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 irrelevant information 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 query reformulation 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.
翻译:实践证明,PRF模式可能错误地侧重于在更多反馈中增加的额外不相关信息,从而用较少的反馈来重新配置查询。理想的是,如果PRF模式能够区分反馈中不相干和相关的信息,那么反馈文件就更好了。为了缩小这一差距,我们建议“损失-损失-损失”框架,以比较培训期间同一查询的不同修改之间的重新调整损失。具体地说,我们用不同数量的反馈来同时修改最初的查询次数,并重新计算其重现损失。然后,我们对这些重新配置的损失增加一次正规化损失,以惩罚使用更稳健的反馈但获得更多损失的修改,在比较性调整后,将采用更稳健、更准确的反馈文件,修改后的查询将越好。为了缩小这一差距,我们建议“损失-损失-损失-损失-损失-损失(LOL)”框架,以比较培训期间对同一查询的不同修改。具体地说,我们用不同的反馈数量来同时修改原始的查询次数,并更正其重订损失。然后,我们对这些重新分类损失增加一个正规的重新分类损失,在使用更多的反馈,但获得更大的损失。通过比较的更精确的重新校正校正,预计,我们所使用的方法将用新的重新校订方法,用新的重新校订。我们所使用的方法,用新的重新校正。