ph.d. viva presentation

7/24/2019 Ph.D. Viva Presentation

1/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Objectives of

ResearchWork

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch

WorksTermAssociationGraph Model forDocumentRe-ranking

Topic Model forDocumentRe-ranking

GeneticIntelligence

Model forDocumentRe-ranking

SwarmIntelligenceModel for SearchQueryReformulation

Conclusion

References

Publications

Personalized Information Retrieval SystemUsing Computational Intelligence Techniques

VENINGSTON K

Senior Research FellowDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering

Government College of Technology, [email protected]

Under the Guidance ofDr.R.SHANMUGALAKSHMI

Associate Professor, Dept. of CSE, GCT

05 August 2015

VENINGSTON K (Dept. of CSE, GCT) Ph.D. Viva-Voce 05 August 2015 1 / 71
http://find/


2/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Objectives of

ResearchWork

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch



GeneticIntelligence



Conclusion

References

Publications

Presentation Outline

1 Objectives of Research Work

2 Introduction

3 Literature Survey

4 Proposed Research Works

Term Association Graph Model for Document Re-rankingTopic Model for Document Re-rankingGenetic Intelligence Model for Document Re-rankingSwarm Intelligence Model for Search Query Reformulation

5 Conclusion

6 References

7 Publications

http://find/


3/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Objectives of

ResearchWork

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch



GeneticIntelligence



Conclusion

References

Publications

Objectives of Research Work

To improve the retrieval effectiveness by employing TermAssociation Graph data structure

To enhance a personalized ranking criteria by modeling of

users search interests as topics. Further, employingDocument topic model that integrates User topic model

To realize Genetic Algorithm enabled document re-rankingscheme

To devise personalized search query suggestion using AntColony Optimization

http://find/


4/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Objectives of

ResearchWork

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch



GeneticIntelligence



Conclusion

References

Publications

Introduction [1/2]

Typical Information Retrieval (IR) Architecture

http://find/


5/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Objectives of

ResearchWork

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch



GeneticIntelligence



Conclusion

References

Publications

Introduction [2/2]

WhyPersonalizationin Information Retrieval?

http://find/


6/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Objectives of

ResearchWork

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch



GeneticIntelligence



Conclusion

References

Publications

Classifications of Typical IR systems

Content-based approachSimple matchingof a query with results - This does not helpusers to determine which results are worth

Author-relevancy technique

Citation and hyperlinks - Presents the problem ofauthoringbiasi.e. results that are valued by authors are not necessarilythose valued by the entire population

Usage rank approachActions of users to compute relevancy - Computed from thefrequency, recency, duration of interaction by users

http://find/


7/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Objectives of

ResearchWork

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch



GeneticIntelligence



Conclusion

References

Publications

Limitations in Typical IR systems

Most of the techniques measure relevanceas a function ofthe entire population of users

This does not acknowledge thatrelevance is relativefor

each userThere needs to be a way to take into account thatdifferent people find different things relevant

Users interests and knowledge change over time -

personal relevance

http://find/


8/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Objectives of

ResearchWork

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch



GeneticIntelligence



Conclusion

References

Publications

General Approach for mitigating Challenges

Main ways to personalize a search are Result processingandQuery augmentation

Document Re-ranking

To re-rank the results based upon the frequency, recency, orduration of usage. Provides users with the ability to identifythe most popular, faddish pages that other users have seen

Query Reformulation

To compare the entered query against the contextualinformation available to determine if the query can berefined/reformulated to include other text

http://find/


9/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Objectives of

ResearchWork

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch



GeneticIntelligence



Conclusion

References

Publications

General Problem Description

Diverse interest of search usersOriginal Query User 1 User 2 User 3

World cup football championship ICC cricket world cup T20 cricket world cup

India crisis Economic crisis in India security crisis in India job crisis in India

Job search Student part time jobs government jobs Engineering and IT job search

Cancer astrology and zodiac lung cancer and prevention causes of cancer, symptoms and treatment

Ring Ornament horror movie circus ring show

Okapi animal giraffe African luxury hand bags Information retrieval model BM25

http://find/


10/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Objectives of

ResearchWork

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch



GeneticIntelligenceModel forDocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications

