Investigating the Robustness of Counterfactual Learning to Rank Models: A Reproducibility Study

Counterfactual learning to rank (CLTR) has attracted extensive attention in the IR community for its ability to leverage massive logged user interaction data to train ranking models. While the CLTR models can be theoretically unbiased when the user behavior assumption is correct and the propensity estimation is accurate, their effectiveness is usually empirically evaluated via simulation-based experiments due to a lack of widely-available, large-scale, real click logs. However, the mainstream simulation-based experiments are somewhat limited as they often feature a single, deterministic production ranker and simplified user simulation models to generate the synthetic click logs. As a result, the robustness of CLTR models in complex and diverse situations is largely unknown and needs further investigation. To address this problem, in this paper, we aim to investigate the robustness of existing CLTR models in a reproducibility study with extensive simulation-based experiments that (1) use both deterministic and stochastic production rankers, each with different ranking performance, and (2) leverage multiple user simulation models with different user behavior assumptions. We find that the DLA models and IPS-DCM show better robustness under various simulation settings than IPS-PBM and PRS with offline propensity estimation. Besides, the existing CLTR models often fail to outperform the naive click baselines when the production ranker has relatively high ranking performance or certain randomness, which suggests an urgent need for developing new CLTR algorithms that work for these settings.

Scaling Laws For Dense Retrieval

Scaling up neural models has yielded significant advancements in a wide array of tasks, particularly in language generation. Previous studies have found that the performance of neural models frequently adheres to predictable scaling laws, correlated with factors such as training set size and model size. This insight is invaluable, especially as large-scale experiments grow increasingly resource-intensive. Yet, such scaling law has not been fully explored in dense retrieval due to the discrete nature of retrieval metrics and complex relationships between training data and model sizes in retrieval tasks. In this study, we investigate whether the performance of dense retrieval models follows the scaling law as other neural models. We propose to use contrastive log-likelihood as the evaluation metric and conduct extensive experiments with dense retrieval models implemented with different numbers of parameters and trained with different amounts of annotated data. Results indicate that, under our settings, the performance of dense retrieval models follows a precise power-law scaling related to the model size and the number of annotations. Additionally, we examine scaling with prevalent data augmentation methods to assess the impact of annotation quality, and apply the scaling law to find the best resource allocation strategy under a budget constraint. We believe that these insights will significantly contribute to understanding the scaling effect of dense retrieval models and offer meaningful guidance for future research endeavors.

Leveraging Large Language Models for Relevance Judgments in Legal Case Retrieval

Collecting relevant judgments for legal case retrieval is a challenging and time-consuming task. Accurately judging the relevance between two legal cases requires a considerable effort to read the lengthy text and a high level of domain expertise to extract Legal Facts and make juridical judgments. With the advent of advanced large language models, some recent studies have suggested that it is promising to use LLMs for relevance judgment. Nonetheless, the method of employing a general large language model for reliable relevance judgments in legal case retrieval is yet to be thoroughly explored. To fill this research gap, we devise a novel few-shot workflow tailored to the relevant judgment of legal cases. The proposed workflow breaks down the annotation process into a series of stages, imitating the process employed by human annotators and enabling a flexible integration of expert reasoning to enhance the accuracy of relevance judgments. By comparing the relevance judgments of LLMs and human experts, we empirically show that we can obtain reliable relevance judgments with the proposed workflow. Furthermore, we demonstrate the capacity to augment existing legal case retrieval models through the synthesis of data generated by the large language model.

MA4DIV: Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning for Search Result Diversification

The objective of search result diversification (SRD) is to ensure that selected documents cover as many different subtopics as possible. Existing methods primarily utilize a paradigm of "greedy selection", i.e., selecting one document with the highest diversity score at a time. These approaches tend to be inefficient and are easily trapped in a suboptimal state. In addition, some other methods aim to approximately optimize the diversity metric, such as $\alpha$-NDCG, but the results still remain suboptimal. To address these challenges, we introduce Multi-Agent reinforcement learning (MARL) for search result DIVersity, which called MA4DIV. In this approach, each document is an agent and the search result diversification is modeled as a cooperative task among multiple agents. This approach allows for directly optimizing the diversity metrics, such as $\alpha$-NDCG, while achieving high training efficiency. We conducted preliminary experiments on public TREC datasets to demonstrate the effectiveness and potential of MA4DIV. Considering the limited number of queries in public TREC datasets, we construct a large-scale dataset from industry sources and show that MA4DIV achieves substantial improvements in both effectiveness and efficiency than existing baselines on a industrial scale dataset.

An Analysis on Matching Mechanisms and Token Pruning for Late-interaction Models

With the development of pre-trained language models, the dense retrieval models have become promising alternatives to the traditional retrieval models that rely on exact match and sparse bag-of-words representations. Different from most dense retrieval models using a bi-encoder to encode each query or document into a dense vector, the recently proposed late-interaction multi-vector models (i.e., ColBERT and COIL) achieve state-of-the-art retrieval effectiveness by using all token embeddings to represent documents and queries and modeling their relevance with a sum-of-max operation. However, these fine-grained representations may cause unacceptable storage overhead for practical search systems. In this study, we systematically analyze the matching mechanism of these late-interaction models and show that the sum-of-max operation heavily relies on the co-occurrence signals and some important words in the document. Based on these findings, we then propose several simple document pruning methods to reduce the storage overhead and compare the effectiveness of different pruning methods on different late-interaction models. We also leverage query pruning methods to further reduce the retrieval latency. We conduct extensive experiments on both in-domain and out-domain datasets and show that some of the used pruning methods can significantly improve the efficiency of these late-interaction models without substantially hurting their retrieval effectiveness.

USimAgent: Large Language Models for Simulating Search Users

Due to the advantages in the cost-efficiency and reproducibility, user simulation has become a promising solution to the user-centric evaluation of information retrieval systems. Nonetheless, accurately simulating user search behaviors has long been a challenge, because users' actions in search are highly complex and driven by intricate cognitive processes such as learning, reasoning, and planning. Recently, Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarked potential in simulating human-level intelligence and have been used in building autonomous agents for various tasks. However, the potential of using LLMs in simulating search behaviors has not yet been fully explored. In this paper, we introduce a LLM-based user search behavior simulator, USimAgent. The proposed simulator can simulate users' querying, clicking, and stopping behaviors during search, and thus, is capable of generating complete search sessions for specific search tasks. Empirical investigation on a real user behavior dataset shows that the proposed simulator outperforms existing methods in query generation and is comparable to traditional methods in predicting user clicks and stopping behaviors. These results not only validate the effectiveness of using LLMs for user simulation but also shed light on the development of a more robust and generic user simulators.

An Integrated Data Processing Framework for Pretraining Foundation Models

The ability of the foundation models heavily relies on large-scale, diverse, and high-quality pretraining data. In order to improve data quality, researchers and practitioners often have to manually curate datasets from difference sources and develop dedicated data cleansing pipeline for each data repository. Lacking a unified data processing framework, this process is repetitive and cumbersome. To mitigate this issue, we propose a data processing framework that integrates a Processing Module which consists of a series of operators at different granularity levels, and an Analyzing Module which supports probing and evaluation of the refined data. The proposed framework is easy to use and highly flexible. In this demo paper, we first introduce how to use this framework with some example use cases and then demonstrate its effectiveness in improving the data quality with an automated evaluation with ChatGPT and an end-to-end evaluation in pretraining the GPT-2 model. The code and demonstration videos are accessible on GitHub.

CoSearchAgent: A Lightweight Collaborative Search Agent with Large Language Models

Collaborative search supports multiple users working together to accomplish a specific search task. Research has found that designing lightweight collaborative search plugins within instant messaging platforms aligns better with users' collaborative habits. However, due to the complexity of multi-user interaction scenarios, it is challenging to implement a fully functioning lightweight collaborative search system. Therefore, previous studies on lightweight collaborative search had to rely on the Wizard of Oz paradigm. In recent years, large language models (LLMs) have been demonstrated to interact naturally with users and achieve complex information-seeking tasks through LLM-based agents. Hence, to better support the research in collaborative search, in this demo, we propose CoSearchAgent, a lightweight collaborative search agent powered by LLMs. CoSearchAgent is designed as a Slack plugin that can support collaborative search during multi-party conversations on this platform. Equipped with the capacity to understand the queries and context in multi-user conversations and the ability to search the Web for relevant information via APIs, CoSearchAgent can respond to user queries with answers grounded on the relevant search results. It can also ask clarifying questions when the information needs are unclear. The proposed CoSearchAgent is highly flexible and would be useful for supporting further research on collaborative search. The code and demo video are accessible.

Session-level Normalization and Click-through Data Enhancement for Session-based Evaluation

Since a user usually has to issue a sequence of queries and examine multiple documents to resolve a complex information need in a search session, researchers have paid much attention to evaluating search systems at the session level rather than the single-query level. Most existing session-level metrics evaluate each query separately and then aggregate the query-level scores using a session-level weighting function. The assumptions behind these metrics are that all queries in the session should be involved, and their orders are fixed. However, if a search system could make the user satisfied with her first few queries, she may not need any subsequent queries. Besides, in most real-world search scenarios, due to a lack of explicit feedback from real users, we can only leverage some implicit feedback, such as users' clicks, as relevance labels for offline evaluation. Such implicit feedback might be different from the real relevance in a search session as some documents may be omitted in the previous query but identified in the later reformulations. To address the above issues, we make two assumptions about session-based evaluation, which explicitly describe an ideal session-search system and how to enhance click-through data in computing session-level evaluation metrics. Based on our assumptions, we design a session-level metric called Normalized U-Measure (NUM). NUM evaluates a session as a whole and utilizes an ideal session to normalize the result of the actual session. Besides, it infers session-level relevance labels based on implicit feedback. Experiments on two public datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of NUM by comparing it with existing session-based metrics in terms of correlation with user satisfaction and intuitiveness. We also conduct ablation studies to explore whether these assumptions hold.

CoAScore: Chain-of-Aspects Prompting for NLG Evaluation

Recently, natural language generation (NLG) evaluation has shifted from a single-aspect to a multi-aspect paradigm, allowing for a more accurate assessment. Large language models (LLMs) achieve superior performance on various NLG evaluation tasks. However, current work often employs the LLM to independently evaluate different aspects, which largely ignores the rich correlation between various aspects. To fill this research gap, in this work, we propose an NLG evaluation metric called CoAScore. Powered by LLMs, the CoAScore utilizes multi-aspect knowledge through a CoA (\textbf{C}hain-\textbf{o}f-\textbf{A}spects) prompting framework when assessing the quality of a certain aspect. Specifically, for a given aspect to evaluate, we first prompt the LLM to generate a chain of aspects that are relevant to the target aspect and could be useful for the evaluation. We then collect evaluation scores for each generated aspect, and finally, leverage the knowledge of these aspects to improve the evaluation of the target aspect. We evaluate CoAScore across five NLG evaluation tasks (e.g., summarization, dialog response generation, etc) and nine aspects (e.g., overall quality, relevance, coherence, etc). Our experimental findings highlight that, in comparison to individual aspect evaluation, CoAScore exhibits a higher correlation with human judgments. This improvement significantly outperforms existing unsupervised evaluation metrics, whether for assessing overall quality or other aspects. We also conducted extensive ablation studies to validate the effectiveness of the three stages within the CoAScore framework and conducted case studies to show how the LLM performs in these stages. Our code and scripts are available.