MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171045163 · doi:10.1145/2036264.2036281

Mining Concept Sequences from Large-Scale Search Logs for Context-Aware Query Suggestion

2011· article· en· W2171045163 on OpenAlexaff
Zhen Liao, Daxin Jiang, Enhong Chen, Jian Pei, Huanhuan Cao, Hang Li

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCaching and Content Delivery
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersMinistry of Education of the People's Republic of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceWeb search queryInformation retrievalQuery expansionWeb query classificationQuery languageContext (archaeology)Query optimizationSargableSession (web analytics)Search engineData miningWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Query suggestion plays an important role in improving usability of search engines. Although some recently proposed methods provide query suggestions by mining query patterns from search logs, none of them models the immediately preceding queries as context systematically, and uses context information effectively in query suggestions. Context-aware query suggestion is challenging in both modeling context and scaling up query suggestion using context. In this article, we propose a novel context-aware query suggestion approach. To tackle the challenges, our approach consists of two stages. In the first, offline model-learning stage , to address data sparseness, queries are summarized into concepts by clustering a click-through bipartite. A concept sequence suffix tree is then constructed from session data as a context-aware query suggestion model. In the second, online query suggestion stage , a user’s search context is captured by mapping the query sequence submitted by the user to a sequence of concepts. By looking up the context in the concept sequence suffix tree, we suggest to the user context-aware queries. We test our approach on large-scale search logs of a commercial search engine containing 4.0 billion Web queries, 5.9 billion clicks, and 1.87 billion search sessions. The experimental results clearly show that our approach outperforms three baseline methods in both coverage and quality of suggestions.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations41
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and TechnologySame topicCaching and Content DeliveryFrench-language works237,207