Literature Survey

Related work on Re-ranking techniquesPaper Title Author, Year Techniques used Limitations

Implicit preference Sugiyama et al, 2004 Term frequency scheme Noisy browsing history

Hyp erlink data Brin & Page, 1998 Link structure analys is Computes universal notion of imp ortance

Collab orative filtering Sarwar et al, 2000 Groupization algorithm User data are dynamic

Categorization Liu et al, 2004 Mapping queries to related categories Predefined categories are used

Long-term user behavior Bennett et al, 2012 Create profiles from entire history Misses searcher needs for the current task

Short-term user behavior Cao et al, 2008 Create profiles from recent search session Lacks in capturing users long term interest

Location awarenes s Leung et al, 2010 Location ontology Captures lo cation information by text matching

Task awareness Luxenburger et al, 2008 Task language mo del Lacks tem poral features of user tasks

Tag data Carman et al, 2008 Content based profiles Results are biased towards particular user group

Context data White etal,2009 Usermodeling uses Contextual features Treat all context sources equally

Click data Liu et al, 2002 Assesses pages frequently clicked Makes no use of terms and its asso ciation

http://goback/http://find/http://find/http://goback/


11/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Objectives of

ResearchWork

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch





Conclusion

References

Publications

Literature Survey

Related work on Query reformulation techniquesPaper Title Author, Year Techniques used Limitations

Anchor text Kraft & Zien, 2004 Mining anchor texts More number of query suggestions

Bipartite graph Mei et al, 2008 Prepares morphological different keywords Individual user intents are not considered

Personalized facets Koren et al, 2008 Employs key-value pair meta-data Uses frequency based facet ranking

Term association pattern Wang & Zhai, 2008 Analyze relations of terms inside a query Click-through data not considered

Rule based classifier Huang & Efthimiadis, 2009 Matches query with ordered reformulation rules Semantic associations are missing

Clustering Jain & Mishne, 2010 Query suggestions are grouped by topics Drift in user intent to another topic

Merging Sheldon et al, 2011 Produces results from different reformulations Random walk on the click graph

http://find/http://goback/


12/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Objectives of

ResearchWork

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch





Conclusion

References

Publications

Proposed Research Works

Module 1Term Association Graph Model for Document Re-ranking

Module 2

Topic Model for Document Re-ranking

Module 3

Genetic Intelligence Model for Document Re-ranking

Module 4

Swarm Intelligence Model for Search Query Reformulation



13/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Objectives of

ResearchWork

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch





Conclusion

References

Publications

1. Term Association Graph Model for DocumentRe-ranking

Problem Statement

How to represent document collection as term graphmodel?

How to use it for improving search results?

Methodology

Term graph representation

Ranking semantic association for Re-ranking

TermRank based approach (TRA)

Path Traversal based approach (PTA)1 PTA1: Naive approach2 PTA2: Paired similarity document ordering3 PTA3: Personalized path selection



14/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Objectives of

ResearchWork

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch





Conclusion

References

Publications

Document Representation

Sample of OHSUMED (Oregon Health & Science

University MEDline) test CollectionDocID Item-set Support

54711 Ribonuclease, catalytic, lysine, phosphate, enzymatic, ethylation 0.12

55199 Ribonuclease, Adx, glucocorticoids, chymotrypsin, mRNA 0.2

62920 Ribonuclease, anticodon, alanine, tRNA 0.1

64711 Cl- channels, catalytic, Monophosphate, cells 0.072

65118 isozyme, enzyme, aldehyde, catalytic 0.096

Supportd=

ni=1fd(ti)N

j=1

ni=1fd(ti)

http://find/


15/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Objectives ofResearchWork

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch





Conclusion

References

Publications

Term Association Graph Model


Ph D


16/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch





Conclusion

References

Publications

Ranking Schemes based on Semantic Association


Ph D T R k A h (TRA)
http://find/


17/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch





Conclusion

References

Publications

Term Rank Approach (TRA)

Rank(ta) =c

tbTa

Rank(tb)Ntb

ta and tbare Nodes

Tb is a set of terms ta points to

Ta is a set of terms that point to ta

Ntb=|Tb| is the number of links from ta


Ph D PTA1 N i A h


18/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch



GeneticIntelligenceModel for

DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications

PTA1: Naive Approach

The sequence of documents are chosen from path p3 i.e.D11,D1,D37,D17,D22, andD5. D11 will be the top rankeddocument.


Ph D PTA2 P i d Si il i R ki
http://goforward/http://find/http://goback/


19/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch




DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications

PTA2: Paired Similarity Ranking

sim(T1,T2) = 2 depth(LCS)

depth(T1)+depth(T2)

T1 and T2 denote the term nodes in Term AssociationGraph TGLCSdenote the Least Common Sub-Sumer ofT1 and T2depth(T) denote the shortest distance from query node qto a node T on TG


Ph D PTA3 P li d P th S l ti
http://find/


20/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch




DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications

PTA3: Personalized Path Selection


Ph D PTA3 P li d P th S l ti
http://find/


21/71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch




DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications



Ph.D. PTA3: Personalized Path Selection
http://find/


22/71

Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch




DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications


PSCweight= 1

|t|

#topics

i=1

(sivi(

tTi))

1

#t /T

|t|

PSCweight is the Personalized Search Context Weight

|t| is the total number of terms in dfspath includingquery term

T is the set of user interested topics

sivi is the search interest value of ith topic


Ph.D. Experimental Dataset
http://find/


23/71

Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch




DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications

Experimental Dataset


Ph.D. Evaluation Measures
http://find/


24/71

Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch




DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications

Evaluation Measures

Subjective Evaluation

1 Information Richness

InfoRich(Rm) = 1

Div(Rm)

Div(Rmk=1

1

Nk

Nki=1

InfoRich(dik)

Objective Evaluation1 Precision P= #RelevantRetrived

k

2 Recall P= #RelevantRetrievedTotal#Relevant

3 Mean Average PrecisionMAP=|Q|

q=1AvgPrecision(q)

|Q|

AvgPrecision(q) = 1RR

k=1((P@k) . (rel(k)))4 Mean Reciprocal RankMRR= 1|Q|

|Q|i=1

1ranki

5 Normalized Discounted Cumulative Gain

NDCGk=k

i=12ri1

log2(i+1)

IDCGk


Ph.D. Experimental Results & Analysis [1/3]
http://find/


25/71

Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Objectives ofResearch

Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch




DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications

Experimental Results & Analysis [1/3]

Non-Personalized Evaluation on Real Dataset


Ph.D.V V Experimental Results & Analysis [2/3]
http://find/


26/71

Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch




DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications


Non-Personalized Evaluation on Synthetic Dataset


Ph.D.Vi V Experimental Results & Analysis [3/3]
http://find/


27/71

Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearch




DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications


Personalized Evaluation on Real Dataset


Ph.D.Vi V e Motivation to Module 2
http://find/


28/71

Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey

ProposedResearchWorks

TermAssociationGraph Model forDocumentRe-ranking



DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications

Motivation to Module 2

Summary of Module 1

1 Employs termassociation graphmodel

2 Suggested differentmethods to enhancethe documentre-ranking

3 Captures hiddensemantic association

Exploits topical representationfor identifying user interest.Matching of documents and

queries is not done with topicalrepresentation. To explore topicmodel to find relevantdocuments by matching topicalfeatures


Ph.D.Viva Voce 2 Topic Model for Document Re-ranking
http://find/


29/71

Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey





DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications

2. Topic Model for Document Re ranking

Problem Statement

How to model and represent past search contexts?

How to use it for improving search results?

