Abstract:Learning to rank from logged user feedback, such as clicks or purchases, is a central component of many real-world information systems. Different from human-annotated relevance labels, the user feedback is always noisy and biased. Many existing learning to rank methods infer the underlying relevance of query–item pairs based on different assumptions of examination, and still optimize a relevance based objective. Such methods rely heavily on the correct estimation of examination, which is often difficult to achieve in practice. In this work, we propose a general framework U-rank+ for learning to rank with logged user feedback from the perspective of graph matching. We systematically analyze the biases in user feedback, including examination bias and selection bias. Then, we take both biases into consideration for unbiased utility estimation that directly based on user feedback, instead of relevance. In order to maximize the estimated utility in an efficient manner, we design two different solvers based on Sinkhorn and LambdaLoss for U-rank+ . The former is based on a standard graph matching algorithm, and the latter is inspired by the traditional method of learning to rank. Both of the algorithms have good theoretical properties to optimize the unbiased utility objective while the latter is proved to be empirically more effective and efficient in practice. Our framework U-rank+ can deal with a general utility function and can be used in a widespread of applications including web search, recommendation, and online advertising. Semi-synthetic experiments on three benchmark learning to rank datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of U-rank+ . Furthermore, our proposed framework has been deployed on two different scenarios of a mainstream App store, where the online A/B testing shows that U-rank+ achieves an average improvement of 19.2% on click-through rate and 20.8% improvement on conversion rate in recommendation scenario, and 5.12% on platform revenue in online advertising scenario over the production baselines.

Individual Judgments Versus Consensus: Estimating Query-URL Relevance.

Relevance Judgment Convergence Degree -- A Measure of Inconsistency among Assessors for Information Retrieval

Relevance Estimation with Multiple Information Sources on Search Engine Result Pages.

When does Relevance Mean Usefulness and User Satisfaction in Web Search?

Automatic Search Engine Performance Evaluation With The Wisdom Of Crowds

A Comparison of Retrieval Result Relevance Judgments Between American and Chinese Users

Reliable Confidence Intervals for Information Retrieval Evaluation Using Generative A.I

Search Result Reranking with Visual and Structure Information Sources

Predicting Relevance based on Assessor Disagreement: Analysis and Practical Applications for Search Evaluation

Understanding Relevance Judgments in Legal Case Retrieval

Understanding and Predicting Usefulness Judgment in Web Search

Evaluating Relevance Judgments with Pairwise Discriminative Power

Evaluating search engines and defining a consensus implementation

Investigating Cognitive Effects in Session-level Search User Satisfaction

Beyond Relevance Ranking: A General Graph Matching Framework for Utility-Oriented Learning to Rank

Iterative Utility Judgment Framework via LLMs Inspired by Relevance in Philosophy

Investigation Of User Search Behavior While Facing Heterogeneous Search Services

Know where to go: Make LLM a relevant, responsible, and trustworthy searchers

Incorporating Query Reformulating Behavior into Web Search Evaluation

Ranking Search Intents Underlying a Query.

Relevance Judgment in Epistemic and Hedonic Information Searches