Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Bringing Undergraduate Students Closer to a Real-World Information Retrieval Setting: Methodology and Resources

531

Published on

We describe a pilot experiment to update the program of an Information Retrieval course for Computer Science undergraduates. We have engaged the students in the development of a search engine from …

We describe a pilot experiment to update the program of an Information Retrieval course for Computer Science undergraduates. We have engaged the students in the development of a search engine from scratch, and they have been involved in the elaboration, also from scratch, of a complete test collection to evaluate their systems. With this methodology they get a whole vision of the Information Retrieval process as they would find it in a real-world setting, and their direct involvement in the evaluation makes them realize the importance of these laboratory experiments in Computer Science. We show that this methodology is indeed reliable and feasible, and so we plan on improving and keep using it in the next years, leading to a public repository of resources for Information Retrieval courses.

Published in: Education, Business, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
531
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Bringing Undergraduate StudentsCloser to a Real-WorldInformation Retrieval Setting:Methodology and ResourcesJulián Urbano, Mónica Marrero,Diego Martín and Jorge Moratohttp://julian-urbano.infoTwitter: @julian_urbano ACM ITiCSE 2011 Darmstadt, Germany · June 29th
  • 2. 3Information Retrieval• Automatically search documents ▫ Effectively ▫ Efficiently• Expected between 2009 and 2020 [Gantz et al., 2010] ▫ 44 times more digital information ▫ 1.4 times more staff and investment• IR is very important for the world• IR is clearly important for Computer Science students ▫ Usually not in the core program of CS majors [Fernández-Luna et al., 2009]
  • 3. 4Experiments in Computer Science• Decisions in the CS industry ▫ Based on mere experience ▫ Bias towards or against some technologies• CS professionals need background ▫ Experimental methods ▫ Critical analysis of experimental studies [IEEE/ACM, 2001]• IR is a highly experimental discipline [Voorhees, 2002]• Focus on evaluation of search engine effectiveness ▫ Evaluation experiments not common in IR courses [Fernández-Luna et al., 2009]
  • 4. 5Proposal:Teach IR through Experimentation• Try to resemble a real-world IR scenario ▫ Relatively large amounts of information ▫ Specific characteristics and needs ▫ Evaluate what techniques are better• Can we reliably adapt the methodologies of academic/industrial evaluation workshops? ▫ TREC, INEX, CLEF…
  • 5. 6Current IR Courses• Develop IR systems extending frameworks/tools ▫ IR Base [Calado et al., 2007] ▫ Alkaline, Greenstone, SpidersRUs [Chau et al., 2010] ▫ Lucene, Lemur• Students should focus on the concepts and not struggle with the tools [Madnani et al., 2008]
  • 6. 7Current IR Courses (II)• Develop IR systems from scratch ▫ Build your search engine in 90 days [Chau et al., 2003] ▫ History Places [Hendry, 2007]• Only possible in technical majors ▫ Software development ▫ Algorithms ▫ Data structures ▫ Database management• Much more complicated than using other tools• Much better to understand the IR techniques and processes explained
  • 7. 8Current IR Courses (III)• Students must learn the Scientific Method [IEEE/ACM Computing Curricula, 2001]• Not only get the numbers [Markey et al., 1978] ▫ Where do they come from? ▫ What do they really mean? ▫ Why they are calculated that way?• Analyze the reliability and validity• Not usually paid much attention in IR courses [Fernández-Luna et al., 2009]
  • 8. 9Current IR Courses (and IV)• Modern CS industry is changing ▫ Big data• Real conditions differ widely from class [Braught et al., 2004] ▫ Interesting from the experimental viewpoint• Finding free collections to teach IR is hard ▫ Copyright ▫ Diversity• Usually stick to the same collections year after year ▫ Try to make them a product of the course itself
  • 9. 10Our IR Course• Senior CS undergraduates ▫ So far: elective, 1 group of ~30 students ▫ From next year: mandatory, 2-3 groups of ~35 students• Exercise: very simple Web crawler [Urbano et al., 2010]• Search engine form scratch, in groups of 3-4 students ▫ Module 1: basic indexing and retrieval ▫ Module 2: query expansion ▫ Module 3: Named Entity Recognition• Skeleton and evaluation framework are provided• External libraries allowed for certain parts ▫ Stemmer, Wordnet, etc.• Microsoft .net, C#, SQL Server Express
  • 10. 12Evaluation in Early TREC Editions Document collection, depending on the task, domain…
  • 11. 13Evaluation in Early TREC Editions Document collection, depending on the task, domain… Relevance assessors, … retired analysts
  • 12. 14Evaluation in Early TREC Editions Document collection, depending on the task, domain… Candidate … topics
  • 13. 15Evaluation in Early TREC Editions Document collection, depending on the task, domain… … Topic difficulty?
  • 14. 16Evaluation in Early TREC Editions Document collection, depending on the task, domain… … Organizers choose final ~50 topics
  • 15. 17Evaluation in Early TREC Editions …
  • 16. 18Evaluation in Early TREC Editions … Participants …
  • 17. 19Evaluation in Early TREC Editions … Top 1000 … results per topic
  • 18. 20Evaluation in Early TREC Editions … … Organizers
  • 19. 21Evaluation in Early TREC Editions Top 100 results
  • 20. 22Evaluation in Early TREC Editions Top 100 results Depth-100 pool Depending on overlapping, pool sizes vary (usually ~1/3)
  • 21. 23Evaluation in Early TREC Editions Top 100 results Depth-100 pool Depending on overlapping, pool sizes vary (usually ~1/3) What documents are relevant?
  • 22. 24Evaluation in Early TREC Editions Top 100 results Depth-100 pool Depending on overlapping, pool sizes vary (usually ~1/3) What documents are relevant? Relevance judgments Organizers
  • 23. 25Evaluation in Early TREC Editions Top 100 results Depth-100 pool Depending on overlapping, pool sizes vary (usually ~1/3) What documents are relevant? Relevance judgments Organizers
  • 24. 26Changes for the Course Document collection, can not be too large
  • 25. 27Changes for the Course Document collection, can not be too large Topics … are restricted• Different themes = many diverse documents• Similar topics = fewer documents• Start with a theme common to all topics
  • 26. 28Changes for the Course Write topics … with a common theme How do we get relevant documents?
  • 27. 29Changes for the Course Write topics … with a common theme Try to answer the topic ourselves
  • 28. 30Changes for the Course Write topics … with a common theme Try to answer the topic ourselves Too difficult? Too few documents?
  • 29. 31Changes for the Course Write topics … with a common theme Try to answer the topic ourselves Too difficult? Too few documents? Complete document collectionFinal topics Crawler
  • 30. 32Changes for the Course• Relevance judging would be next• Before students start developing their systems ▫ Cheating is very tempting: all (mine) relevant!• Reliable pools without the student systems?• Use other well-known systems: Lucene & Lemur ▫ These are the pooling systems ▫ Different techniques, similar to what we teach
  • 31. 33Changes for the Course … Lucene Lemur Lucene … Lemur
  • 32. 34Changes for the Course … Lucene Lemur Lucene … Lemur depth-k pools lead to very different sizesSome students would judge many more documents than others
  • 33. 35Changes for the Course Topic 001 Topic 002 Topic 003 Topic 004 Topic 005 Topic N• Instead of depth-k, pool until size-k ▫ Size-100 in our case ▫ About 2 hours to judge, possible to do in class
  • 34. 36Changes for the Course• Pooling systems might leave relevant material out ▫ Include Google’s top 10 results to each pool  When choosing topics we knew there were some• Students might do the judgments carelessly ▫ Crawl 2 noise topics with unrelated queries ▫ Add 10 noise documents to each pool and check• Now keep pooling documents until size-100 ▫ The union of the pools form the biased collection  This is the one we gave students
  • 35. 372010 Test Collection• 32 students, 5 faculty• Theme: Computing ▫ 20 topics (plus 2 for noise)  17 judged by two people ▫ 9,769 documents (735MB) in complete collection ▫ 1,967 documents (161MB) in biased collection• Pool sizes between 100 and 105 ▫ Average pool depth 27.5, from 15 to 58
