GDESA: Greedy Diversity Encoder with Self-attention for Search Results Diversification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Search result diversification aims to generate diversified search results so as to meet the various information needs of users. Most of those existing diversification methods greedily select the optimal documents one-by-one comparing with the selected document sequences. Due to the fact that the information utilities of the candidate documents are not independent, a model based on greedy document selection may not produce the global optimal ranking results. To address this issue, some work proposes to model global document interactions regardless of whether a document is selected, which is inconsistent with actual user behavior. In this article, we propose a new supervised diversification framework as an ensemble of global interaction and document selection. Based on a self-attention encoder-decoder structure and an RNN-based document selection component, the model can simultaneously leverage both the global interactions among all the documents and the interactions between the selected sequence and each unselected document. This framework is called Greedy Diversity Encoder with Self-Attention (GDESA). Experimental results show that GDESA outperforms previous methods that rely just on global interactions, and our further analysis demonstrates that using both global interactions and document selection is necessary and beneficial.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".