REVIEW 1 cited by
On Search Engine Evaluation Metrics
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
The search engine evaluation research has quite a lot metrics available to it. Only recently, the question of the significance of individual metrics started being raised, as these metrics' correlations to real-world user experiences or performance have generally not been well-studied. The first part of this thesis provides an overview of previous literature on the evaluation of search engine evaluation metrics themselves, as well as critiques of and comments on individual studies and approaches. The second part introduces a meta-evaluation metric, the Preference Identification Ratio (PIR), that quantifies the capacity of an evaluation metric to capture users' preferences. Also, a framework for simultaneously evaluating many metrics while varying their parameters and evaluation standards is introduced. Both PIR and the meta-evaluation framework are tested in a study which shows some interesting preliminary results; in particular, the unquestioning adherence to metrics or their ad hoc parameters seems to be disadvantageous. Instead, evaluation methods should themselves be rigorously evaluated with regard to goals set for a particular study.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Accelerated learning from recommender systems using multi-armed bandit
A Vrbo team used daily Thompson sampling to rank four recommendation models by click-through rate, but the A/B validation they report is for a previous campaign's winner, not the current one.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.