用户vs模型:观察告诉我们关于有效性度量的什么

Alistair Moffat, Paul Thomas, Falk Scholer
{"title":"用户vs模型:观察告诉我们关于有效性度量的什么","authors":"Alistair Moffat, Paul Thomas, Falk Scholer","doi":"10.1145/2505515.2507665","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Retrieval system effectiveness can be measured in two quite different ways: by monitoring the behavior of users and gathering data about the ease and accuracy with which they accomplish certain specified information-seeking tasks; or by using numeric effectiveness metrics to score system runs in reference to a set of relevance judgments. In the second approach, the effectiveness metric is chosen in the belief that user task performance, if it were to be measured by the first approach, should be linked to the score provided by the metric. This work explores that link, by analyzing the assumptions and implications of a number of effectiveness metrics, and exploring how these relate to observable user behaviors. Data recorded as part of a user study included user self-assessment of search task difficulty; gaze position; and click activity. Our results show that user behavior is influenced by a blend of many factors, including the extent to which relevant documents are encountered, the stage of the search process, and task difficulty. These insights can be used to guide development of batch effectiveness metrics.","PeriodicalId":20528,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 22nd ACM international conference on Information & Knowledge Management","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"93","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Users versus models: what observation tells us about effectiveness metrics\",\"authors\":\"Alistair Moffat, Paul Thomas, Falk Scholer\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/2505515.2507665\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Retrieval system effectiveness can be measured in two quite different ways: by monitoring the behavior of users and gathering data about the ease and accuracy with which they accomplish certain specified information-seeking tasks; or by using numeric effectiveness metrics to score system runs in reference to a set of relevance judgments. In the second approach, the effectiveness metric is chosen in the belief that user task performance, if it were to be measured by the first approach, should be linked to the score provided by the metric. This work explores that link, by analyzing the assumptions and implications of a number of effectiveness metrics, and exploring how these relate to observable user behaviors. Data recorded as part of a user study included user self-assessment of search task difficulty; gaze position; and click activity. Our results show that user behavior is influenced by a blend of many factors, including the extent to which relevant documents are encountered, the stage of the search process, and task difficulty. These insights can be used to guide development of batch effectiveness metrics.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20528,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 22nd ACM international conference on Information & Knowledge Management\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-10-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"93\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 22nd ACM international conference on Information & Knowledge Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/2505515.2507665\",\"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 22nd ACM international conference on Information & Knowledge Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2505515.2507665","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 93

摘要

检索系统的有效性可以通过两种截然不同的方式来衡量:通过监测用户的行为并收集有关用户完成某些特定信息搜索任务的容易程度和准确性的数据;或者通过使用数字有效性度量来根据一组相关判断对系统运行进行评分。在第二种方法中,选择有效性度量是基于这样一种信念,即如果要用第一种方法度量用户任务性能,则应该将其与度量提供的分数联系起来。这项工作通过分析一些有效性指标的假设和含义,并探索这些指标与可观察到的用户行为之间的关系,探讨了这种联系。作为用户研究的一部分记录的数据包括用户对搜索任务难度的自我评估;凝视位置;点击活动。我们的研究结果表明,用户行为受到许多因素的混合影响,包括遇到相关文档的程度、搜索过程的阶段和任务难度。这些见解可用于指导批量有效性指标的开发。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Users versus models: what observation tells us about effectiveness metrics
Retrieval system effectiveness can be measured in two quite different ways: by monitoring the behavior of users and gathering data about the ease and accuracy with which they accomplish certain specified information-seeking tasks; or by using numeric effectiveness metrics to score system runs in reference to a set of relevance judgments. In the second approach, the effectiveness metric is chosen in the belief that user task performance, if it were to be measured by the first approach, should be linked to the score provided by the metric. This work explores that link, by analyzing the assumptions and implications of a number of effectiveness metrics, and exploring how these relate to observable user behaviors. Data recorded as part of a user study included user self-assessment of search task difficulty; gaze position; and click activity. Our results show that user behavior is influenced by a blend of many factors, including the extent to which relevant documents are encountered, the stage of the search process, and task difficulty. These insights can be used to guide development of batch effectiveness metrics.
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