Users often issue vague queries; when we cannot predict their intents precisely, a natural solution is to diversify the search results, hoping that some of the results correspond to the intent: This is usually called “result diversification”. Only a few studies have been completed to systematically evaluate approaches on result diversity. Some questions still remain unanswered: 1) As we cannot exhaustively list all intents in an evaluation, how does an incomplete intent set influence evaluation results? 2) Intents are not equally popular; so how can we estimate the probability of each intent? In this paper, we address these questions in building up a test collection for multi-intent queries. The labeling tool that we have developed allows assessors to add new intents while performing relevance assessments. Thus, we can investigate the influence of an incomplete intent set through experiments. Moreover, we propose two simple methods to estimate the probabilities of the underlying intents. Experimental results indicate that the evaluation results are different if we take the probabilities into consideration.
['Ruihua Song', 'Dongjie Qi', 'Hua Liu', 'Tetsuya Sakai', 'Jian-Yun Nie', 'Hsiao-Wuen Hon', 'Yong Yu']
Constructing a Test Collection with Multi-Intent Queries.