Abstract

Dealing with unjudged documents ("holes") in relevance assessments is a perennial problem when evaluating search systems with offline experiments. Holes can reduce the apparent effectiveness of retrieval systems during evaluation and introduce biases in models trained with incomplete data. In this work, we explore whether large language models can help us fill such holes to improve offline evaluations. We examine an extreme, albeit common, evaluation setting wherein only a single known relevant document per query is available for evaluation. We then explore various approaches for predicting the relevance of unjudged documents with respect to a query and the known relevant document, including nearest neighbor, supervised, and prompting techniques. We find that although the predictions of these One-Shot Labelers (1SL) frequently disagree with human assessments, the labels they produce yield a far more reliable ranking of systems than the single labels do alone. Specifically, the stronges

Authors

(none)

Tags

  • Uncategorized

Stats

  • citations42
  • S2 citationsβ€”
  • github stars0
  • HF likes0
  • heat score12.25
  • arxiv keymacavaney2023one

Related papers