  • 36. 38Evaluation• With results and judgments, rank student systems• Compute mean NDCG scores [Järvelin et al., 2002] ▫ Are relevant documents properly ranked? ▫ Ranges between 0 (useless) to 1 (perfect)• The group with the best system is rewarded with an extra point (over 10) in the final grade ▫ About half the students really motivated for this
  • 37. 39Is This Evaluation Method Reliable?• These evaluations have problems [Voorhees, 2002] ▫ Inconsistency of judgments [Voorhees, 2000]  People have different notions of «relevance»  Same document judged differently ▫ Incompleteness of judgments [Zobel, 1998]  Documents not in the pool are considered not relevant  What if some of them were actually relevant?• TREC ad hoc was quite reliable ▫ Many topics ▫ Great man-power
  • 38. 40Assessor Agreement• 17 topics were judged by 2 people ▫ Mean Cohen’s Kappa = 0.417  From 0.096 to 0.735 ▫ Mean Precision-Recall = 0.657 - 0.638  From 0.111 to 1• For TREC, observed 0.65 precision at 0.65 recall [Voorhees, 2000]• Only 1 noise document was judged relevant
  • 39. Mean NDCG@100 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 03-3 01-1 03-2 03-1 01-3 05-3 07-1 01-2 Inconsistency & 05-1 07-3 02-1 05-2 System Performance 07-2 08-1Student system 04-1 02-3 08-2 02-2 08-3 04-2 04-3 06-3 06-1 Mean over 2,000 trels 06-2 41
  • 40. 42Inconsistency &System Performance (and II)• Take 2,000 random samples of assessors ▫ Each would have been possible if using 1 assessor ▫ NDCG differences between 0.075 and 0.146• 1.5 times larger than in TREC [Voorhees, 2000] ▫ Unexperienced assessors ▫ 3-point relevance scale ▫ Larger values to begin with! (x2)  Percentage differences are lower
  • 41. 43Inconsistency & System Ranking• Absolute numbers do not tell much, rankings do ▫ It is highly dependent on the collection• Compute correlations with 2,000 random samples ▫ Mean Kendall’s tau = 0.926  From 0.811 to 1• For TREC, observed 0.938 [Voorhees, 2000]• No swap was significant (Wilcoxon, α=0.05)
  • 42. 44Incompleteness &System Performance 16Increment in Mean NDCG@100 (%) Mean difference over 2,000 trels 14 Estimated difference 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Pool size
  • 43. 45Incompleteness &System Performance (and II)• Start with size-20 pools and keep adding 5 more ▫ 20 to 25: NDCG variations between 14% and 37% ▫ 95 to 100: between 0.4% and 1.6%, mean 1%• In TREC editions, between 0.5% and 3.5% [Zobel, 1998] ▫ Even some observations of 19%!• We achieve these levels for sizes 60-65
  • 44. 46Incompleteness & Effort• Extrapolate to larger pools ▫ If differences decrease a lot, judge a little more ▫ If not, judge fewer documents but more topics• 135 documents for mean NDCG differences <0.5% ▫ Not really worth the +35% effort
  • 45. 47Student Perception• Brings more work both for faculty and students• More technical problems than previous years ▫ Survey scores dropped from 3.27 to 2.82 over 5 ▫ Expected, they had to work considerably more ▫ Possible gaps in (our) CS program?• Same satisfaction scores as previous years ▫ Very appealing for us ▫ This was our first year, lots of logistics problems
  • 46. 48Conclusions & Future Work• IR deserves more attention in CS education• Laboratory experiments deserve it too• Focus on the experimental nature of IR ▫ But give a wider perspective useful beyond IR• Much more interesting and instructive• Adapt well-known methodologies in industry/academia to our limited resources
  • 47. 49Conclusions & Future Work (II)• Improve the methodology ▫ Explore quality control techniques in crowdsourcing• Integrate with other courses ▫ Computer Science ▫ Library Science• Make everything public, free ▫ Tets collections and reports ▫ http://ir.kr.inf.uc3m.es/eirex/
  • 48. 50Conclusions & Future Work (and III)• We call all this EIREX ▫ Information Retrieval Education through Experimentation• We would like others to participate ▫ Use it in your class  Collections  The methodology  Tools
  • 49. 522011 Semester• Only 19 students• The 2010 collection used for testing ▫ Every year there will be more variety to choose• 2011 collection: Crowdsourcing ▫ 23 topics, better described  Created by the students  Judgments by 1 student ▫ 13,245 documents (952MB) in complete collection ▫ 2,088 documents (96MB) in biased collection• Overview report coming soon!
  • 50. 53Can we reliably adapt the large-scale methodologies of academic/industrial IR evaluation workshops? YES (we can)

×