Heterogeneous Graph-based Context-aware Document Ranking
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
Users' complex information needs usually require consecutive queries, which results in sessions with a series of interactions. Exploiting such contextual interactions has been proven to be favorable for result ranking. However, existing studies mainly model the contextual information independently and sequentially. They neglect the diverse information hidden in different relations and structured information of session elements as well as the valuable signals from other relevant sessions. In this paper, we propose HEXA, a heterogeneous graph-based context-aware document ranking framework. It exploits heterogeneous graphs to organize the contextual information and beneficial search logs for modeling user intents and ranking results. Specifically, we construct two heterogeneous graphs, i.e., a session graph and a query graph. The session graph is built from the current session queries and documents. Meanwhile, we sample the current query's k-layer neighbors from search logs to construct the query graph. Then, we employ heterogeneous graph neural networks and specialized readout functions on the two graphs to capture the user intents from local and global aspects. Finally, the document ranking scores are measured by how well the documents are matched with the two user intents. Results on two large-scale datasets confirm the effectiveness of our 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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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