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
The page presentation biases in the information retrieval system, especially on the click behavior, is a well-known challenge that hinders improving ranking models' performance with implicit user feedback. Unbiased Learning to Rank~(ULTR) algorithms are then proposed to learn an unbiased ranking model with biased click data. However, most existing algorithms are specifically designed to mitigate position-related bias, e.g., trust bias, without considering biases induced by other features in search result page presentation(SERP), e.g. attractive bias induced by the multimedia. Unfortunately, those biases widely exist in industrial systems and may lead to an unsatisfactory search experience. Therefore, we introduce a new problem, i.e., whole-page Unbiased Learning to Rank(WP-ULTR), aiming to handle biases induced by whole-page SERP features simultaneously. It presents tremendous challenges: (1) a suitable user behavior model (user behavior hypothesis) can be hard to find; and (2) complex biases cannot be handled by existing algorithms. To address the above challenges, we propose a Bias Agnostic whole-page unbiased Learning to rank algorithm, named BAL, to automatically find the user behavior model with causal discovery and mitigate the biases induced by multiple SERP features with no specific design. Experimental results on a real-world dataset verify the effectiveness of the BAL.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.003 |
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