The Anatomy of Relevance: Topical, Snippet and Perceived Relevance in Search Result Evaluation

January 26, 2015 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› arXiv.org

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Aleksandr Chuklin, Maarten de Rijke arXiv ID 1501.06412 Category cs.IR: Information Retrieval Citations 6 Venue arXiv.org Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Currently, the quality of a search engine is often determined using so-called topical relevance, i.e., the match between the user intent (expressed as a query) and the content of the document. In this work we want to draw attention to two aspects of retrieval system performance affected by the presentation of results: result attractiveness ("perceived relevance") and immediate usefulness of the snippets ("snippet relevance"). Perceived relevance may influence discoverability of good topical documents and seemingly better rankings may in fact be less useful to the user if good-looking snippets lead to irrelevant documents or vice-versa. And result items on a search engine result page (SERP) with high snippet relevance may add towards the total utility gained by the user even without the need to click those items. We start by motivating the need to collect different aspects of relevance (topical, perceived and snippet relevances) and how these aspects can improve evaluation measures. We then discuss possible ways to collect these relevance aspects using crowdsourcing and the challenges arising from that.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Information Retrieval

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted