Optimizing Compound Retrieval Systems

Modern retrieval systems do not rely on a single ranking model to construct their rankings. Instead, they generally take a cascading approach where a sequence of ranking models are applied in multiple re-ranking stages. Thereby, they balance the quality of the top-K ranking with computational costs by limiting the number of documents each model re-ranks. However, the cascading approach is not the only way models can interact to form a retrieval system. We propose the concept of compound retrieval systems as a broader class of retrieval systems that apply multiple prediction models. This encapsulates cascading models but also allows other types of interactions than top-K re-ranking. In particular, we enable interactions with large language models (LLMs) which can provide relative relevance comparisons. We focus on the optimization of compound retrieval system design which uniquely involves learning where to apply the component models and how to aggregate their predictions into a final ranking. This work shows how our compound approach can combine the classic BM25 retrieval model with state-of-the-art (pairwise) LLM relevance predictions, while optimizing a given ranking metric and efficiency target. Our experimental results show optimized compound retrieval systems provide better trade-offs between effectiveness and efficiency than cascading approaches, even when applied in a self-supervised manner. With the introduction of compound retrieval systems, we hope to inspire the information retrieval field to more out-of-the-box thinking on how prediction models can interact to form rankings.

A Simpler Alternative to Variational Regularized Counterfactual Risk Minimization

Variance regularized counterfactual risk minimization (VRCRM) has been proposed as an alternative off-policy learning (OPL) method. VRCRM method uses a lower-bound on the $f$-divergence between the logging policy and the target policy as regularization during learning and was shown to improve performance over existing OPL alternatives on multi-label classification tasks. In this work, we revisit the original experimental setting of VRCRM and propose to minimize the $f$-divergence directly, instead of optimizing for the lower bound using a $f$-GAN approach. Surprisingly, we were unable to reproduce the results reported in the original setting. In response, we propose a novel simpler alternative to f-divergence optimization by minimizing a direct approximation of f-divergence directly, instead of a $f$-GAN based lower bound. Experiments showed that minimizing the divergence using $f$-GANs did not work as expected, whereas our proposed novel simpler alternative works better empirically.

Proximal Ranking Policy Optimization for Practical Safety in Counterfactual Learning to Rank

Counterfactual learning to rank (CLTR) can be risky and, in various circumstances, can produce sub-optimal models that hurt performance when deployed. Safe CLTR was introduced to mitigate these risks when using inverse propensity scoring to correct for position bias. However, the existing safety measure for CLTR is not applicable to state-of-the-art CLTR methods, cannot handle trust bias, and relies on specific assumptions about user behavior. We propose a novel approach, proximal ranking policy optimization (PRPO), that provides safety in deployment without assumptions about user behavior. PRPO removes incentives for learning ranking behavior that is too dissimilar to a safe ranking model. Thereby, PRPO imposes a limit on how much learned models can degrade performance metrics, without relying on any specific user assumptions. Our experiments show that PRPO provides higher performance than the existing safe inverse propensity scoring approach. PRPO always maintains safety, even in maximally adversarial situations. By avoiding assumptions, PRPO is the first method with unconditional safety in deployment that translates to robust safety for real-world applications.

Practical and Robust Safety Guarantees for Advanced Counterfactual Learning to Rank

Counterfactual learning to rank (CLTR ) can be risky; various circumstances can cause it to produce sub-optimal models that hurt performance when deployed. Safe CLTR was introduced to mitigate these risks when using inverse propensity scoring to correct for position bias. However, the existing safety measure for CLTR is not applicable to state-of-the-art CLTR, it cannot handle trust bias, and its guarantees rely on specific assumptions about user behavior. Our contributions are two-fold. First, we generalize the existing safe CLTR approach to make it applicable to state-of-the-art doubly robust (DR) CLTR and trust bias. Second, we propose a novel approach, proximal ranking policy optimization (PRPO ), that provides safety in deployment without assumptions about user behavior. PRPO removes incentives for learning ranking behavior that is too dissimilar to a safe ranking model. Thereby, PRPO imposes a limit on how much learned models can degrade performance metrics, without relying on any specific user assumptions. Our experiments show that both our novel safe doubly robust method and PRPO provide higher performance than the existing safe inverse propensity scoring approach. However, when circumstances are unexpected, the safe doubly robust approach can become unsafe and bring detrimental performance. In contrast, PRPO always maintains safety, even in maximally adversarial situations. By avoiding assumptions, PRPO is the first method with unconditional safety in deployment that translates to robust safety for real-world applications.

Local Feature Selection without Label or Feature Leakage for Interpretable Machine Learning Predictions

Local feature selection in machine learning provides instance-specific explanations by focusing on the most relevant features for each prediction, enhancing the interpretability of complex models. However, such methods tend to produce misleading explanations by encoding additional information in their selections. In this work, we attribute the problem of misleading selections by formalizing the concepts of label and feature leakage. We rigorously derive the necessary and sufficient conditions under which we can guarantee no leakage, and show existing methods do not meet these conditions. Furthermore, we propose the first local feature selection method that is proven to have no leakage called SUWR. Our experimental results indicate that SUWR is less prone to overfitting and combines state-of-the-art predictive performance with high feature-selection sparsity. Our generic and easily extendable formal approach provides a strong theoretical basis for future work on interpretability with reliable explanations.

Reliable Confidence Intervals for Information Retrieval Evaluation Using Generative A.I

The traditional evaluation of information retrieval (IR) systems is generally very costly as it requires manual relevance annotation from human experts. Recent advancements in generative artificial intelligence -- specifically large language models (LLMs) -- can generate relevance annotations at an enormous scale with relatively small computational costs. Potentially, this could alleviate the costs traditionally associated with IR evaluation and make it applicable to numerous low-resource applications. However, generated relevance annotations are not immune to (systematic) errors, and as a result, directly using them for evaluation produces unreliable results. In this work, we propose two methods based on prediction-powered inference and conformal risk control that utilize computer-generated relevance annotations to place reliable confidence intervals (CIs) around IR evaluation metrics. Our proposed methods require a small number of reliable annotations from which the methods can statistically analyze the errors in the generated annotations. Using this information, we can place CIs around evaluation metrics with strong theoretical guarantees. Unlike existing approaches, our conformal risk control method is specifically designed for ranking metrics and can vary its CIs per query and document. Our experimental results show that our CIs accurately capture both the variance and bias in evaluation based on LLM annotations, better than the typical empirical bootstrapping estimates. We hope our contributions bring reliable evaluation to the many IR applications where this was traditionally infeasible.

Is Interpretable Machine Learning Effective at Feature Selection for Neural Learning-to-Rank?

Neural ranking models have become increasingly popular for real-world search and recommendation systems in recent years. Unlike their tree-based counterparts, neural models are much less interpretable. That is, it is very difficult to understand their inner workings and answer questions like how do they make their ranking decisions? or what document features do they find important? This is particularly disadvantageous since interpretability is highly important for real-world systems. In this work, we explore feature selection for neural learning-to-rank (LTR). In particular, we investigate six widely-used methods from the field of interpretable machine learning (ML) and introduce our own modification, to select the input features that are most important to the ranking behavior. To understand whether these methods are useful for practitioners, we further study whether they contribute to efficiency enhancement. Our experimental results reveal a large feature redundancy in several LTR benchmarks: the local selection method TabNet can achieve optimal ranking performance with less than 10 features; the global methods, particularly our G-L2X, require slightly more selected features, but exhibit higher potential in improving efficiency. We hope that our analysis of these feature selection methods will bring the fields of interpretable ML and LTR closer together.

Optimal Baseline Corrections for Off-Policy Contextual Bandits

The off-policy learning paradigm allows for recommender systems and general ranking applications to be framed as decision-making problems, where we aim to learn decision policies that optimize an unbiased offline estimate of an online reward metric. With unbiasedness comes potentially high variance, and prevalent methods exist to reduce estimation variance. These methods typically make use of control variates, either additive (i.e., baseline corrections or doubly robust methods) or multiplicative (i.e., self-normalisation). Our work unifies these approaches by proposing a single framework built on their equivalence in learning scenarios. The foundation of our framework is the derivation of an equivalent baseline correction for all of the existing control variates. Consequently, our framework enables us to characterize the variance-optimal unbiased estimator and provide a closed-form solution for it. This optimal estimator brings significantly improved performance in both evaluation and learning, and minimizes data requirements. Empirical observations corroborate our theoretical findings.

A First Look at Selection Bias in Preference Elicitation for Recommendation

Preference elicitation explicitly asks users what kind of recommendations they would like to receive. It is a popular technique for conversational recommender systems to deal with cold-starts. Previous work has studied selection bias in implicit feedback, e.g., clicks, and in some forms of explicit feedback, i.e., ratings on items. Despite the fact that the extreme sparsity of preference elicitation interactions make them severely more prone to selection bias than natural interactions, the effect of selection bias in preference elicitation on the resulting recommendations has not been studied yet. To address this gap, we take a first look at the effects of selection bias in preference elicitation and how they may be further investigated in the future. We find that a big hurdle is the current lack of any publicly available dataset that has preference elicitation interactions. As a solution, we propose a simulation of a topic-based preference elicitation process. The results from our simulation-based experiments indicate (i) that ignoring the effect of selection bias early in preference elicitation can lead to an exacerbation of overrepresentation in subsequent item recommendations, and (ii) that debiasing methods can alleviate this effect, which leads to significant improvements in subsequent item recommendation performance. Our aim is for the proposed simulator and initial results to provide a starting point and motivation for future research into this important but overlooked problem setting.

Going Beyond Popularity and Positivity Bias: Correcting for Multifactorial Bias in Recommender Systems

Two typical forms of bias in user interaction data with recommender systems (RSs) are popularity bias and positivity bias, which manifest themselves as the over-representation of interactions with popular items or items that users prefer, respectively. Debiasing methods aim to mitigate the effect of selection bias on the evaluation and optimization of RSs. However, existing debiasing methods only consider single-factor forms of bias, e.g., only the item (popularity) or only the rating value (positivity). This is in stark contrast with the real world where user selections are generally affected by multiple factors at once. In this work, we consider multifactorial selection bias in RSs. Our focus is on selection bias affected by both item and rating value factors, which is a generalization and combination of popularity and positivity bias. While the concept of multifactorial bias is intuitive, it brings a severe practical challenge as it requires substantially more data for accurate bias estimation. As a solution, we propose smoothing and alternating gradient descent techniques to reduce variance and improve the robustness of its optimization. Our experimental results reveal that, with our proposed techniques, multifactorial bias corrections are more effective and robust than single-factor counterparts on real-world and synthetic datasets.