ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Accurately interpreting clickthrough data as implicit feedback
Full text PdfPdf (199 KB)
Source Annual ACM Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval archive
Proceedings of the 28th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval table of contents
Salvador, Brazil
SESSION: Evaluation table of contents
Pages: 154 - 161  
Year of Publication: 2005
ISBN:1-59593-034-5
Authors
Thorsten Joachims  Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
Laura Granka  Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA
Bing Pan  Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
Helene Hembrooke  Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
Geri Gay  Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
Sponsor
SIGIR: ACM Special Interest Group on Information Retrieval
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 45,   Downloads (12 Months): 347,   Citation Count: 115
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1076034.1076063
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

This paper examines the reliability of implicit feedback generated from clickthrough data in WWW search. Analyzing the users' decision process using eyetracking and comparing implicit feedback against manual relevance judgments, we conclude that clicks are informative but biased. While this makes the interpretation of clicks as absolute relevance judgments difficult, we show that relative preferences derived from clicks are reasonably accurate on average.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

1
 
2
 
3
R. Belew. Finding Out About. Cambridge, 2000.
 
4
J. Boyan, D. Freitag, and T. Joachims. A machine learning architecture for optimizing web search engines. In AAAI Workshop on Internet Based Information Systems, pages 1--8, August 1996.
5
6
 
7
W. Cohen, R. Shapire, and Y. Singer. Learning to order things. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 10:243--270, 1999.
 
8
S. Fox, K. Karnawat, M. Mydland, S. Dumais, and T. White. Evaluating implicit measures to improve the search experiences. In Talk presented at SIGIR03 Workshop on Implicit Measures of User Interests and Preferences, 2003.
9
10
11
12
 
13
S. Holland, M. Ester, and W. Kieβling. Preference mining: A novel approach on mining user preferences for personalized applications. In Conference on Principles and Practice of Knowledge Discovery in Databases (PKDD), pages 204 -- 216, 2003.
14
 
15
M. Just and P. Carpenter. A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87:329--354, 1980.
16
 
17
18
19
 
20
21
22
 
23
K. Rayner. Eye movements in reading and information processing. Psychological Bulletin, 124:372--252, 1998.
 
24
E. Russo and F. LeClerc. An eye-fixation analysis of choice processes for consumer nondurables. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(2):274--290, 1994.
 
25
J. Salogarvi, I. Kojo, S. Jaana, and S. Kaski. Can relevance be inferred from eye movements in information retrieval? In Proceedings of the Workshop on Self-Organizing Maps, pages 261--266, 2003.
 
26
R. White, J. Jose, and I. Ruthven. Comparing explicit and implicit feedback techniques for web retrieval: Trec-10 interactive track report. In Text Retrieval Conference (TREC), 2001.

CITED BY  119

Collaborative Colleagues:
Thorsten Joachims: colleagues
Laura Granka: colleagues
Bing Pan: colleagues
Helene Hembrooke: colleagues
Geri Gay: colleagues