Learning from the Wisdom of Crowds: Exploiting Similar Sessions for Session Search
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 engines are essential internet services, enabling users to efficiently find the information they need. Session search employs users’ session logs of queries to solve complex retrieval tasks, in which users search multiple times until interested documents are found. Most existing session search models focus on the contextual information within the current search, ignoring the evidence from historical search sessions. Considering the fact that many ongoing retrieval tasks should have already been carried out by other users with a similar intent, we argue that historical sessions with similar intents can help improve the accuracy of the current search task. We propose a novel Similar Session-enhanced Ranking (SSR) model to improve the session search performance using historical sessions with similar intents. Specifically, the candidate historical sessions are matched by query-level and session-level semantic similarity, and then query-level neighbor behaviors are aggregated by a Query-guided GNN (QGNN) while session-level neighbor behaviors are aggregated using the attention mechanism. Finally, we integrate the refined and aggregated historical neighbor information into the current search session. Experimental results on AOL and Tiangong-ST datasets show that our SSR model significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art models.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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