The impact of intent selection on diversified search evaluation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To construct a diversified search test collection, a set of possible subtopics (or intents) needs to be determined for each topic, in one way or another, and perintent relevance assessments need to be obtained. In the TREC Web Track Diversity Task, subtopics are manually developed at NIST, based on results of automatic click log analysis; in the NTCIR INTENT Task, intents are determined by manually clustering 'subtopics strings' returned by participating systems. In this study, we address the following research question: Does the choice of intents for a test collection affect relative performances of diversified search systems? To this end, we use the TREC 2012 Web Track Diversity Task data and the NTCIR-10 INTENT-2 Task data, which share a set of 50 topics but have different intent sets. Our initial results suggest that the choice of intents may affect relative performances, and that this choice may be far more important than how many intents are selected for each topic
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it