skip to main content
10.1145/2124295.2124311acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswsdmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Pairwise cross-domain factor model for heterogeneous transfer ranking

Published:08 February 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

Learning to rank arises in many information retrieval applications, ranging from Web search engine, online advertising to recommendation systems. Traditional ranking mainly focuses on one type of data source, and effective modeling relies on a sufficiently large number of labeled examples, which require expensive and time-consuming labeling process. However, in many real-world applications, ranking over multiple related heterogeneous domains becomes a common situation, where in some domains we may have a relatively large amount of training data while in some other domains we can only collect very little. Theretofore, how to leverage labeled information from related heterogeneous domain to improve ranking in a target domain has become a problem of great interests. In this paper, we propose a novel probabilistic model, pairwise cross-domain factor model, to address this problem. The proposed model learns latent factors(features) for multi-domain data in partially-overlapped heterogeneous feature spaces. It is capable of learning homogeneous feature correlation, heterogeneous feature correlation, and pairwise preference correlation for cross-domain knowledge transfer. We also derive two PCDF variations to address two important special cases. Under the PCDF model, we derive a stochastic gradient based algorithm, which facilitates distributed optimization and is flexible to adopt different loss functions and regularization functions to accommodate different data distributions. The extensive experiments on real world data sets demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed model and algorithm.

References

  1. R. Ando and T. Zhang. A high-performance semi-supervised learning method for text chunking. In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 1--9. Association for Computational Linguistics Morristown, NJ, USA, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. A. Argyriou, T. Evgeniou, and M. Pontil. Multi-task feature learning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems: Proceedings of the 2006 Conference, page 41. MIT Press, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. A. Argyriou, C. Micchelli, M. Pontil, and Y. Ying. A spectral regularization framework for multi-task structure learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 20, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. S. Bickel, M. Brückner, and T. Scheffer. Discriminative learning for differing training and test distributions. In Proceedings of the 24th international conference on Machine learning, pages 81--88. ACM New York, NY, USA, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. J. Blitzer, K. Crammer, A. Kulesza, F. Pereira, and J. Wortman. Learning bounds for domain adaptation. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 20, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. J. Blitzer, R. McDonald, and F. Pereira. Domain adaptation with structural correspondence learning. In Proceedings of the Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. A. Blum and T. Mitchell. Combining labeled and unlabeled data with co-training. In Proceedings of the eleventh annual conference on Computational learning theory, COLT'98, pages 92--100, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. E. Bonilla, K. Chai, and C. Williams. Multi-task gaussian process prediction. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 20:153--160.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. C. Burges, T. Shaked, E. Renshaw, A. Lazier, M. Deeds, N. Hamilton, and G. Hullender. Learning to rank using gradient descent. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Machine learning, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Z. Cao, T. Qin, T.-Y. Liu, M.-F. Tsai, and H. Li. Learning to rank: from pairwise approach to listwise approach. In ICML '07, pages 129--136, New York, NY, USA, 2007. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. D. Chen, J. Yan, G. Wang, Y. Xiong, W. Fan, and Z. Chen. TransRank: A Novel Algorithm for Transfer of Rank Learning. In IEEE ICDM Workshops, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. M. Collins, S. Dasgupta, and R. Reina. A generalizaion of principal component analysis to the exponential family. In NIPS'01, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. C. Cortes, M. Mohri, and A. Rastogi. Magnitude-preserving ranking algorithms. In Proceedings of the 24th ICML, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. W. Dai, G. Xue, Q. Yang, and Y. Yu. Co-clustering based classification for out-of-domain documents. In Proceedings of the 13th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, pages 210--219. ACM New York, NY, USA, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. W. Dai, Q. Yang, G. Xue, and Y. Yu. Boosting for transfer learning. In Proceedings of the 24th international conference on Machine learning, pages 193--200. ACM New York, NY, USA, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. H. Daume. Frustratingly easy domain adaptation. In Annual meeting-association for computational linguistics, volume 45, page 256, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. H. Daume III and D. Marcu. Domain adaptation for statistical classifiers. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 26:101--126, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. T. Evgeniou and M. Pontil. Regularized multi-task learning. In Proceedings of the tenth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, pages 109--117. ACM New York, NY, USA, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Y. Freund, R. Iyer, R. Schapire, and Y. Singer. An efficient boosting algorithm for combining preferences. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on Machine Learning, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. J. Friedman. Greedy function approximation: a gradient boosting machine. Annals of Statistics, pages 1189--1232, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. J. Gao, Q. Wu, C. Burges, K. Svore, Y. Su, N. Khan, S. Shah, and H. Zhou. Model adaptation via model interpolation and boosting for web search ranking. In Proceedings of conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. J. Guiver and E. Snelson. Learning to rank with SoftRank and Gaussian processes. In Proceedings of the 31st annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. M. Harel and S. Mannor. Learning from multiple outlooks. In L. Getoor and T. Scheffer, editors, Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML-11), ICML '11, pages 401--408, New York, NY, USA, June 2011. ACM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. J. He and R. Lawrence. A graph-based framework for multi-task multi-view learning. In L. Getoor and T. Scheffer, editors, Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML-11), ICML '11, pages 25--32, New York, NY, USA, June 2011. ACM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. J. Huang, A. Smola, A. Gretton, K. Borgwardt, and B. Scholkopf. Correcting sample selection bias by unlabeled data. Advances in neural information processing systems, 19:601, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. J. Jiang and C. Zhai. Instance weighting for domain adaptation in NLP. In Annual meeting-assosciation for computational linguistics, volume 45, page 264, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. T. Joachims. Optimizing search engines using clickthrough data. In Proceedings of ACM SIGKDD, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. N. Lawrence and J. Platt. Learning to learn with the informative vector machine. In Proceedings of the twenty-first international conference on Machine learning. ACM New York, NY, USA, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. H. Lee, A. Battle, R. Raina, and A. Y. Ng. Efficient sparse coding algorithms. In In NIPS, pages 801--808. NIPS, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. S. Lee, V. Chatalbashev, D. Vickrey, and D. Koller. Learning a meta-level prior for feature relevance from multiple related tasks. In Proceedings of the 24th international conference on Machine learning, pages 489--496. ACM New York, NY, USA, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. X. Liao, Y. Xue, and L. Carin. Logistic regression with an auxiliary data source. In MACHINE LEARNING-INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP THEN CONFERENCE-, volume 22, page 505, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. P. Luo, F. Zhuang, H. Xiong, Y. Xiong, and Q. He. Transfer learning from multiple source domains via consensus regularization. In CIKM '08: Proceeding of the 17th ACM conference on Information and knowledge management, pages 103--112, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. R. Raina, A. Battle, H. Lee, B. Packer, and A. Ng. Self-taught learning: Transfer learning from unlabeled data. In Proceedings of the 24th international conference on Machine learning, pages 759--766. ACM New York, NY, USA, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. A. Schwaighofer, V. Tresp, and K. Yu. Learning Gaussian process kernels via hierarchical Bayes. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 17:1209--1216, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. M. Sugiyama, S. Nakajima, H. Kashima, P. von Bunau, and M. Kawanabe. Direct importance estimation with model selection and its application to covariate shift adaptation. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 20, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. B. Wang, J. Tang, W. Fan, S. Chen, Z. Yang, and Y. Liu. Heterogeneous cross domain ranking in latent space. In Proceeding of the 18th ACM conference on Information and knowledge management, CIKM '09, pages 987--996, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. C. Wang and S. Mahadevan. Heterogeneous domain adaptation using manifold alignment. In IJCAI, pages 1541--1546, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. J. Xu and H. Li. Adarank: a boosting algorithm for information retrieval. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM SIGIR, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Q. Yang, Y. Chen, G.-R. Xue, W. Dai, and Y. Yu. Heterogeneous transfer learning for image clustering via the social web. ACL '09, pages 1--9, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. H. Zha, Z. Zheng, H. Fu, and G. Sun. Incorporating query difference for learning retrieval functions in world wide web search. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM CIKM conference, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Z. Zheng, K. Chen, G. Sun, and H. Zha. A regression framework for learning ranking functions using relative relevance judgments. In SIGIR '07: Proceedings of the 30th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, pages 287--294, New York, NY, USA, 2007. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. M. Zinkevich, M. Weimer, A. Smola, and L. Li. Parallelized stochastic gradient descent. In J. Lafferty, C. K. I. Williams, J. Shawe-Taylor, R. Zemel, and A. Culotta, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 23, pages 2595--2603, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Pairwise cross-domain factor model for heterogeneous transfer ranking

    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

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader