Click to edit Master title style

Evaluation
Techniques for IR

Powered - By

• Rahul Pal
• Saurabh Yadav1
 Table
Click to edit Master title styleof Contents……..

Introduction
Methods of Evaluation Techniques
Types of Evaluation Techniques

Benchmark Datasets & Experimentation

Case Study & Future Trends

2 2
Click to edit Master title style INTRODUCTION………….
Definition :-
Evaluation in IR measures how well a retrieval system returns relevant information. It ensures
the effectiveness of search engines and databases in providing accurate results

Why Evaluation:-
• Ensures Accuracy and Efficiency – Helps improve the relevance of search results.

• Enhances User Experience – Optimizes retrieval algorithms for better performance.

• Identifies Optimization Areas – Improves search ranking models.

• Enables Objective Comparison – Assists in evaluating different IR models effectively.

3 3
Click to edit Master title style

Use Cases :-
• Search Engines (Google, Bing, etc.) – Ranks and retrieves the most relevant results.

• Recommendation Systems (Netflix, Amazon, etc.) – Enhances personalized content suggestions.

• Medical Information Retrieval – Retrieves accurate and relevant medical documents.

Challenges :-
• Ambiguity in Queries – Users may provide unclear or vague search terms.

• Scalability Issues – Evaluating large datasets requires high computational resources.

• Subjectivity in Relevance – Different users may interpret relevance differently.

4 4
 Click to edit Master title style METHODS.……….......
Offline Evaluation :-

• Relies on pre-existing benchmark datasets(Standardized) and test queries (Evaluation)

• Provides controlled conditions for testing retrieval systems without user interaction.
• Great for consistent, repeatable results

Online Evaluation :-

• Measures how real users interact with the system in real-time.

• Includes methods like A/B Testing, where different versions of a system are compared.
• Provides insights into user preferences and system performance under actual usage.

User-Centric Evaluation :-

• Focuses on understanding user behavior and gathering direct feedback.

• Looks at factors like satisfaction, engagement, and task success to assess system effectiveness.
• Prioritizes the user experience and ensures the system meets user needs.
5 5
 Click to edit Master title style
Relevance-Based Metrics
TYPES…………………….
These metrics measure how well the system retrieves relevant documents.

Precision :-

1. Definition: The proportion of retrieved documents that are relevant.

2. Formula:

3. Explanation: Higher precision means fewer irrelevant documents are retrieved.

6 6
 Click to edit Master title style
Recall :-

• Definition: The proportion of relevant documents that were successfully

retrieved.

• Formula:

• Explanation: High recall ensures fewer relevant documents are missed.

F1-Score :-

• Definition: The harmonic mean of precision and recall, balancing both measures.

• Formula :-

• Explanation: Useful when you need a single score combining precision and recall.
7 7
Click to edit Master title style
User-Centric Metrics

These metrics assess user behavior and engagement.

Click-Through Rate (CTR) :-

• Formula:

• Explanation: Higher CTR means users find the results more relevant.

Dwell Time :-

• Definition: Measures how long users stay on a document before returning to search.
• Explanation: A longer dwell time suggests high relevance.

Bounce Rate :-

• Definition: The percentage of users who leave the results page without interaction.
• Explanation: A high bounce rate may indicate irrelevant or low-quality results.
8 8
 Click to edit Master title style
Query-Based Metrics

These metrics evaluate the effectiveness of user queries.

Query Coverage :-

• Formula:

• Explanation: Higher coverage means the system retrieves relevant documents for more queries.

Query Reformulation Rate :-

• Definition: Measures how often users modify their queries to improve results.
• Explanation: A high reformulation rate suggests initial search results may not be satisfactory.

9 9
 Click to edit Master title style
Benchmark Datasets & Experimentation………..
• IT Involve using standardized datasets to evaluate and compare the performance of algorithms.

• These datasets provide a common ground for performance assessment, allowing researchers to measure
accuracy, relevance, and overall system efficiency.

TREC (Text Retrieval Conference):

• Purpose: TREC is a benchmark dataset for evaluating text retrieval systems.

• Contents: It includes a large collection of documents, queries, and relevance judgments.

• Ideal Use: It's perfect for testing retrieval models, ranking algorithms, and measuring various
performance metrics.

10
Click to edit
MS MARCO Master
(Microsoft Machine title
Readingstyle
Comprehension) :-

• Purpose : MS MARCO is a large-scale dataset designed to evaluate machine reading

comprehension and passage ranking.

• Contents : The dataset includes real-world web data, challenging models to perform open-domain
question answering.

• Ideal Use : It is used for testing advanced natural language processing (NLP) models and
information retrieval systems.

A/B Testing:

• Purpose: A/B testing involves dividing users or data points into different groups to compare the
performance of two or more algorithmic variants.

• How It Works: Each group is exposed to a different algorithm variant, and performance metrics (like
accuracy, speed, and user satisfaction) are tracked to determine the better-performing model.

1111
 Case Study & Future Trends………….
Click to edit Master title style
Case Study

Google :-

1. Search Quality Evaluation : Combines algorithms and human evaluators, known as "Search Quality
Raters," to assess relevance and quality.

2. Google Scholar : Evaluates coverage, relevance, and citation metrics in academic literature.

Bing :-

1. Search Quality Evaluation : Uses algorithms, relevance judgments, click-through rates, and user feedback
to ensure search quality.

2. Intelligent Search Dialogue Systems : Assessed for dialogue capabilities and output content value, with
comparisons to ChatGPT.

1212
 Click to edit Master title style
Future Trends

• Personalized Search: AI will tailor search results based on user behavior, preferences, and
demographics using deep learning to analyze complex profiles.

• Context-Aware Retrieval: AI will consider context (e.g., location, time, device) to deliver
personalized results, such as showing different restaurant options based on the user's situation.

• Reinforcement Learning: RL will optimize search results by learning from user feedback
and interactions, improving engagement and satisfaction over time.

1313
Click to edit Master title style CONCLUSION……….….
• Evaluation techniques in information retrieval involve using standardized datasets like TREC
and MS MARCO to assess algorithm performance based on metrics such as accuracy,
relevance, and efficiency.

• Methods like A/B testing help compare algorithms directly, while user feedback and human
evaluation ensure content quality.

• Key factors like user intent, social signals, and Core Web Vitals are increasingly important
in optimizing results for better user engagement and experience.

1414
Click to edit Master title style

Thank You….

15