skip to main content
10.1145/1571941.1571987acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesirConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Robust sparse rank learning for non-smooth ranking measures

Authors Info & Claims
Published:19 July 2009Publication History

ABSTRACT

Recently increasing attention has been focused on directly optimizing ranking measures and inducing sparsity in learning models. However, few attempts have been made to relate them together in approaching the problem of learning to rank. In this paper, we consider the sparse algorithms to directly optimize the Normalized Discounted Cumulative Gain (NDCG) which is a widely-used ranking measure. We begin by establishing a reduction framework under which we reduce ranking, as measured by NDCG, to the importance weighted pairwise classification. Furthermore, we provide a sound theoretical guarantee for this reduction, bounding the realized NDCG regret in terms of a properly weighted pairwise classification regret, which implies that good performance can be robustly transferred from pairwise classification to ranking. Based on the converted pairwise loss function, it is conceivable to take into account sparsity in ranking models and to come up with a gradient possessing certain performance guarantee. For the sake of achieving sparsity, a novel algorithm named RSRank has also been devised, which performs L1 regularization using truncated gradient descent. Finally, experimental results on benchmark collection confirm the significant advantage of RSRank in comparison with several baseline methods.

References

  1. M.R. Asia. Letor3.0: benchmark datasets for learning to rank. Microsoft Corporation, December 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. R. Baeza-Yates and B. Ribeiro-Neto. Modern Information Retrieval. Addison Wesley, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. M.-F. Balcan, N. Bansal, A. Beygelzimer, D. Coppersmith, J. Langford, and G. Sorkin. Robust reductions from ranking to classification. Machine Learning, 72(1-2):139--153, August 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. A. Beygelzimer, V. Dani, T. Hayes, and J. Langford. Reductions between classification tasks. Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity, 11, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. A. Beygelzimer, V. Dani, T. Hayes, J. Langford, and B. Zadrozny. Error limiting reductions between classification tasks. In Proceedings of the 22th International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 49--56, ACM, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. C. Burges, R. Ragno, and Q. Le. Learning to rank with nonsmooth cost functions. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 19, pages 193--200. MIT Press, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Z. Cao, T. Qin, T.-Y. Liu, M.-F. Tsai, and H. Li. Learning to rank: from pairwise approach to listwise approach. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 129--136. ACM, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. S. Chakrabarti, R. Khanna, U. Sawant, and C. Bhattacharyya. Structured learning for non-smooth ranking losses. In Proceeding of the 14th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pages 88--96. ACM, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. O. Chapelle, Q. Le, and A. Smola. Large margin optimization of ranking measures. In NIPS Workshop on Machine Learning for Web Search, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. J. Guiver and E. Snelson. Learning to rank with softrank and gaussian processes. In Proceedings of the 31th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in IR, pages 259--266. ACM, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. K. Jarvelin and J. Kekalainen. Cumulated gain-based evaluation of IR techniques. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 20(4):422--446, October 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. J. Langford and A. Beygelzimer. Sensitive error correcting output codes. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3559:158--172, June 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. J. Langford, L. Li and T. Zhang. Sparse online learning via truncated gradient. CoRR, abs/0806.4686, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Q. Le and A. Smola. Direct optimization of ranking measures. CoRR, abs/0704.3359, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. T. Qin, T.-Y. Liu, and H. Li. A general approximation framework for direct optimization of information retrieval measures. MSR-TR-2008-164, Microsoft Research, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. M. Taylor, J. Guiver, S. Robertson, and T. Minka. SoftRank: optimizing non-smooth rank metrics. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Web Search and Web Data Mining, pages 77--86. ACM, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. E. Voorhees. Overview of the TREC 2002 question answering track. In Proceedings of the Eleventh Text Retrieval Conference(TREC), pages 115--123, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. J. Xu and H. Li. AdaRank: a boosting algorithm for information retrieval. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in IR, pages 391--398. ACM, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. J.-Y. Yeh, J.-Y. Lin, H.-R. Ke, and W.-P. Yang. Learning to rank for information retrieval using genetic programming. In LR4IR, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Y. Yue and C. Burges. On using simultaneous perturbation stochastic approximation for learning to rank, and the empirical optimality of lambdarank. MSR-TR-2007-115, Microsoft Research, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. T. Zhang. Statistical behavior and consistency of classification methods based on convex risk minimization. The Annuals of Statistics, 32:56--85, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. T. Zhang. Some sharp performance bounds for least squares regression with L1 regularization. Technical Report TR-2007-005, Rutgers Statistics Department, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. P. Zhao and B. Yu. On model selection consistency of lasso. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 7:2541--2563, December 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Robust sparse rank learning for non-smooth ranking measures

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        SIGIR '09: Proceedings of the 32nd international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval
        July 2009
        896 pages
        ISBN:9781605584836
        DOI:10.1145/1571941

        Copyright © 2009 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 19 July 2009

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate792of3,983submissions,20%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader