Search Plurality

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2501.00987v1
• Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2025 00:28:33 GMT
• Title: Search Plurality
• Abstract summary: We argue that the concept of prioritization warrants scrutiny, along with the consistent hierarchical ordering that underlies this lack of neutrality.<n>We introduce the term Search Plurality to encapsulate the idea of emphasizing the various means a query can be approached.<n>This is demonstrated in a design that prioritizes the display of categories over specific search items, helping users grasp the breadth of their search.
• Score: 0.5076419064097734
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: In light of Phillips' contention regarding the impracticality of Search Neutrality, asserting that non-epistemic factors presently dictate result prioritization, our objective in this study is to confront this constraint by questioning prevailing design practices in search engines. We posit that the concept of prioritization warrants scrutiny, along with the consistent hierarchical ordering that underlies this lack of neutrality. We introduce the term Search Plurality to encapsulate the idea of emphasizing the various means a query can be approached. This is demonstrated in a design that prioritizes the display of categories over specific search items, helping users grasp the breadth of their search. Whether a query allows for multiple interpretations or invites diverse opinions, the presentation of categories highlights the significance of organizing data based on relevance, importance, and relative significance, akin to traditional methods. However, unlike previous approaches, this method enriches our comprehension of the overall information landscape, countering the potential bias introduced by ranked lists.

Related papers

• Auditing Search Query Suggestion Bias Through Recursive Algorithm Interrogation [5.490018587818889]
  This work presents a new, alternative approach to search query bias identification.<n>It includes less high-level suggestions to deepen the data basis of bias analyses.<n>Based on these suggestions, we investigate topical group bias in person-related searches in the political domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-06T12:13:39Z)
• Towards Context-aware Reasoning-enhanced Generative Searching in E-commerce [61.03081096959132]
  We propose a context-aware reasoning-enhanced generative search framework for better textbfunderstanding the complicated context.<n>Our approach achieves superior performance compared with strong baselines, validating its effectiveness for search-based recommendation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-19T16:46:11Z)
• MAPS: Motivation-Aware Personalized Search via LLM-Driven Consultation Alignment [16.10791252542592]
  Motivation-Aware Personalized Search aims to retrieve and rank items that match users' preferences and search intent. Our analysis of a real-world e-commerce platform reveals that users often engage in relevant consultations before searching. To address these, we propose a Motivation-Aware Personalized Search (MAPS) method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-03T16:24:36Z)
• A Counterfactual Explanation Framework for Retrieval Models [4.562474301450839]
  We use an optimization framework to solve the question of which words played a role in not being favored by a retrieval model for a particular query. Our experiments show the effectiveness of our proposed approach in predicting counterfactuals for both statistical (e.g. BM25) and deep-learning-based models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-01T22:33:29Z)
• The Quest for the Right Mediator: Surveying Mechanistic Interpretability Through the Lens of Causal Mediation Analysis [51.046457649151336]
  We propose a perspective on interpretability research grounded in causal mediation analysis.<n>We describe the history and current state of interpretability taxonomized according to the types of causal units (mediators) employed.<n>We discuss the pros and cons of each mediator, providing insights as to when particular kinds of mediators and search methods are most appropriate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-02T17:51:42Z)
• Overview of PerpectiveArg2024: The First Shared Task on Perspective Argument Retrieval [56.66761232081188]
  We present a novel dataset covering demographic and socio-cultural (socio) variables, such as age, gender, and political attitude, representing minority and majority groups in society. We find substantial challenges in incorporating perspectivism, especially when aiming for personalization based solely on the text of arguments without explicitly providing socio profiles. While we bootstrap perspective argument retrieval, further research is essential to optimize retrieval systems to facilitate personalization and reduce polarization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-29T03:14:57Z)
• Asking Multimodal Clarifying Questions in Mixed-Initiative Conversational Search [89.1772985740272]
  In mixed-initiative conversational search systems, clarifying questions are used to help users who struggle to express their intentions in a single query. We hypothesize that in scenarios where multimodal information is pertinent, the clarification process can be improved by using non-textual information. We collect a dataset named Melon that contains over 4k multimodal clarifying questions, enriched with over 14k images. Several analyses are conducted to understand the importance of multimodal contents during the query clarification phase.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-12T16:04:01Z)
• Large Search Model: Redefining Search Stack in the Era of LLMs [63.503320030117145]
  We introduce a novel conceptual framework called large search model, which redefines the conventional search stack by unifying search tasks with one large language model (LLM) All tasks are formulated as autoregressive text generation problems, allowing for the customization of tasks through the use of natural language prompts. This proposed framework capitalizes on the strong language understanding and reasoning capabilities of LLMs, offering the potential to enhance search result quality while simultaneously simplifying the existing cumbersome search stack.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-23T05:52:09Z)
• Deep Reinforcement Agent for Efficient Instant Search [14.086339486783018]
  We propose to address the load issue by identifying tokens that are semantically more salient towards retrieving relevant documents. We train a reinforcement agent that interacts directly with the search engine and learns to predict the word's importance. A novel evaluation framework is presented to study the trade-off between the number of triggered searches and the system's performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-17T22:47:15Z)
• Semantic Search for Large Scale Clinical Ontologies [63.71950996116403]
  We present a deep learning approach to build a search system for large clinical vocabularies. We propose a Triplet-BERT model and a method that generates training data based on semantic training data. The model is evaluated using five real benchmark data sets and the results show that our approach achieves high results on both free text to concept and concept to searching concept vocabularies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-01T05:15:42Z)
• Compositional Attention: Disentangling Search and Retrieval [66.7108739597771]
  Multi-head, key-value attention is the backbone of the Transformer model and its variants. Standard attention heads learn a rigid mapping between search and retrieval. We propose a novel attention mechanism, called Compositional Attention, that replaces the standard head structure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-18T15:47:38Z)
• Exposing Query Identification for Search Transparency [69.06545074617685]
  We explore the feasibility of approximate exposing query identification (EQI) as a retrieval task by reversing the role of queries and documents in two classes of search systems. We derive an evaluation metric to measure the quality of a ranking of exposing queries, as well as conducting an empirical analysis focusing on various practical aspects of approximate EQI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-14T20:19:27Z)
• Analysing the Effect of Clarifying Questions on Document Ranking in Conversational Search [10.335808358080289]
  We investigate how different aspects of clarifying questions and user answers affect the quality of ranking. We introduce a simple-based lexical baseline, that significantly outperforms the existing naive baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-09T12:55:16Z)
• A Linguistically Driven Framework for Query Expansion via Grammatical Constituent Highlighting and Role-Based Concept Weighting [0.0]
  Concepts-of-Interest are recognized as the core concepts that represent the gist of the search goal. The remaining query constituents which serve to specify the search goal and complete the query structure are classified as descriptive, relational or structural.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-25T01:43:00Z)

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.