Birger Larsen

Radu Dragusin, Paula Petcu, Christina Lioma et al.

Background: The web has become a primary information resource about illnesses and treatments for both medical and non-medical users. Standard web search is by far the most common interface for such information. It is therefore of interest to find out how well web search engines work for diagnostic queries and what factors contribute to successes and failures. Among diseases, rare (or orphan) diseases represent an especially challenging and thus interesting class to diagnose as each is rare, diverse in symptoms and usually has scattered resources associated with it. Methods: We use an evaluation approach for web search engines for rare disease diagnosis which includes 56 real life diagnostic cases, state-of-the-art evaluation measures, and curated information resources. In addition, we introduce FindZebra, a specialized (vertical) rare disease search engine. FindZebra is powered by open source search technology and uses curated freely available online medical information. Results: FindZebra outperforms Google Search in both default setup and customised to the resources used by FindZebra. We extend FindZebra with specialized functionalities exploiting medical ontological information and UMLS medical concepts to demonstrate different ways of displaying the retrieved results to medical experts. Conclusions: Our results indicate that a specialized search engine can improve the diagnostic quality without compromising the ease of use of the currently widely popular web search engines. The proposed evaluation approach can be valuable for future development and benchmarking. The FindZebra search engine is available at http://www.findzebra.com/.

Jüri Keller, Maik Fröbe, Björn Engelmann et al.

Cranfield-style retrieval evaluations with too few or too many relevant documents or with low inter-assessor agreement on relevance can reduce the reliability of observations. In evaluations with human assessors, information needs are often formalized as retrieval topics to avoid an excessive number of relevant documents while maintaining good agreement. However, emerging evaluation setups that use Large Language Models (LLMs) as relevance assessors often use only queries, potentially decreasing the reliability. To study whether LLM relevance assessors benefit from formalized information needs, we synthetically formalize information needs with LLMs into topics that follow the established structure from previous human relevance assessments (i.e., descriptions and narratives). We compare assessors using synthetically formalized topics against the LLM-default query-only assessor on Robust04 and the 2019/2020 editions of TREC Deep Learning. We find that assessors without formalization judge many more documents relevant and have a lower agreement, leading to reduced reliability in retrieval evaluations. Furthermore, we show that the formalized topics improve agreement between human and LLM relevance judgments, even when the topics are not highly similar to their human counterparts. Our findings indicate that LLM relevance assessors should use formalized information needs, as is standard for human assessment, and synthetically formalize topics when no human formalization exists to improve evaluation reliability.

Lucas Chaves Lima, Casper Hansen, Christian Hansen et al.

This report describes the participation of two Danish universities, University of Copenhagen and Aalborg University, in the international search engine competition on COVID-19 (the 2020 TREC-COVID Challenge) organised by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and its Text Retrieval Conference (TREC) division. The aim of the competition was to find the best search engine strategy for retrieving precise biomedical scientific information on COVID-19 from the largest, at that point in time, dataset of curated scientific literature on COVID-19 -- the COVID-19 Open Research Dataset (CORD-19). CORD-19 was the result of a call to action to the tech community by the U.S. White House in March 2020, and was shortly thereafter posted on Kaggle as an AI competition by the Allen Institute for AI, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Georgetown University's Center for Security and Emerging Technology, Microsoft, and the National Library of Medicine at the US National Institutes of Health. CORD-19 contained over 200,000 scholarly articles (of which more than 100,000 were with full text) about COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, and related coronaviruses, gathered from curated biomedical sources. The TREC-COVID challenge asked for the best way to (a) retrieve accurate and precise scientific information, in response to some queries formulated by biomedical experts, and (b) rank this information decreasingly by its relevance to the query. In this document, we describe the TREC-COVID competition setup, our participation to it, and our resulting reflections and lessons learned about the state-of-art technology when faced with the acute task of retrieving precise scientific information from a rapidly growing corpus of literature, in response to highly specialised queries, in the middle of a pandemic.

Christian Hansen, Casper Hansen, Jakob Grue Simonsen et al.

