评估搜索引擎的性能和中立性/偏见

Ahmed Kamoun, P. Maillé, B. Tuffin
{"title":"评估搜索引擎的性能和中立性/偏见","authors":"Ahmed Kamoun, P. Maillé, B. Tuffin","doi":"10.1145/3306309.3306325","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Different search engines provide different outputs for the same keyword. This may be due to different definitions of relevance, to different ranking aggregation methods, and/or to different knowledge/anticipation of users' preferences, but rankings are also suspected to be biased towards own content, which may prejudicial to other content providers. In this paper, we make some initial steps toward a rigorous comparison and analysis of search engines, by proposing a definition for a consensual relevance of a page with respect to a keyword, from a set of search engines. More specifically, we look at the results of several search engines for a sample of keywords, and define for each keyword the visibility of a page based on its ranking over all search engines. This allows to define a score of the search engine for a keyword, and then its average score over all keywords. Based on the pages visibility, we can also define the consensus search engine as the one showing the most visible results for each keyword, and discuss how biased results toward specific pages can be highlighted and quantified to provide answers to the search neutrality debate. We have implemented this model and present an analysis of the results.","PeriodicalId":113198,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 12th EAI International Conference on Performance Evaluation Methodologies and Tools","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the performance and neutrality/bias of search engines\",\"authors\":\"Ahmed Kamoun, P. Maillé, B. Tuffin\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3306309.3306325\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Different search engines provide different outputs for the same keyword. This may be due to different definitions of relevance, to different ranking aggregation methods, and/or to different knowledge/anticipation of users' preferences, but rankings are also suspected to be biased towards own content, which may prejudicial to other content providers. In this paper, we make some initial steps toward a rigorous comparison and analysis of search engines, by proposing a definition for a consensual relevance of a page with respect to a keyword, from a set of search engines. More specifically, we look at the results of several search engines for a sample of keywords, and define for each keyword the visibility of a page based on its ranking over all search engines. This allows to define a score of the search engine for a keyword, and then its average score over all keywords. Based on the pages visibility, we can also define the consensus search engine as the one showing the most visible results for each keyword, and discuss how biased results toward specific pages can be highlighted and quantified to provide answers to the search neutrality debate. We have implemented this model and present an analysis of the results.\",\"PeriodicalId\":113198,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 12th EAI International Conference on Performance Evaluation Methodologies and Tools\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 12th EAI International Conference on Performance Evaluation Methodologies and Tools\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3306309.3306325\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 12th EAI International Conference on Performance Evaluation Methodologies and Tools","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3306309.3306325","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

不同的搜索引擎为相同的关键字提供不同的输出。这可能是由于不同的相关性定义,不同的排名聚合方法,和/或对用户偏好的不同认识/预期,但排名也被怀疑偏向于自己的内容,这可能会对其他内容提供商造成损害。在本文中,我们通过提出一组搜索引擎中关于关键字的页面共识相关性的定义,向搜索引擎的严格比较和分析迈出了一些初步步骤。更具体地说,我们查看几个搜索引擎的关键字样本结果,并根据其在所有搜索引擎中的排名为每个关键字定义页面的可见性。这允许定义一个关键字的搜索引擎的分数,然后它的平均分数在所有关键字。基于页面可见性,我们还可以将共识搜索引擎定义为为每个关键字显示最可见结果的搜索引擎,并讨论如何突出显示和量化针对特定页面的有偏见的结果,从而为搜索中立性争论提供答案。我们已经实现了这个模型,并对结果进行了分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating the performance and neutrality/bias of search engines
Different search engines provide different outputs for the same keyword. This may be due to different definitions of relevance, to different ranking aggregation methods, and/or to different knowledge/anticipation of users' preferences, but rankings are also suspected to be biased towards own content, which may prejudicial to other content providers. In this paper, we make some initial steps toward a rigorous comparison and analysis of search engines, by proposing a definition for a consensual relevance of a page with respect to a keyword, from a set of search engines. More specifically, we look at the results of several search engines for a sample of keywords, and define for each keyword the visibility of a page based on its ranking over all search engines. This allows to define a score of the search engine for a keyword, and then its average score over all keywords. Based on the pages visibility, we can also define the consensus search engine as the one showing the most visible results for each keyword, and discuss how biased results toward specific pages can be highlighted and quantified to provide answers to the search neutrality debate. We have implemented this model and present an analysis of the results.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信