Papers
arxiv:2204.11545

LoL: A Comparative Regularization Loss over Query Reformulation Losses for Pseudo-Relevance Feedback

Published on Apr 25, 2022
Authors:
,
,
,
,

Abstract

Pseudo-relevance feedback (PRF) has proven to be an effective query reformulation technique to improve retrieval accuracy. It aims to alleviate the mismatch of linguistic expressions between a query and its potential relevant documents. Existing PRF methods independently treat revised queries originating from the same query but using different numbers of feedback documents, resulting in severe query drift. Without comparing the effects of two different revisions from the same query, a PRF model may incorrectly focus on the additional ir<PRE_TAG>relevant information</POST_TAG> increased in the more feedback, and thus reformulate a query that is less effective than the revision using the less feedback. Ideally, if a PRF model can distinguish between irrelevant and relevant information in the feedback, the more feedback documents there are, the better the revised query will be. To bridge this gap, we propose the Loss-over-Loss (LoL) framework to compare the reformulation losses between different revisions of the same query during training. Concretely, we revise an original query multiple times in parallel using different amounts of feedback and compute their reformulation losses. Then, we introduce an additional regularization loss on these reformulation losses to penalize revisions that use more feedback but gain larger losses. With such comparative regularization, the PRF model is expected to learn to suppress the extra increased irrelevant information by comparing the effects of different revised queries. Further, we present a differentiable <PRE_TAG>query reformulation</POST_TAG> method to implement this framework. This method revises queries in the vector space and directly optimizes the retrieval performance of query vectors, applicable for both sparse and dense retrieval models. Empirical evaluation demonstrates the effectiveness and robustness of our method for two typical sparse and dense retrieval models.

Community

Sign up or log in to comment

Models citing this paper 0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2204.11545 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper 0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2204.11545 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper 0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2204.11545 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper 0

No Collection including this paper

Add this paper to a collection to link it from this page.