We study whether it is possible to infer if a news headline is true or false using only the movement of the human eyes when reading news headlines. Our study with 55 participants who are eye-tracked when reading 108 news headlines (72 true, 36 false) shows that false headlines receive statistically significantly less visual attention than true headlines. We further build an ensemble learner that predicts news headline factuality using only eye-tracking measurements. Our model yields a mean AUC of 0.688 and is better at detecting false than true headlines. Through a model analysis, we find that eye-tracking 25 users when reading 3-6 headlines is sufficient for our ensemble learner.

Christina Lioma, Birger Larsen, Peter Ingwersen

When submitting queries to information retrieval (IR) systems, users often have the option of specifying which, if any, of the query terms are heavily dependent on each other and should be treated as a fixed phrase, for instance by placing them between quotes. In addition to such cases where users specify term dependence, automatic ways also exist for IR systems to detect dependent terms in queries. Most IR systems use both user and algorithmic approaches. It is not however clear whether and to what extent user-defined term dependence agrees with algorithmic estimates of term dependence, nor which of the two may fetch higher performance gains. Simply put, is it better to trust users or the system to detect term dependence in queries? To answer this question, we experiment with 101 crowdsourced search engine users and 334 queries (52 train and 282 test TREC queries) and we record 10 assessments per query. We find that (i) user assessments of term dependence differ significantly from algorithmic assessments of term dependence (their overlap is approximately 30%); (ii) there is little agreement among users about term dependence in queries, and this disagreement increases as queries become longer; (iii) the potential retrieval gain that can be fetched by treating term dependence (both user- and system-defined) over a bag of words baseline is reserved to a small subset (approxi-mately 8%) of the queries, and is much higher for low-depth than deep preci-sion measures. Points (ii) and (iii) constitute novel insights into term dependence.

Christina Lioma, Jakob Grue Simonsen, Birger Larsen

Recent discussions on alternative facts, fake news, and post truth politics have motivated research on creating technologies that allow people not only to access information, but also to assess the credibility of the information presented to them by information retrieval systems. Whereas technology is in place for filtering information according to relevance and/or credibility, no single measure currently exists for evaluating the accuracy or precision (and more generally effectiveness) of both the relevance and the credibility of retrieved results. One obvious way of doing so is to measure relevance and credibility effectiveness separately, and then consolidate the two measures into one. There at least two problems with such an approach: (I) it is not certain that the same criteria are applied to the evaluation of both relevance and credibility (and applying different criteria introduces bias to the evaluation); (II) many more and richer measures exist for assessing relevance effectiveness than for assessing credibility effectiveness (hence risking further bias). Motivated by the above, we present two novel types of evaluation measures that are designed to measure the effectiveness of both relevance and credibility in ranked lists of retrieval results. Experimental evaluation on a small human-annotated dataset (that we make freely available to the research community) shows that our measures are expressive and intuitive in their interpretation.

Birger Larsen, Christina Lioma, Arjen de Vries

The ECIR half-day workshop on Task-Based and Aggregated Search (TBAS) was held in Barcelona, Spain on 1 April 2012. The program included a keynote talk by Professor Jarvelin, six full paper presentations, two poster presentations, and an interactive discussion among the approximately 25 participants. This report overviews the aims and contents of the workshop and outlines the major outcomes.

Christina Lioma, Birger Larsen, Hinrich Schütze et al.

Interactive Information Retrieval refers to the branch of Information Retrieval that considers the retrieval process with respect to a wide range of contexts, which may affect the user's information seeking experience. The identification and representation of such contexts has been the object of the principle of Polyrepresentation, a theoretical framework for reasoning about different representations arising from interactive information retrieval in a given context. Although the principle of Polyrepresentation has received attention from many researchers, not much empirical work has been done based on it. One reason may be that it has not yet been formalised mathematically. In this paper we propose an up-to-date and exible mathematical formalisation of the principle of Polyrepresentation for information needs. Specifically, we apply Subjective Logic to model different representations of information needs as beliefs marked by degrees of uncertainty. We combine such beliefs using different logical operators, and we discuss these combinations with respect to different retrieval scenarios and situations. A formal model is introduced and discussed, with illustrative applications to the modelling of information needs.

