1 / 55

Information Retrieval

Information Retrieval. CSE 8337 Spring 2003 Modeling Material for these slides obtained from: Modern Information Retrieval by Ricardo Baeza-Yates and Berthier Ribeiro-Neto http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~hearst/irbook/

fiona
Download Presentation

Information Retrieval

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Information Retrieval CSE 8337 Spring 2003 Modeling Material for these slides obtained from: Modern Information Retrieval by Ricardo Baeza-Yates and Berthier Ribeiro-Neto http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~hearst/irbook/ Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval by Gerard Salton and Michael J. McGill, McGraw-Hill, 1983.

  2. Modeling TOC • Introduction • Classic IR Models • Boolean Model • Vector Model • Probabilistic Model • Set Theoretic Models • Fuzzy Set Model • Extended Boolean Model • Generalized Vector Model • Latent Semantic Indexing • Neural Network Model • Alternative Probabilistic Models • Inference Network • Belief Network

  3. Introduction • IR systems usually adopt index terms to process queries • Index term: • a keyword or group of selected words • any word (more general) • Stemming might be used: • connect: connecting, connection, connections • An inverted file is built for the chosen index terms

  4. Introduction Docs Index Terms doc match Ranking Information Need query

  5. Introduction • Matching at index term level is quite imprecise • No surprise that users get frequently unsatisfied • Since most users have no training in query formation, problem is even worst • Frequent dissatisfaction of Web users • Issue of deciding relevance is critical for IR systems: ranking

  6. Introduction • A ranking is an ordering of the documents retrieved that (hopefully) reflects the relevance of the documents to the query • A ranking is based on fundamental premisses regarding the notion of relevance, such as: • common sets of index terms • sharing of weighted terms • likelihood of relevance • Each set of premisses leads to a distinct IR model

  7. Algebraic Set Theoretic Generalized Vector Lat. Semantic Index Neural Networks Structured Models Fuzzy Extended Boolean Non-Overlapping Lists Proximal Nodes Classic Models Probabilistic boolean vector probabilistic Inference Network Belief Network Browsing Flat Structure Guided Hypertext IR Models U s e r T a s k Retrieval: Adhoc Filtering Browsing

  8. IR Models

  9. Classic IR Models - Basic Concepts • Each document represented by a set of representative keywords or index terms • An index term is a document word useful for remembering the document main themes • Usually, index terms are nouns because nouns have meaning by themselves • However, search engines assume that all words are index terms (full text representation)

  10. Classic IR Models - Basic Concepts • The importance of the index terms is represented by weights associated to them • ki- an index term • dj- a document • wij - a weight associated with (ki,dj) • The weight wijquantifies the importance of the index term for describing the document contents

  11. Classic IR Models - Basic Concepts • t is the total number of index terms • K = {k1, k2, …, kt} is the set of all index terms • wij >= 0 is a weight associated with (ki,dj) • wij = 0 indicates that term does not belong to doc • dj= (w1j, w2j, …, wtj) is a weighted vector associated with the document dj • gi(dj) = wij is a function which returns the weight associated with pair (ki,dj)

  12. The Boolean Model • Simple model based on set theory • Queries specified as boolean expressions • precise semantics and neat formalism • Terms are either present or absent. Thus, wij  {0,1} • Consider • q = ka  (kb  kc) • qdnf = (1,1,1)  (1,1,0)  (1,0,0) • qcc= (1,1,0) is a conjunctive component

  13. Ka Kb (1,1,0) (1,0,0) (1,1,1) Kc The Boolean Model • q = ka  (kb kc) • sim(q,dj) = 1 if  qcc| (qcc  qdnf)  (ki, gi(dj)= gi(qcc)) 0 otherwise

  14. Drawbacks of the Boolean Model • Retrieval based on binary decision criteria with no notion of partial matching • No ranking of the documents is provided • Information need has to be translated into a Boolean expression • The Boolean queries formulated by the users are most often too simplistic • As a consequence, the Boolean model frequently returns either too few or too many documents in response to a user query

  15. The Vector Model • Use of binary weights is too limiting • Non-binary weights provide consideration for partial matches • These term weights are used to compute a degree of similarity between a query and each document • Ranked set of documents provides for better matching

  16. The Vector Model • wij > 0 whenever ki appears in dj • wiq >= 0 associated with the pair (ki,q) • dj = (w1j, w2j, ..., wtj) • q = (w1q, w2q, ..., wtq) • To each term ki is associated a unitary vector i • The unitary vectors i and j are assumed to be orthonormal (i.e., index terms are assumed to occur independently within the documents) • The t unitary vectors i form an orthonormal basis for a t-dimensional space where queries and documents are represented as weighted vectors

  17. The Vector Model j dj  q i • Sim(q,dj) = cos() = [dj  q] / |dj| * |q| = [ wij * wiq] / |dj| * |q| • Since wij > 0 and wiq > 0, 0 <= sim(q,dj) <=1 • A document is retrieved even if it matches the query terms only partially

