Communication, Information and Library Science 4 Huntington St.,
Stuff I’ve Seen: A System for Personal Information Retrieval and Re-use by Seher Acer Elif Demirli Susan Dumais, Edward Cutrell, JJ Cadiz, Gavin Jancke,
1 Web Information Retrieval Web Science Course. 2.
Personalized Ontologies for Web Search and Caching Susan Gauch Information and Telecommunications Technology Center Electrical Engineering and Computer.
Chapter 5: Information Retrieval and Web Search
Overview of Search Engines
Finding and Re-Finding Through Personalization Jaime Teevan MIT, CSAIL David Karger (advisor), Mark Ackerman, Sue Dumais, Rob Miller (committee), Eytan.
Search Engines and Information Retrieval Chapter 1.
Facets of Personalization Jaime Teevan Microsoft Research (CLUES) with S. Dumais, E. Horvitz, D. Liebling, E. Adar, J. Elsas, R. Hughes.
Reyyan Yeniterzi Weakly-Supervised Discovery of Named Entities Using Web Search Queries Marius Pasca Google CIKM 2007.
Improving Web Search Ranking by Incorporating User Behavior Information Eugene Agichtein Eric Brill Susan Dumais Microsoft Research.
Xiaoying Gao Computer Science Victoria University of Wellington Intelligent Agents COMP 423.
Tag Data and Personalized Information Retrieval 1.
Chapter 2 Architecture of a Search Engine. Search Engine Architecture n A software architecture consists of software components, the interfaces provided.
UOS 1 Ontology Based Personalized Search Zhang Tao The University of Seoul.
Xiaoying Gao Computer Science Victoria University of Wellington Intelligent Agents COMP 423.
Probabilistic Query Expansion Using Query Logs Hang Cui Tianjin University, China Ji-Rong Wen Microsoft Research Asia, China Jian-Yun Nie University of.
Personalized Search Xiao Liu
Chapter 6: Information Retrieval and Web Search
UCAIR Project Xuehua Shen, Bin Tan, ChengXiang Zhai
Toward A Session-Based Search Engine Smitha Sriram, Xuehua Shen, ChengXiang Zhai Department of Computer Science University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
Binxing Jiao et. al (SIGIR ’10) Presenter : Lin, Yi-Jhen Advisor: Dr. Koh. Jia-ling Date: 2011/4/25 VISUAL SUMMARIZATION OF WEB PAGES.
University of Malta CSA3080: Lecture 6 © Chris Staff 1 of 20 CSA3080: Adaptive Hypertext Systems I Dr. Christopher Staff Department.
Contextual Ranking of Keywords Using Click Data Utku Irmak, Vadim von Brzeski, Reiner Kraft Yahoo! Inc ICDE 09’ Datamining session Summarized.
IR Homework #2 By J. H. Wang Mar. 31, Programming Exercise #2: Query Processing and Searching Goal: to search relevant documents for a given query.
Improving Web Search Results Using Affinity Graph Benyu Zhang, Hua Li, Yi Liu, Lei Ji, Wensi Xi, Weiguo Fan, Zheng Chen, Wei-Ying Ma Microsoft Research.
Less is More Probabilistic Models for Retrieving Fewer Relevant Documents Harr Chen, David R. Karger MIT CSAIL ACM SIGIR 2006 August 9, 2006.
Discovering and Using Groups to Improve Personalized Search Jaime Teevan, Merrie Morris, Steve Bush Microsoft Research.
IR Theory: Relevance Feedback. Relevance Feedback: Example  Initial Results Search Engine2.
 Examine two basic sources for implicit relevance feedback on the segment level for search personalization. Eye tracking Display time.
Personalizing Search Jaime Teevan, MIT Susan T. Dumais, MSR and Eric Horvitz, MSR.
Personalizing Web Search using Long Term Browsing History Nicolaas Matthijs, Cambridge Filip Radlinski, Microsoft In Proceedings of WSDM
Personalization with user’s local data Personalizing Search via Automated Analysis of Interests and Activities 1 Sungjick Lee Department of Electrical.
Qi Guo Emory University Ryen White, Susan Dumais, Jue Wang, Blake Anderson Microsoft Presented by Tetsuya Sakai, Microsoft Research.
CiteSight: Contextual Citation Recommendation with Differential Search Avishay Livne 1, Vivek Gokuladas 2, Jaime Teevan 3, Susan Dumais 3, Eytan Adar 1.
Modern information retreival Chapter. 02: Modeling (Latent Semantic Indexing)
Implicit User Modeling for Personalized Search Xuehua Shen, Bin Tan, ChengXiang Zhai Department of Computer Science University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
Search Result Interface Hongning Wang Abstraction of search engine architecture User Ranker Indexer Doc Analyzer Index results Crawler Doc Representation.
COLLABORATIVE SEARCH TECHNIQUES Submitted By: Shikha Singla MIT-872-2K11 M.Tech(2 nd Sem) Information Technology.
Language Modeling Putting a curve to the bag of words Courtesy of Chris Jordan.
Post-Ranking query suggestion by diversifying search Chao Wang.
Bloom Cookies: Web Search Personalization without User Tracking Authors: Nitesh Mor, Oriana Riva, Suman Nath, and John Kubiatowicz Presented by Ben Summers.
Michael Bendersky, W. Bruce Croft Dept. of Computer Science Univ. of Massachusetts Amherst Amherst, MA SIGIR
Document Clustering and Collection Selection Diego Puppin Web Mining,
Xiaoying Gao Computer Science Victoria University of Wellington COMP307 NLP 4 Information Retrieval.
Personalizing Web Search Jaime Teevan, MIT with Susan T. Dumais and Eric Horvitz, MSR.
UIC at TREC 2006: Blog Track Wei Zhang Clement Yu Department of Computer Science University of Illinois at Chicago.
1 Personalizing Search via Automated Analysis of Interests and Activities Jaime Teevan, MIT Susan T. Dumais, Microsoft Eric Horvitz, Microsoft SIGIR 2005.
Potential for Personalization Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 17(1), March 2010 Data Mining for Understanding User Needs Jaime Teevan, Susan.
SEARCH AND CONTEXT Susan Dumais, Microsoft Research INFO 320.
Information Retrieval in Practice
Why indexing? For efficient searching of a document
Information Storage and Retrieval Fall Lecture 1: Introduction and History.
Search Engine Architecture
Author: Kazunari Sugiyama, etc. (WWW2004)
Gizem MISIRLI Gülden OLGUN
Presentation transcript:

Seesaw Personalized Web Search Jaime Teevan, MIT with Susan T. Dumais and Eric Horvitz, MSR

Query expansion Personalization Algorithms Standard IR Document Query User Server Client

Query expansion Personalization Algorithms Standard IR Document Query User Server Client v. Result re-ranking

Result Re-Ranking Ensures privacy Good evaluation framework Can look at rich user profile Look at light weight user models  Collected on server side  Sent as query expansion

Seesaw Search EngineSeesaw dog 1 cat10 india 2 mit 4 search93 amherst12 vegas 1

Seesaw Search Engine query dog 1 cat10 india 2 mit 4 search93 amherst12 vegas 1

Seesaw Search Engine query dog 1 cat10 india 2 mit 4 search93 amherst12 vegas 1 dog cat monkey banana food baby infant child boy girl forest hiking walking gorp baby infant child boy girl csail mit artificial research robot web search retrieval ir hunt

Seesaw Search Engine query dog 1 cat10 india 2 mit 4 search93 amherst12 vegas Search results page web search retrieval ir hunt 1.3

Calculating a Document’s Score Based on standard tf.idf web search retrieval ir hunt 1.3

Calculating a Document’s Score Based on standard tf.idf (r i +0.5)(N-n i -R+r i +0.5) (n i -r i +0.5)(R-r i +0.5) w i = log User as relevance feedback  Stuff I’ve Seen index  More is better

Finding the Score Efficiently Corpus representation (N, n i )  Web statistics  Result set Document representation  Download document  Use result set snippet Efficiency hacks generally OK!

Evaluating Personalized Search 15 evaluators Evaluate 50 results for a query  Highly relevant  Relevant  Irrelevant Measure algorithm quality  DCG(i) = { Gain(i), DCG (i–1) + Gain(i)/log(i), if i = 1 otherwise

Evaluating Personalized Search Query selection  Chose from 10 pre-selected queries  Previously issued query cancer Microsoft traffic … bison frise Red Sox airlines … Las Vegas rice McDonalds … Pre-selected 53 pre-selected (2-9/query) Total: 137 Joe Mary

Seesaw Improves Text Retrieval Random Relevance Feedback Seesaw

Text Features Not Enough

Take Advantage of Web Ranking

Further Exploration Explore larger parameter space Learn parameters  Based on individual  Based on query  Based on results Give user control?

Making Seesaw Practical Learn most about personalization by deploying a system Best algorithm reasonably efficient Merging server and client  Query expansion Get more relevant results in the set to be re-ranked  Design snippets for personalization

User Interface Issues Make personalization transparent Give user control over personalization  Slider between Web and personalized results  Allows for background computation Creates problem with re-finding  Results change as user model changes  Thesis research – Re:Search Engine

Thank you!