Christina Lioma, Birger Larsen, Peter Ingwersen

According to the principle of polyrepresentation, retrieval accuracy may improve through the combination of multiple and diverse information object representations about e.g. the context of the user, the information sought, or the retrieval system. Recently, the principle of polyrepresentation was mathematically expressed using subjective logic, where the potential suitability of each representation for improving retrieval performance was formalised through degrees of belief and uncertainty. No experimental evidence or practical application has so far validated this model. We extend the work of Lioma et al. (2010), by providing a practical application and analysis of the model. We show how to map the abstract notions of belief and uncertainty to real-life evidence drawn from a retrieval dataset. We also show how to estimate two different types of polyrepresentation assuming either (a) independence or (b) dependence between the information objects that are combined. We focus on the polyrepresentation of different types of context relating to user information needs (i.e. work task, user background knowledge, ideal answer) and show that the subjective logic model can predict their optimal combination prior and independently to the retrieval process.

Christina Lioma, Birger Larsen, Wei Lu

Typically, every part in most coherent text has some plausible reason for its presence, some function that it performs to the overall semantics of the text. Rhetorical relations, e.g. contrast, cause, explanation, describe how the parts of a text are linked to each other. Knowledge about this socalled discourse structure has been applied successfully to several natural language processing tasks. This work studies the use of rhetorical relations for Information Retrieval (IR): Is there a correlation between certain rhetorical relations and retrieval performance? Can knowledge about a document's rhetorical relations be useful to IR? We present a language model modification that considers rhetorical relations when estimating the relevance of a document to a query. Empirical evaluation of different versions of our model on TREC settings shows that certain rhetorical relations can benefit retrieval effectiveness notably (> 10% in mean average precision over a state-of-the-art baseline).

Christina Lioma, Birger Larsen, Wei Lu et al.

Much of the information processed by Information Retrieval (IR) systems is unreliable, biased, and generally untrustworthy [1], [2], [3]. Yet, factuality & objectivity detection is not a standard component of IR systems, even though it has been possible in Natural Language Processing (NLP) in the last decade. Motivated by this, we ask if and how factuality & objectivity detection may benefit IR. We answer this in two parts. First, we use state-of-the-art NLP to compute the probability of document factuality & objectivity in two TREC collections, and analyse its relation to document relevance. We find that factuality is strongly and positively correlated to document relevance, but objectivity is not. Second, we study the impact of factuality & objectivity to retrieval effectiveness by treating them as query independent features that we combine with a competitive language modelling baseline. Experiments with 450 TREC queries show that factuality improves precision >10% over strong baselines, especially for uncurated data used in web search; objectivity gives mixed results. An overall clear trend is that document factuality & objectivity is much more beneficial to IR when searching uncurated (e.g. web) documents vs. curated (e.g. state documentation and newswire articles). To our knowledge, this is the first study of factuality & objectivity for back-end IR, contributing novel findings about the relation between relevance and factuality/objectivity, and statistically significant gains to retrieval effectiveness in the competitive web search task.

Christina Lioma, Fabien Tarissan, Jakob Grue Simonsen et al.

Document coherence describes how much sense text makes in terms of its logical organisation and discourse flow. Even though coherence is a relatively difficult notion to quantify precisely, it can be approximated automatically. This type of coherence modelling is not only interesting in itself, but also useful for a number of other text processing tasks, including Information Retrieval (IR), where adjusting the ranking of documents according to both their relevance and their coherence has been shown to increase retrieval effectiveness [34,37]. The state of the art in unsupervised coherence modelling represents documents as bipartite graphs of sentences and discourse entities, and then projects these bipartite graphs into one-mode undirected graphs. However, one-mode projections may incur significant loss of the information present in the original bipartite structure. To address this we present three novel graph metrics that compute document coherence on the original bipartite graph of sentences and entities. Evaluation on standard settings shows that: (i) one of our coherence metrics beats the state of the art in terms of coherence accuracy; and (ii) all three of our coherence metrics improve retrieval effectiveness because, as closer analysis reveals, they capture aspects of document quality that go undetected by both keyword-based standard ranking and by spam filtering. This work contributes document coherence metrics that are theoretically principled, parameter-free, and useful to IR.

