ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
On the effectiveness of evaluating retrieval systems in the absence of relevance judgments
Full text PdfPdf (101 KB)
Source Annual ACM Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval archive
Proceedings of the 26th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in informaion retrieval table of contents
Toronto, Canada
POSTER SESSION: Posters table of contents
Pages: 361 - 362  
Year of Publication: 2003
ISBN:1-58113-646-3
Authors
Javed A. Aslam  Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Robert Savell  Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Sponsor
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 2,   Downloads (12 Months): 38,   Citation Count: 8
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/10.1145/860435.860501
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Soboroff, Nicholas and Cahan recently proposed a method for evaluating the performance of retrieval systems without relevance judgments. They demonstrated that the system evaluations produced by their methodology are correlated with actual evaluations using relevance judgments in the TREC competition. In this work, we propose an explanation for this phenomenon. We devise a simple measure for quantifying the similarity of retrieval systems by assessing the similarity of their retrieved results. Then, given a collection of retrieval systems and their retrieved results, we use this measure to assess the average similarity of a system to the other systems in the collection. We demonstrate that evaluating retrieval systems according to average similarity yields results quite similar to the methodology proposed by Soboroff et~al., and we further demonstrate that these two techniques are in fact highly correlated. Thus, the techniques are effectively evaluating and ranking retrieval systems by "popularity" as opposed to "performance.



CITED BY  8

Collaborative Colleagues:
Javed A. Aslam: colleagues
Robert Savell: colleagues