An Axiomatic Analysis of Diversity Evaluation Metrics: Introducing the Rank-Biased Utility Metric

Enrique Amigó, Damiano Spina, Jorge Carrillo-de-Albornoz
5/7/2018
cs.IR

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

Many evaluation metrics have been defined to evaluate the effectiveness ad-hoc retrieval and search result diversification systems. However, it is often unclear which evaluation metric should be used to analyze the performance of retrieval systems given a specific task. Axiomatic analysis is an informative mechanism to understand the fundamentals of metrics and their suitability for particular scenarios. In this paper, we define a constraint-based axiomatic framework to study the suitability of existing metrics in search result diversification scenarios. The analysis informed the definition of Rank-Biased Utility (RBU) -- an adaptation of the well-known Rank-Biased Precision metric -- that takes into account redundancy and the user effort associated to the inspection of documents in the ranking. Our experiments over standard diversity evaluation campaigns show that the proposed metric captures quality criteria reflected by different metrics, being suitable in the absence of knowledge about particular features of the scenario under study.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. Any repos shown below are weak matches — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{amig2018axiomatic,
  title  = {An Axiomatic Analysis of Diversity Evaluation Metrics: Introducing the Rank-Biased Utility Metric},
  author = {Enrique Amigó and Damiano Spina and Jorge Carrillo-de-Albornoz},
  year   = {2018},
  eprint = {1805.02334},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.02334}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/1805.02334.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/1805.02334)

Discussion