Skip to content

Analysis and implementational details of rank aggregation methods for combing results of multiple engines to achieve best mAP and P@5,10 values

Notifications You must be signed in to change notification settings

Panjete/rankAggr

Repository files navigation

To Run

  • bash rrf.sh [collection-file] [output-file] - to get RRF aggregation on results from [collection-file] written into [result-file].

  • bash bordacount.sh [collection-file] [output-file] - to get Borda Count aggregation on results from [collection-file] written into [result-file].

  • bash condorcet.sh [collection-file] [output-file] - to get Condorcet aggregation on results from [collection-file] written into [result-file].

  • bash bayesfuse.sh [collection-file] [output-file] - to get BayesFuse aggregation on results from [collection-file] written into [result-file].

  • bash bordafuse.sh [collection-file] [output-file] - to get Bordafuse aggregation on results from [collection-file] written into [result-file].

  • bash getscores.sh -> to get trec_eval results (read script for I/O compatibilty)

  • python getqrels.py -> to obtain a qrels file to trec_eval computation from [collection-file]

REFERENCES

[1] Javed A. Aslam and Mark H. Montague. Models for metasearch. In SIGIR, 2001. URL: https://www.khoury.northeastern.edu/home/jaa/CSG339.06F/resources/borda_metas.pdf.

[2] GordonV.Cormack, CharlesL.A.Clarke, andStefan Buttcher. Reciprocal rank fusion outperforms condorcet and individual rank learning methods. Proceedings of the 32nd international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, 2009. URL: https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:12408211.

[3] Mark H. Montague and Javed A. Aslam. Condorcet fusion for improved retrieval. In International Con- ference on Information and Knowledge Management, 2002. URL: https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:5201014.

letor

RESULTS

As map, p@5 and p@10 values,

  • RRF on no-retrieve = 500 -> 0.4757, 0.3375, 0.2439

  • RRF on no-retrieve = 100 -> 0.4502, 0.3194, 0.2304

  • RRF on k = 10 -> 0.4707, 0.3332, 0.2408

  • RRF on k = 60 -> 0.4772, 0.3413, 0.2450

  • RRF on k = 60, including NULL docs with rank = 1000 -> 0.4768 , 0.3401, 0.2444

  • RRF on k = 100 -> 0.4780, 0.3444, 0.2455

  • RRF on k = 150 -> 0.4796, 0.3464, 0.2463

  • RRF on k = 300 -> 0.4811, 0.3457, 0.2460

  • RRF on k = 400 -> 0.4786, 0.3457, 0.2460

  • Bordacount approach 1 -> 0.3981, 0.2911, 0.2250

  • Bordacount approach 2 = 0.4773, 0.3454, 0.2457

  • Without considering non-retrieved = 0.2416, 0.1497, 0.1589

  • Condorcet -> 0.4786, 0.3449, 0.2485

  • Condorcet ignoring non-retrieved -> 0.3942, 0.2888, 0.2249

  • Bayesfuse with fine prob classes -> 0.4799, 0.3462, 0.2464

  • Bayesfuse without considering irrelevant at all -> 0.4807, 0.3457, 0.2460

  • Variants of Bordafuse maps -> 0.4855, 0.4835

  • Final optimisations of Bordafuse -> 0.4862, 0.3485, 0.2489

About

Analysis and implementational details of rank aggregation methods for combing results of multiple engines to achieve best mAP and P@5,10 values

Topics

Resources

Stars

Watchers

Forks

Releases

No releases published

Packages

No packages published