Methodology

User search context modeling

1 User profile modeling2 Learning user interested topic3 Finding document topic

Personalized Re-ranking process

1 Exploiting user interest profile model2 Computing personalized score for document using usermodel

3 Generating personalized result set by re-ranking


Ph.D.Viva-Voce User search context modeling
http://find/


30/71

Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey





DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications


User profile modeling

u=UPwi

UPwiHistory(D)=P(wi) = tfwi,D

wiD

tfwi,D


Ph.D.Viva-Voce User search context modeling
http://find/


31/71

Viva Voce

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey





DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications


Learning user interested topic

Finding document topic


Ph.D.Viva-Voce Personalized Re-ranking process
http://find/


32/71

Viva Voce

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey





DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications

g p

Exploiting user interest profile model

KLD(TdTu) = tDUP(Td(t))log

P(Td(t))

P(Tu(t))


Ph.D.Viva-Voce Personalized Re-ranking process
http://find/


34/71

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey





DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications

p


Ph.D.Viva-Voce Parameter Tuning
http://find/


35/71

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey





DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications

g

Learning and Parameters


Ph.D.Viva-Voce Experimental Results & Analysis [1/2]
http://find/


36/71

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey





DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications

[ / ]

Evaluation on Real Dataset


Ph.D.Viva-Voce Experimental Results & Analysis [2/2]
http://find/


37/71

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey





DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications

Evaluation on AOL Dataset


Ph.D.Viva-Voce Motivation to Module 3
http://find/


38/71

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey





DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications

Summary of Module 2

1 Client sidepersonalization

2 Insensitive to the

number of Topics3 Not all the queries

would requirepersonalization to be

performed

Explores topic model for findingrelevant documents using

topical features. To learn atopic model on a representativesubset of a collection usingGenetic Intelligence technique


Ph.D.Viva-Voce 3. Genetic Intelligence Model for Document
http://find/


39/71

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey





DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications

Re-ranking

Problem StatementHow to represent documents as chromosomes?

How to evaluate fitness of search results?

Methodology

Apply GA with an adaptation of probabilistic modelProbabilistic similarity function has been used for fitnessevaluation

Documents are assigned a score based on the probability

of relevanceProbability of relevance are sought using GA approach inorder to optimize the search process i.e. finding of relevantdocument not by assessing the entire corpus or collection


Ph.D.Viva-Voce Why GA for IR?
http://find/


40/71

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey





DocumentRe-ranking


Conclusion

References

Publications

When the document search space represents a highdimensional space i.e. the size of the document corpus ismultitude in IR

GA is the searching mechanisms known for itsquick search

capabilitiesWhen no relevant documents are retrieved in top orderwith the initial query

Theprobabilistic explorationinduced by GA allows the

exploration of new areas in the document space.


Ph.D.Viva-Voce Steps in GA for IR
http://find/


41/71

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

PublicationsVENINGSTON K (Dept. of CSE, GCT) Ph.D. Viva-Voce 05 August 2015 41 / 71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce Fitness Evaluation
http://find/


42/71

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

Representations of Chromosomes

Probabilistic Fitness Functions

1 P(q|d) =

wd(P(q|w)P(w |d))

2 P(q|d) =P(q|C) + (1)

wd(P(q|w)P(w |d))


Ph.D.Viva-Voce Selection & Reproduction
http://goforward/http://find/http://goback/


43/71

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey




GeneticIntelligenceModel forDocumentRe-rankingSwarmIntelligenceModel for SearchQueryReformulation

Conclusion

References

Publications

Roulette-wheel selection

Reproduction Operators1 Crossover2 Mutation


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTON

http://find/


44/71

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey





Conclusion

References


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTON

Parameter Tuning
http://find/


45/71

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey





Conclusion

References

Publications

LearningPc and Pm Parameters


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTON

http://find/


46/71

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey





Conclusion

References

Publications

Evaluation on Benchmark Dataset


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTON

http://find/


47/71

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey





Conclusion

References

Publications

Evaluation on Real Dataset


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTON

Motivation to Module 4
http://find/


48/71

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey





Conclusion

References

Publications

Summary of Module 3

1 Explored the utility ofincorporating GA toimprove re-ranking

2 Adaptation of

personalization in GAprovides more desirableresults

3 Not all the querieswould requirepersonalization to beperformed

The graph representation ofdocuments best suit theapplication of SwarmIntelligence model. To simulateACO in graph structure basedon behavior of ants seeking apath between their colony andsource of food for search query

reformulation


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTON

4. Swarm Intelligence Model for Search QueryReformulation
http://find/


49/71

VENINGSTONK


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey




GeneticIntelligenceModel forDocument

Re-rankingSwarmIntelligenceModel for SearchQueryReformulation

Conclusion

References

Publications

Reformulation

Problem Statement

How to address vocabulary mismatch problem in IR?

How to change the original query to form a new querythat would find better relevant documents?

Methodology

Exploits Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) approach tosuggest related key words

The self-organizing principles which allow the highlycoordinated behavior of real ants that collaborate to solvecomputational problems


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTON

ACO for Query Reformulation
http://find/


50/71

K


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

Terminologies

Artificial Ant

Pheromone

Typical Ant SystemVENINGSTON K (Dept. of CSE, GCT) Ph.D. Viva-Voce 05 August 2015 50 / 71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTON

ACO Implementation
http://find/


51/71

K


Work

Introduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTON

Characteristics of Artificial Ant
http://find/


52/71

K


WorkIntroduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

Notion ofautocatalytic behavior

Chooses the query term to go with a transition probabilityas a function of the similarity i.e. amount of trail presenton the connecting edge between terms

Navigation over retrieved documents for a query is treatedas ant movement over graph

When the user completes a tour, a substance calledtrailortraceorpheromoneis laid on each edge


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTON

Similarity
http://find/


53/71

K


WorkIntroduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

Transition Probability

pkij(t) = [ij(t)]

[ij]

k[ik(t)][ik]

ij is a static similarity weight

ij is a trace deposited by usersTrail Deposition

ij(t+ 1) =pij(t) + ij

pis the rate of trail decay per time interval i.e. pheromoneevaporation factor

ij is the sum of deposited trails by users


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

http://find/


54/71

K


WorkIntroduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

AOL Search query log

Only the queries issued by at least 10 users were employedand the pre-processed documents retrieved for that querywere used to construct graph

270 single and two word queries issued by different usersfrom AOL search log are taken


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Experimental Evaluation
http://find/


55/71

K


WorkIntroduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

Baseline MethodsAssociation Rule based approach (AR)

SimRank Approach (SR)

Backward Random Walk approach (BRW)

Forward Random Walk approach (FRW)Traditional ACO based approach (TACO)

Parameter setting

Depth was set as 5 i.e. top ranked 5 related queries

Evaporation factor (p) was set to 0.5


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Experimental Results & Analysis
http://find/


56/71

K


WorkIntroduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

Manual Evaluation

Benchmark Evaluation


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Summary
http://find/


57/71

K


WorkIntroduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

Summary of Module 4

1 Terms in the initial set of documents constitute potential

related terms2 Semantically related keywords are suggested to the initial

query

3 Single word queries are treated as an ambiguous one


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Conclusion
http://find/


58/71

K


WorkIntroduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

1 Usage of Term Association GraphEfficient retrieval of Journal articles

The graph structure may signify grammatical relationsbetween terms

2 Integration of Document Topic model and User Topicmodel

Effective in general searchThis may incorporate live user feedback

3 GA based document fitness evaluationGood in document space explorationChromosomes representation may be improved

4 ACO based query reformulationExploits collaborative knowledge of usersIf the solution is badly chosen, the probability of a badperformance is high


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Further Extension
http://find/


59/71

K


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

1 Efficient updating policy for user interest models

2

Account individual user specific context for generatingquery refinements

3 Medical Information Retrieval (Eg. PubMed, WebMD,etc.)


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Book References
http://find/


60/71


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

Salton & McGill (1986)

Introduction to modern information retrieval

McGraw-Hill , New York.

Baeza-Yates & Ribeiro-Neto (1999)

Modern Information Retrieval

Addison Wesley.

Manning et al (2008)

Introduction to Information Retrieval

Cambridge University Press .

Goldberg (1989)Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning

Addison-Wesley.


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

References [1/7]

M tthiji & R dli ki (2012)
http://find/


61/71


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

Matthijis & Radlinski (2012)

Personalizing Web Search using Long Term Browsing History

In Proc. 4th ACM WSDM, 25 34.

Agichtein et al (2006)

Improving Web Search Ranking by Incorporating user behaviorinformation

In Proc. 29th ACM SIGIR, 19 26.

Ponte & Croft (1998)A language modeling approach to information retrieval

In Proc. 21st ACM SIGIR, 275 281.

Lafferty et al (2001)

Document language models, query models, and risk minimization for

information retrievalIn Proc. 24th ACM SIGIR, 111 119.

Kushchu (2005)

Web-Based Evolutionary and Adaptive Information Retrieval

IEEE Trans. Evolutionary Computation 9(2),117125.


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

References [2/7]

Leung & Lee (2010)
http://find/


62/71


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

Leung & Lee (2010)

Deriving Concept-based User profiles from Search Engine Logs

IEEE Trans. Knowledge and Data Engineering22(7), 969 982.

Blanco & Lioma (2012)

Graph-based term weighting for information retrieval

Springer Information Retrieval15(1), 54 92.

Dorigo et al (2006)

Ant Colony OptimizationIEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine1(4), 28 39.

Sugiyama et al (2004)

Adaptive web search based on user pro?le constructed without anyeffort from users

In Proc. 13th Intl.Conf. World Wide Web, 675 684.

Brin Page (1998)

The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search Engine

Elsevier Journal on Computer Networks and ISDN Systems30(1-7),107 117.


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

References [3/7]

Eirinaki Vazirgiannis (2005)
http://find/


63/71


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

Eirinaki Vazirgiannis (2005)

UPR:Usage-based page ranking for web persoanalization

In Proc. 5th IEEE Intl. Conf. Data Mining, 130 137.

Sarwar et al (2000)

Analysis of Recommendation Algorithms for E-commerce

In Proc. 2nd ACM Intl. Conf. Electronic commerce, 158 167.

Liu et al (2004)

Personalized web search for improving retrieval effectiveness

IEEE Trans. Knowledge and Data Engineering16(1), 28 40.

Bennett et al (2012)

Modeling the impact of short- and long-term behavior on search

personalizationIn Proc. 35th ACM SIGIR, 185 194.

cao et al (2008)

Context-Aware Query Suggestion by Mining Click-Through

In Proc. 14th ACM SIGKDD, 875 883.VENINGSTON K (Dept. of CSE, GCT) Ph.D. Viva-Voce 05 August 2015 63 / 71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

References [4/7]

( )
http://find/


64/71


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

carman et al (2008)

Tag data and personalized Information Retrieval

In Proc. ACM workshop Search in social media , 27 34.

Leung et al (2010)

Personalized Web Search with Location Preferences

In Proc. 26th IEEE Intl. Conf. Data Engineering, 701 712.

Luxenburger et al (2008)Task-aware search personalization

In Proc. 31st ACM SIGIR, 721 722.

white et al (2009)

Predicting user interests from contextual information

In Proc. 32nd ACM SIGIR, 363 370.

White et al (2013)

Enhancing personalized search by mining and modeling task behavior

In Proc. 22nd Intl. Conf. World Wide Web, 1411 1420.


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

References [5/7]

Vallet et al (2010)
http://find/


65/71


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

Vallet et al (2010)

Personalizing web search with Folksonomy-Based user and documentprofiles

In Proc. 32nd European conference on Advances in IR, 420 431.

Jansen et al (2007)

Determining the user intent of web search engine queries

In Proc. 6th Intl. Conf. World Wide Web, 1149 1150.

Jansen et al (2000)Real life, real users, and real needs: a study and analysis of userqueries on the web

Elsevier Information Processing and Management36(2), 207 227.

Daoud et al (2008)

Learning user interests for a session-based personalized SearchIn Proc. 2nd Intl. symposium on Information interaction in context,57 64.

Kraft Zien (2004)

Mining Anchor Text for Query Refinement

In Proc. 13th Intl. Conf. WorldWide Web, 666 674.VENINGSTON K (Dept. of CSE, GCT) Ph.D. Viva-Voce 05 August 2015 65 / 71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

References [6/7]

Dang Croft (2010)
http://find/


66/71


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

Dang Croft (2010)

Query Reformulation Using Anchor Text

In Proc. 3rd ACM WSDM, 41 50.

