用户浏览模型:相关性vs .检查

R. Srikant, Sugato Basu, Ni Wang, D. Pregibon
{"title":"用户浏览模型:相关性vs .检查","authors":"R. Srikant, Sugato Basu, Ni Wang, D. Pregibon","doi":"10.1145/1835804.1835835","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There has been considerable work on user browsing models for search engine results, both organic and sponsored. The click-through rate (CTR) of a result is the product of the probability of examination (will the user look at the result) times the perceived relevance of the result (probability of a click given examination). Past papers have assumed that when the CTR of a result varies based on the pattern of clicks in prior positions, this variation is solely due to changes in the probability of examination. We show that, for sponsored search results, a substantial portion of the change in CTR when conditioned on prior clicks is in fact due to a change in the relevance of results for that query instance, not just due to a change in the probability of examination. We then propose three new user browsing models, which attribute CTR changes solely to changes in relevance, solely to changes in examination (with an enhanced model of user behavior), or to both changes in relevance and examination. The model that attributes all the CTR change to relevance yields substantially better predictors of CTR than models that attribute all the change to examination, and does only slightly worse than the model that attributes CTR change to both relevance and examination. For predicting relevance, the model that attributes all the CTR change to relevance again does better than the model that attributes the change to examination. Surprisingly, we also find that one model might do better than another in predicting CTR, but worse in predicting relevance. Thus it is essential to evaluate user browsing models with respect to accuracy in predicting relevance, not just CTR.","PeriodicalId":20529,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"53","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"User browsing models: relevance versus examination\",\"authors\":\"R. Srikant, Sugato Basu, Ni Wang, D. Pregibon\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/1835804.1835835\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There has been considerable work on user browsing models for search engine results, both organic and sponsored. The click-through rate (CTR) of a result is the product of the probability of examination (will the user look at the result) times the perceived relevance of the result (probability of a click given examination). Past papers have assumed that when the CTR of a result varies based on the pattern of clicks in prior positions, this variation is solely due to changes in the probability of examination. We show that, for sponsored search results, a substantial portion of the change in CTR when conditioned on prior clicks is in fact due to a change in the relevance of results for that query instance, not just due to a change in the probability of examination. We then propose three new user browsing models, which attribute CTR changes solely to changes in relevance, solely to changes in examination (with an enhanced model of user behavior), or to both changes in relevance and examination. The model that attributes all the CTR change to relevance yields substantially better predictors of CTR than models that attribute all the change to examination, and does only slightly worse than the model that attributes CTR change to both relevance and examination. For predicting relevance, the model that attributes all the CTR change to relevance again does better than the model that attributes the change to examination. Surprisingly, we also find that one model might do better than another in predicting CTR, but worse in predicting relevance. Thus it is essential to evaluate user browsing models with respect to accuracy in predicting relevance, not just CTR.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20529,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"53\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/1835804.1835835\",\"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 16th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/1835804.1835835","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 53

摘要

对于搜索引擎结果的用户浏览模型(包括自然浏览和赞助浏览),已经进行了大量的研究。结果的点击率(CTR)是检查概率(用户是否会查看结果)乘以结果的感知相关性(给定检查的点击概率)的乘积。过去的论文假设,当结果的CTR根据先前位置的点击模式而变化时,这种变化仅仅是由于检查概率的变化。我们表明,对于赞助搜索结果,当以先前点击为条件时,CTR变化的很大一部分实际上是由于该查询实例的结果相关性的变化,而不仅仅是由于检查概率的变化。然后,我们提出了三种新的用户浏览模型,这些模型将点击率的变化仅仅归因于相关性的变化,仅仅归因于检查的变化(使用增强的用户行为模型),或者相关性和检查的变化。将所有点击率变化归因于相关性的模型比将所有点击率变化归因于检查的模型产生了更好的点击率预测器,并且仅比将点击率变化归因于相关性和检查的模型略差。对于预测相关性,将所有点击率变化再次归为相关性的模型比将变化归为检查的模型做得更好。令人惊讶的是,我们还发现一个模型在预测点击率方面可能比另一个模型做得更好,但在预测相关性方面却更差。因此,有必要评估用户浏览模型在预测相关性方面的准确性,而不仅仅是点击率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
User browsing models: relevance versus examination
There has been considerable work on user browsing models for search engine results, both organic and sponsored. The click-through rate (CTR) of a result is the product of the probability of examination (will the user look at the result) times the perceived relevance of the result (probability of a click given examination). Past papers have assumed that when the CTR of a result varies based on the pattern of clicks in prior positions, this variation is solely due to changes in the probability of examination. We show that, for sponsored search results, a substantial portion of the change in CTR when conditioned on prior clicks is in fact due to a change in the relevance of results for that query instance, not just due to a change in the probability of examination. We then propose three new user browsing models, which attribute CTR changes solely to changes in relevance, solely to changes in examination (with an enhanced model of user behavior), or to both changes in relevance and examination. The model that attributes all the CTR change to relevance yields substantially better predictors of CTR than models that attribute all the change to examination, and does only slightly worse than the model that attributes CTR change to both relevance and examination. For predicting relevance, the model that attributes all the CTR change to relevance again does better than the model that attributes the change to examination. Surprisingly, we also find that one model might do better than another in predicting CTR, but worse in predicting relevance. Thus it is essential to evaluate user browsing models with respect to accuracy in predicting relevance, not just CTR.
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