Against recall: is it persistence, cardinality, density, coverage, or totality?
Against recall: is it persistence, cardinality, density, coverage, or totality?
复制标题
反对回忆：是持久性、基数、密度、覆盖范围还是总体性？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
L. Park
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Zobel;Alistair Moffat;L. Park
在信息检索的历史中，召回的概念一直是系统测量的关键要素之一，尽管关于它的价值有许多未回答的问题。在这篇文章中，我们回顾了这些问题，并探讨了几个进一步的问题，影响回忆的有用性。特别是，我们问是否有理由期望能够测量召回;一些研究人员是否混淆了召回和答案集基数的概念;以及用户是否会依赖于系统“高召回”的信念来深入探索答案列表。结合早期的观察不可知的召回，并缺乏一个合理的用户模型，召回是一种满意度的衡量标准，我们得出结论，使用召回作为衡量排名查询的有效性是站不住脚的。
The concept of recall has been one of the key elements of system measurement throughout the history of information retrieval, despite the fact that there are many unanswered questions as to its value. In this essay, we review those questions and explore several further issues that affect the usefulness of recall. In particular, we ask whether it is reasonable to expect to be able to measure recall; whether some researchers are conflating the concepts of recall and answer set cardinality; and whether it is plausible that a user would rely on a belief that a system is "high recall" to deeply explore an answer list. Combined with earlier observations about the unknowability of recall, and the lack of a plausible user model in which recall is a measure of satisfaction, we conclude that use of recall as a measure of the effectiveness of ranked querying is indefensible.