Mei et al (2008)

Query suggestion using hitting time

In Proc. 17th ACM CIKM, 469 478.

Koren et al (2008)

Personalized interactive faceted searchIn Proc. 17th Intl. Conf. World Wide Web, 477 486.

Wang Zhai (2005)

Mining term association patterns from search logs for effective queryReformulation

In Proc.ACM CIKM, 479 488.

Huang Efthimiadis (2009)

Analyzing and evaluating query reformulation strategies in web searchlogs

In Proc. 18th ACM CIKM, 77 86.


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

References [7/7]

Jain Mishne (2010)
http://find/


67/71


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

Jain Mishne (2010)

Organizing query completions for web search

In Proc. ACM CIKM, 1169 1178.

Sadikov et al (2010)

Clustering query refinements by user intent

In Proc. 19th Intl. Conf. World Wide Web, 841 850.

Bhatia (2011)

Query suggestions in the absence of query logs

In Proc. 34th ACM SIGIR, 795 804.

Sheldon et al (2011)

LambdaMerge: Merging the results of query reformulations

In Proc. 4th ACM WSDM, 117 125.

Goyal et al (2012)

Query representation through lexical association for informationretrieval

IEEE Trans. Knowledge and Data Engineering24(12),22602273.


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

Journal Publications

Veningston, & Shanmugalakshmi (2015)
http://find/


68/71


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

g , & g ( )

Semantic Association Ranking Schemes for Information RetrievalApplications using Term Association Graph Representation

Sadhana - Academy Proceedings in Engineering Sciences, SpringerPublication.[Annexure I]

Veningston & Shanmugalakshmi (2014)

Computational Intelligence for Information Retrieval using GeneticAlgorithm

INFORMATION - An International Interdisciplinary Journal17(8),3825 3832.[Annexure I]


Combining User Interested Topic and Document Topic forPersonalized Information Retrieval

Lecture Notes in Computer ScienceSpringer Publication 8883 , 60 79.[Annexure II]


Efficient Implementation of Web Search Query reformulation usingAnt Colony Optimization

Lecture Notes in Com uter Science S rin er Publication 8883 80 VENINGSTON K (Dept. of CSE, GCT) Ph.D. Viva-Voce 05 August 2015 68 / 71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

International Conference Publications [1/2]

Veningston, & Shanmugalakshmi (2015)
http://find/


69/71


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

g , g ( )

Personalized Location aware Recommendation System

In Proc. 2nd IEEE Intl. Conf. Advanced Computing and

Communication Systems , Indexed in IEEE Xplore.[Best Paper]


Information Retrieval by Document Re-ranking using TermAssociation Graph

In Proc. ACM Intl. Conf. Interdisciplinary Advances in Applied

Computing, Indexed in ACM Digital Library.[Best Paper]


Personalized Grouping of User Search Histories for Efficient WebSearch

In Proc. 13th WSEAS Intl. Conf. Applied Computer and Applied

Computational Science, 164 172.


Statistical language modeling for personalizing Information Retrieval

In Proc. 1st IEEE Intl. Conf. Advanced Computing and

Communication Systems , Indexed in IEEEXplore.[BestPaper]VENINGSTON K (Dept. of CSE, GCT) Ph.D. Viva-Voce 05 August 2015 69 / 71

Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK

International Conference Publications [2/2]
http://find/


70/71


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

Veningston, Shanmugalakshmi & Ruksana (2013)

Context aware Personalization for Web Information Retrieval: A Largescale probabilistic approach

In Proc. Intl. Conf. Cloud and Big Data Analytics , PSG College ofTechnology.


Enhancing personalized web search Re-ranking algorithm byincorporating user profile

In Proc. 3rd IEEE Intl. Conf. Computing, Communication and

Networking Technologies , Indexed in IEEE Xplore.


Ph.D.Viva-Voce

VENINGSTONK
http://find/


71/71


Introduction

LiteratureSurvey






Conclusion

References

Publications

Thank You & Queries

http://find/