Christina Lioma, Birger Larsen, Casper Petersen et al.

What if Information Retrieval (IR) systems did not just retrieve relevant information that is stored in their indices, but could also "understand" it and synthesise it into a single document? We present a preliminary study that makes a first step towards answering this question. Given a query, we train a Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) on existing relevant information to that query. We then use the RNN to "deep learn" a single, synthetic, and we assume, relevant document for that query. We design a crowdsourcing experiment to assess how relevant the "deep learned" document is, compared to existing relevant documents. Users are shown a query and four wordclouds (of three existing relevant documents and our deep learned synthetic document). The synthetic document is ranked on average most relevant of all.

Casper Petersen, Christina Lioma, Jakob Grue Simonsen et al.

We present two novel models of document coherence and their application to information retrieval (IR). Both models approximate document coherence using discourse entities, e.g. the subject or object of a sentence. Our first model views text as a Markov process generating sequences of discourse entities (entity n-grams); we use the entropy of these entity n-grams to approximate the rate at which new information appears in text, reasoning that as more new words appear, the topic increasingly drifts and text coherence decreases. Our second model extends the work of Guinaudeau & Strube [28] that represents text as a graph of discourse entities, linked by different relations, such as their distance or adjacency in text. We use several graph topology metrics to approximate different aspects of the discourse flow that can indicate coherence, such as the average clustering or betweenness of discourse entities in text. Experiments with several instantiations of these models show that: (i) our models perform on a par with two other well-known models of text coherence even without any parameter tuning, and (ii) reranking retrieval results according to their coherence scores gives notable performance gains, confirming a relation between document coherence and relevance. This work contributes two novel models of document coherence, the application of which to IR complements recent work in the integration of document cohesiveness or comprehensibility to ranking [5, 56].

Christina Lioma, Jakob Grue Simonsen, Birger Larsen et al.

Modelling term dependence in IR aims to identify co-occurring terms that are too heavily dependent on each other to be treated as a bag of words, and to adapt the indexing and ranking accordingly. Dependent terms are predominantly identified using lexical frequency statistics, assuming that (a) if terms co-occur often enough in some corpus, they are semantically dependent; (b) the more often they co-occur, the more semantically dependent they are. This assumption is not always correct: the frequency of co-occurring terms can be separate from the strength of their semantic dependence. E.g. "red tape" might be overall less frequent than "tape measure" in some corpus, but this does not mean that "red"+"tape" are less dependent than "tape"+"measure". This is especially the case for non-compositional phrases, i.e. phrases whose meaning cannot be composed from the individual meanings of their terms (such as the phrase "red tape" meaning bureaucracy). Motivated by this lack of distinction between the frequency and strength of term dependence in IR, we present a principled approach for handling term dependence in queries, using both lexical frequency and semantic evidence. We focus on non-compositional phrases, extending a recent unsupervised model for their detection [21] to IR. Our approach, integrated into ranking using Markov Random Fields [31], yields effectiveness gains over competitive TREC baselines, showing that there is still room for improvement in the very well-studied area of term dependence in IR.

Philipp Mayr, Andrea Scharnhorst, Birger Larsen et al.

Bibliometric techniques are not yet widely used to enhance retrieval processes in digital libraries, although they offer value-added effects for users. In this workshop we will explore how statistical modelling of scholarship, such as Bradfordizing or network analysis of coauthorship network, can improve retrieval services for specific communities, as well as for large, cross-domain collections. This workshop aims to raise awareness of the missing link between information retrieval (IR) and bibliometrics/scientometrics and to create a common ground for the incorporation of bibliometric-enhanced services into retrieval at the digital library interface.