Personalizing Search Results Using Hierarchical RNN with Query-aware Attention
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
Search results personalization has become an effective way to improve the quality of search engines. Previous studies extracted information such as past clicks, user topical interests, query click entropy and so on to tailor the original ranking. However, few studies have taken into account the sequential information underlying previous queries and sessions. Intuitively, the order of issued queries is important in inferring the real user interests. And more recent sessions should provide more reliable personal signals than older sessions. In addition, the previous search history and user behaviors should influence the personalization of the current query depending on their relatedness. To implement these intuitions, in this paper we employ a hierarchical recurrent neural network to exploit such sequential information and automatically generate user profile from historical data. We propose a query-aware attention model to generate a dynamic user profile based on the input query. Significant improvement is observed in the experiment with data from a commercial search engine when compared with several traditional personalization models. Our analysis reveals that the attention model is able to attribute higher weights to more related past sessions after fine training.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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