  18. Weights wij and wiq ? • One approach is to examine the frequency of the occurence of a word in a document: • Absolute frequency: • tf factor, the term frequency within a document • freqi,j - raw frequency of ki within dj • Both high-frequency and low-frequency terms may not actually be significant • Relative frequency: tf divided by number of words in document • Normalized frequency: fi,j = (freqi,j)/(maxl freql,j)

  19. Inverse Document Frequency • Importance of term may depend more on how it can distinguish between documents. • Quantification of inter-documents separation • Dissimilarity not similarity • idf factor, the inverse document frequency

  20. IDF • N be the total number of docs in the collection • ni be the number of docs which contain ki • The idf factor is computed as • idfi = log (N/ni) • the log is used to make the values of tf and idf comparable. It can also be interpreted as the amount of information associated with the term ki. • IDF Ex: • N=1000, n1=100, n2=500, n3=800 • idf1= 3 - 2 = 1 • idf2= 3 – 2.7 = 0.3 • idf3 = 3 – 2.9 = 0.1

  21. The Vector Model • The best term-weighting schemes take both into account. • wij = fi,j * log(N/ni) • This strategy is called a tf-idf weighting scheme

  22. The Vector Model • For the query term weights, a suggestion is • wiq = (0.5 + [0.5 * freqi,q / max(freql,q]) * log(N/ni) • The vector model with tf-idf weights is a good ranking strategy with general collections • The vector model is usually as good as any known ranking alternatives. • It is also simple and fast to compute.

  23. The Vector Model • Advantages: • term-weighting improves quality of the answer set • partial matching allows retrieval of docs that approximate the query conditions • cosine ranking formula sorts documents according to degree of similarity to the query • Disadvantages: • Assumes independence of index terms (??); not clear that this is bad though

  24. k2 k1 d7 d6 d2 d4 d5 d3 d1 k3 The Vector Model: Example I

  25. k2 k1 d7 d6 d2 d4 d5 d3 d1 k3 The Vector Model: Example II

  26. k2 k1 d7 d6 d2 d4 d5 d3 d1 k3 The Vector Model: Example III

  27. Probabilistic Model • Objective: to capture the IR problem using a probabilistic framework • Given a user query, there is an ideal answer set • Querying as specification of the properties of this ideal answer set (clustering) • But, what are these properties? • Guess at the beginning what they could be (i.e., guess initial description of ideal answer set) • Improve by iteration

  28. Probabilistic Model • An initial set of documents is retrieved somehow • User inspects these docs looking for the relevant ones (in truth, only top 10-20 need to be inspected) • IR system uses this information to refine description of ideal answer set • By repeting this process, it is expected that the description of the ideal answer set will improve • Have always in mind the need to guess at the very beginning the description of the ideal answer set • Description of ideal answer set is modeled in probabilistic terms

  29. Probabilistic Ranking Principle • Given a user query q and a document dj, the probabilistic model tries to estimate the probability that the user will find the document dj interesting (i.e., relevant). Ideal answer set is referred to as R and should maximize the probability of relevance. Documents in the set R are predicted to be relevant. • But, • how to compute probabilities? • what is the sample space?

  30. The Ranking • Probabilistic ranking computed as: • sim(q,dj) = P(dj relevant-to q) / P(dj non-relevant-to q) • This is the odds of the document dj being relevant • Taking the odds minimize the probability of an erroneous judgement • Definition: • wij {0,1} • P(R | dj) :probability that given doc is relevant • P(R | dj) : probability doc is not relevant

  31. The Ranking • sim(dj,q) = P(R | dj) / P(R | dj) = [P(dj | R) * P(R)] [P(dj | R) * P(R)] ~ P(dj | R) P(dj | R) • P(dj | R) : probability of randomly selecting the document dj from the set R of relevant documents

  32. The Ranking • sim(dj,q) ~ P(dj | R) P(dj | R) ~ [  P(ki | R)] * [  P(ki | R)] [  P(ki | R)] * [  P(ki | R)] • P(ki | R) : probability that the index term ki is present in a document randomly selected from the set R of relevant documents

  33. The Ranking • sim(dj,q) ~ log [  P(ki | R)] * [  P(kj | R)] [  P(ki |R)] * [  P(ki | R)] ~ K * [ log  P(ki | R) + log  P(ki | R) ] P(ki | R) P(ki | R) where P(ki | R) = 1 - P(ki | R) P(ki | R) = 1 - P(ki | R)

  34. The Initial Ranking • sim(dj,q) ~  wiq * wij * (log P(ki | R) + log P(ki | R) ) P(ki | R) P(ki | R) • Probabilities P(ki | R) and P(ki | R) ? • Estimates based on assumptions: • P(ki | R) = 0.5 • P(ki | R) = ni N • Use this initial guess to retrieve an initial ranking • Improve upon this initial ranking

