A Head-Weighted Gap-Sensitive Correlation Coefficient

被引:4
作者
Gao, Ning [1 ]
Oard, Douglas W. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Maryland, UMIACS, Coll Informat Studies, College Pk, MD 20742 USA
来源
SIGIR 2015: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 38TH INTERNATIONAL ACM SIGIR CONFERENCE ON RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT IN INFORMATION RETRIEVAL | 2015年
关键词
Evaluation Metric; Rank Correlation Coefficient;
D O I
10.1145/2766462.2767793
中图分类号
TP301 [理论、方法];
学科分类号
081202 ;
摘要
Information retrieval systems rank documents, and shared-task evaluations yield results that can be used to rank information retrieval systems. Comparing rankings in ways that can yield useful insights is thus an important capability. When making such comparisons, it is often useful to give greater weight to comparisons near the head of a ranked list than to what happens further down. This is the focus of the widely used tau(AP) measure. When scores are available, gap-sensitive measures give greater weight to larger differences than to smaller ones. This is the focus of the widely used Pearson correlation measure (rho). This paper introduces a new measure, tau(GAP), which combines both features. System comparisons from the TREC 5 Ad Hoc track are used to illustrate the differences in emphasis achieved by tau(AP), rho, and the proposed tau(GAP).
引用
收藏
页码:799 / 802
页数:4
相关论文
共 11 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1948, RANK CORRELATION MET
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2007, CIKM
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2008, INT ACM SIGIR C RES, DOI DOI 10.1145/1390334.1390435
[4]  
Buckley C., 2000, SIGIR Forum, V34, P33
[5]  
Kendall MG, 1938, BIOMETRIKA, V30, P81, DOI 10.1093/biomet/30.1-2.81
[6]  
Ning Gao, 2014, Advances in Information Retrieval. 36th European Conference on IR Research, ECIR 2014. Proceedings: LNCS 8416, P1, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-06028-6_1
[7]  
Pearson K., 1895, Proceedings of the Royal Society London, Vlviii, P240
[8]   PROGRESS IN DOCUMENTATION - AUTOMATIC INDEXING [J].
SPARCK-JONES, K .
JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, 1974, 30 (04) :393-432
[9]  
Turpin A. H., 2001, SIGIR Forum, P225
[10]   Variations in relevance judgments and the measurement of retrieval effectiveness [J].
Voorhees, EM .
INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, 2000, 36 (05) :697-716