MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951455820

Online Learning to Rank in Stochastic Click Models

2017· preprint· en· W2951455820 on OpenAlexaff
Masrour Zoghi, Tomáš Tunys, Mohammad Ghavamzadeh, Branislav Kveton, Csaba Szepesvári, Zheng Wen

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Bandit Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLearning to rankRank (graph theory)RegretMachine learningOnline learningConvergence (economics)Artificial intelligenceRange (aeronautics)Class (philosophy)Theoretical computer scienceRanking (information retrieval)MathematicsWorld Wide Web
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Online learning to rank is a core problem in information retrieval and machine learning. Many provably efficient algorithms have been recently proposed for this problem in specific click models. The click model is a model of how the user interacts with a list of documents. Though these results are significant, their impact on practice is limited, because all proposed algorithms are designed for specific click models and lack convergence guarantees in other models. In this work, we propose BatchRank, the first online learning to rank algorithm for a broad class of click models. The class encompasses two most fundamental click models, the cascade and position-based models. We derive a gap-dependent upper bound on the $T$-step regret of BatchRank and evaluate it on a range of web search queries. We observe that BatchRank outperforms ranked bandits and is more robust than CascadeKL-UCB, an existing algorithm for the cascade model.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.358
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.005 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicAdvanced Bandit Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207