MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297816431 · doi:10.1145/3555371

Learning to Ask: Conversational Product Search via Representation Learning

2022· article· en· W4297816431 on OpenAlexaff
Jie Zou, Jimmy Xiangji Huang, Zhaochun Ren, Evangelos Kanoulas

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Information Systems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation Retrieval and Search Behavior
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsk priceProduct (mathematics)Computer scienceRepresentation (politics)Human–computer interactionArtificial intelligenceMathematicsBusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Online shopping platforms, such as Amazon and AliExpress, are increasingly prevalent in society, helping customers purchase products conveniently. With recent progress in natural language processing, researchers and practitioners shift their focus from traditional product search to conversational product search. Conversational product search enables user-machine conversations and through them collects explicit user feedback that allows to actively clarify the users’ product preferences. Therefore, prospective research on an intelligent shopping assistant via conversations is indispensable. Existing publications on conversational product search either model conversations independently from users, queries, and products or lead to a vocabulary mismatch. In this work, we propose a new conversational product search model, ConvPS, to assist users in locating desirable items. The model is first trained to jointly learn the semantic representations of user, query, item, and conversation via a unified generative framework. After learning these representations, they are integrated to retrieve the target items in the latent semantic space. Meanwhile, we propose a set of greedy and explore-exploit strategies to learn to ask the user a sequence of high-performance questions for conversations. Our proposed ConvPS model can naturally integrate the representation learning of the user, query, item, and conversation into a unified generative framework, which provides a promising avenue for constructing accurate and robust conversational product search systems that are flexible and adaptive. Experimental results demonstrate that our ConvPS model significantly outperforms state-of-the-art baselines.

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)0.004
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Information SystemsSame topicInformation Retrieval and Search BehaviorFrench-language works237,207