skip to main content
10.1145/1341531.1341545acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswsdmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

An experimental comparison of click position-bias models

Published:11 February 2008Publication History

ABSTRACT

Search engine click logs provide an invaluable source of relevance information, but this information is biased. A key source of bias is presentation order: the probability of click is influenced by a document's position in the results page. This paper focuses on explaining that bias, modelling how probability of click depends on position. We propose four simple hypotheses about how position bias might arise. We carry out a large data-gathering effort, where we perturb the ranking of a major search engine, to see how clicks are affected. We then explore which of the four hypotheses best explains the real-world position effects, and compare these to a simple logistic regression model. The data are not well explained by simple position models, where some users click indiscriminately on rank 1 or there is a simple decay of attention over ranks. A 'cascade' model, where users view results from top to bottom and leave as soon as they see a worthwhile document, is our best explanation for position bias in early ranks

References

  1. Eugene Agichtein, Eric Brill, Susan Dumais, and Robert Ragno. Learning user interaction models for predicting web search result preferences. In SIGIR'06: Proceedings of the 29th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval pages 3--10, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Ricardo Baeza-Yates, Carlos Hurtado, and Marcelo Mendoza. Improving search engines by query clustering. In JASIST to appear 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Georges Dupret, Vanessa Murdock, and Benjamin Piwowarski. Web search engine evaluation using click-through data and a user model. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Query Log Analysis (WWW)2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Georges Dupret, Benjamin Piwowarski, Carlos A. Hurtado, and Marcelo Mendoza. A statistical model of query log generation. In String Processing and Information Retrieval, 13th International Conference, SPIRE 2006 pages 217--228, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Thorsten Joachims. Optimizing search engines using clickthrough data. In KDD'02: Proceedings of the eighth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining pages 133--142, New York, NY, USA, 2002. ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Thorsten Joachims, Laura Granka, Bing Pan, Helene Hembrooke, and Geri Gay. Accurately interpreting clickthrough data as implicit feedback. In SIGIR'05: Proceedings of the 28th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval pages 154--161, New York, NY, USA, 2005. ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Sandeep Pandey, Sourashis Roy, Christopher Olston, Junghoo Cho, and Soumen Chakrabarti. Shuffling a stacked deck: the case for partially randomized ranking of search engine results. In VLDB'05: Proceedings of the 31st international conference on Very large data bases pages 781--792. VLDB Endowment, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. F. Radlinski and T. Joachims. Minimally invasive randomization for collecting unbiased preferences from clickthrough logs. In Conference of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) pages 1406--1412, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Matthew Richardson, Ewa Dominowska, and Robert Ragno. Predicting clicks: estimating the click-through rate for new ads. In WWW'07: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web pages 521--530, New York, NY, USA, 2007. ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. An experimental comparison of click position-bias models

    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
      WSDM '08: Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining
      February 2008
      270 pages
      ISBN:9781595939272
      DOI:10.1145/1341531

      Copyright © 2008 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: 11 February 2008

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate498of2,863submissions,17%

      Upcoming Conference

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader