PiRank: Learning To Rank via Differentiable Sorting

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2012.06731v1
• Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2020 05:07:36 GMT
• Title: PiRank: Learning To Rank via Differentiable Sorting
• Authors: Robin Swezey, Aditya Grover, Bruno Charron, Stefano Ermon
• Abstract summary: We propose PiRank, a new class of differentiable surrogates for ranking. We show that PiRank exactly recovers the desired metrics in the limit of zero temperature.
• Score: 85.28916333414145
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: A key challenge with machine learning approaches for ranking is the gap between the performance metrics of interest and the surrogate loss functions that can be optimized with gradient-based methods. This gap arises because ranking metrics typically involve a sorting operation which is not differentiable w.r.t. the model parameters. Prior works have proposed surrogates that are loosely related to ranking metrics or simple smoothed versions thereof. We propose PiRank, a new class of differentiable surrogates for ranking, which employ a continuous, temperature-controlled relaxation to the sorting operator. We show that PiRank exactly recovers the desired metrics in the limit of zero temperature and scales favorably with the problem size, both in theory and practice. Empirically, we demonstrate that PiRank significantly improves over existing approaches on publicly available internet-scale learning-to-rank benchmarks.

Related papers

• Replace Scoring with Arrangement: A Contextual Set-to-Arrangement Framework for Learning-to-Rank [40.81502990315285]
  Learning-to-rank is a core technique in the top-N recommendation task, where an ideal ranker would be a mapping from an item set to an arrangement. Most existing solutions fall in the paradigm of probabilistic ranking principle (PRP), i.e., first score each item in the candidate set and then perform a sort operation to generate the top ranking list. We propose Set-To-Arrangement Ranking (STARank), a new framework directly generates the permutations of the candidate items without the need for individually scoring and sort operations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-05T12:22:26Z)
• Partitioned Saliency Ranking with Dense Pyramid Transformers [4.449304130658638]
  Saliency ranking has emerged as a challenging task focusing on assessing the degree of saliency at instance-level. Previous approaches undertake the saliency ranking by directly sorting the rank scores of salient instances, which have not explicitly resolved the inherent ambiguities. We propose the ranking by partition paradigm, which segments unordered salient instances into partitions and then ranks them based on the correlations among these partitions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-01T02:33:10Z)
• Bipartite Ranking Fairness through a Model Agnostic Ordering Adjustment [54.179859639868646]
  We propose a model agnostic post-processing framework xOrder for achieving fairness in bipartite ranking. xOrder is compatible with various classification models and ranking fairness metrics, including supervised and unsupervised fairness metrics. We evaluate our proposed algorithm on four benchmark data sets and two real-world patient electronic health record repositories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-27T07:42:44Z)
• Learning List-Level Domain-Invariant Representations for Ranking [59.3544317373004]
  We propose list-level alignment -- learning domain-invariant representations at the higher level of lists. The benefits are twofold: it leads to the first domain adaptation generalization bound for ranking, in turn providing theoretical support for the proposed method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-21T04:49:55Z)
• Which Tricks Are Important for Learning to Rank? [32.38701971636441]
  State-of-the-art learning-to-rank methods are based on gradient-boosted decision trees (GBDT) In this paper, we thoroughly analyze several GBDT-based ranking algorithms in a unified setup. As a result, we gain insights into learning-to-rank techniques and obtain a new state-of-the-art algorithm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-04T13:59:04Z)
• Heuristic Search for Rank Aggregation with Application to Label Ranking [16.275063634853584]
  We propose an effective hybrid evolutionary ranking algorithm to solve the rank aggregation problem. The algorithm features a semantic crossover based on concordant pairs and a late acceptance local search reinforced by an efficient incremental evaluation technique. Experiments are conducted to assess the algorithm, indicating a highly competitive performance on benchmark instances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-11T11:43:17Z)
• A Pre-processing Method for Fairness in Ranking [0.0]
  We propose a fair ranking framework that evaluates the order of training data in a pairwise manner. We show that our method outperforms the existing methods in the trade-off between accuracy and fairness over real-world datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-29T02:55:32Z)
• Regret minimization in stochastic non-convex learning via a proximal-gradient approach [80.59047515124198]
  Motivated by applications in machine learning and operations, we regret with first-order oracle feedback minimization online constrained problems. We develop a new prox-grad with guarantees proximal complexity reduction techniques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-13T09:22:21Z)
• Taking the Counterfactual Online: Efficient and Unbiased Online Evaluation for Ranking [74.46448041224247]
  We introduce the novel Logging-Policy Optimization Algorithm (LogOpt), which optimize the policy for logging data. LogOpt turns the counterfactual approach - which is indifferent to the logging policy - into an online approach, where the algorithm decides what rankings to display. We prove that, as an online evaluation method, LogOpt is unbiased w.r.t. position and item-selection bias, unlike existing interleaving methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-24T18:05:58Z)
• Towards Model-Agnostic Post-Hoc Adjustment for Balancing Ranking Fairness and Algorithm Utility [54.179859639868646]
  Bipartite ranking aims to learn a scoring function that ranks positive individuals higher than negative ones from labeled data. There have been rising concerns on whether the learned scoring function can cause systematic disparity across different protected groups. We propose a model post-processing framework for balancing them in the bipartite ranking scenario.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-15T10:08:39Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.