  35. Improving the Initial Ranking • Let • V : set of docs initially retrieved • Vi : subset of docs retrieved that contain ki • Reevaluate estimates: • P(ki | R) = Vi V • P(ki | R) = ni - Vi N - V • Repeat recursively

  36. Improving the Initial Ranking • To avoid problems with V=1 and Vi=0: • P(ki | R) = Vi + 0.5 V + 1 • P(ki | R) = ni - Vi + 0.5 N - V + 1 • Also, • P(ki | R) = Vi + ni/N V + 1 • P(ki | R) = ni - Vi + ni/N N - V + 1

  37. Pluses and Minuses • Advantages: • Docs ranked in decreasing order of probability of relevance • Disadvantages: • need to guess initial estimates for P(ki | R) • method does not take into account tf and idf factors

  38. Brief Comparison of Classic Models • Boolean model does not provide for partial matches and is considered to be the weakest classic model • Salton and Buckley did a series of experiments that indicate that, in general, the vector model outperforms the probabilistic model with general collections • This seems also to be the view of the research community

  39. Set Theoretic Models • The Boolean model imposes a binary criterion for deciding relevance • The question of how to extend the Boolean model to accomodate partial matching and a ranking has attracted considerable attention in the past • We discuss now two set theoretic models for this: • Fuzzy Set Model • Extended Boolean Model

  40. Fuzzy Set Model • This vagueness of document/query matching can be modeled using a fuzzy framework, as follows: • with each term is associated a fuzzy set • each doc has a degree of membership in this fuzzy set • Here, we discuss the model proposed by Ogawa, Morita, and Kobayashi (1991)

  41. Fuzzy Set Theory • A fuzzy subset A of U is characterized by a membership function (A,u) : U  [0,1] which associates with each element u of U a number (u) in the interval [0,1] • Definition • Let A and B be two fuzzy subsets of U. Also, let ¬A be the complement of A. Then, • (¬A,u) = 1 - (A,u) • (AB,u) = max((A,u), (B,u)) • (AB,u) = min((A,u), (B,u))

  42. Fuzzy Information Retrieval • Fuzzy sets are modeled based on a thesaurus • This thesaurus is built as follows: • Let c be a term-term correlation matrix • Let ci,l be a normalized correlation factor for (ki,kl): ci,l = ni,l ni + nl - ni,l • ni: number of docs which contain ki • nl: number of docs which contain kl • ni,l: number of docs which contain both ki and kl • We now have the notion of proximity among index terms.

  43. Fuzzy Information Retrieval • The correlation factor ci,l can be used to define fuzzy set membership for a document dj as follows: i,j = 1 -  (1 - ci,l) ki  dj • i,j : membership of doc dj in fuzzy subset associated with ki • The above expression computes an algebraic sum over all terms in the doc dj

  44. Fuzzy Information Retrieval • A doc dj belongs to the fuzzy set for ki, if its own terms are associated with ki • If doc dj contains a term kl which is closely related to ki, we have • ci,l ~ 1 • i,j ~ 1 • index ki is a good fuzzy index for doc

  45. Ka Kb cc2 cc3 cc1 Kc Fuzzy IR: An Example • q = ka (kb kc) • qdnf = (1,1,1) + (1,1,0) + (1,0,0) = cc1 + cc2 + cc3 • q,dj = cc1+cc2+cc3,j = 1 - (1 - a,j b,j) c,j) * (1 - a,j b,j (1-c,j)) * (1 - a,j (1-b,j) (1-c,j))

  46. Fuzzy Information Retrieval • Fuzzy IR models have been discussed mainly in the literature associated with fuzzy theory • Experiments with standard test collections are not available • Difficult to compare at this time

  47. Extended Boolean Model • Boolean model is simple and elegant. • But, no provision for a ranking • As with the fuzzy model, a ranking can be obtained by relaxing the condition on set membership • Extend the Boolean model with the notions of partial matching and term weighting • Combine characteristics of the Vector model with properties of Boolean algebra

  48. The Idea • The Extended Boolean Model (introduced by Salton, Fox, and Wu, 1983) is based on a critique of a basic assumption in Boolean algebra • Let, • q = kx ky • wxj = fxj * idfx associated with [kx,dj] max(idfi) • Further, wxj = x and wyj = y

  49. (1,1) ky dj+1 y = wyj dj (0,0) x = wxj kx 2 2 sim(qand,dj) = 1 - sqrt( (1-x) + (1-y) ) 2 The Idea: qand = kx ky; wxj = x and wyj = y AND

  50. ky dj+1 dj y = wyj (0,0) x = wxj kx 2 2 sim(qor,dj) = sqrt( x + y ) 2 The Idea: qor = kx ky; wxj = x and wyj = y (1,1) OR

More Related