skip to main content
10.5555/1083592.1083683dlproceedingsArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesvldbConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Shuffling a stacked deck: the case for partially randomized ranking of search engine results

Published: 30 August 2005 Publication History

Abstract

In-degree, PageRank, number of visits and other measures of Web page popularity significantly influence the ranking of search results by modern search engines. The assumption is that popularity is closely correlated with quality, a more elusive concept that is difficult to measure directly. Unfortunately, the correlation between popularity and quality is very weak for newly-created pages that have yet to receive many visits and/or in-links. Worse, since discovery of new content is largely done by querying search engines, and because users usually focus their attention on the top few results, newly-created but high-quality pages are effectively "shut out," and it can take a very long time before they become popular.We propose a simple and elegant solution to this problem: the introduction of a controlled amount of randomness into search result ranking methods. Doing so offers new pages a chance to prove their worth, although clearly using too much randomness will degrade result quality and annul any benefits achieved. Hence there is a tradeoff between exploration to estimate the quality of new pages and exploitation of pages already known to be of high quality. We study this tradeoff both analytically and via simulation, in the context of an economic objective function based on aggregate result quality amortized over time. We show that a modest amount of randomness leads to improved search results.

References

[1]
Alexa Search Engine. http://www.alexa.com/.
[2]
How Much Information? http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/research/projects/how-much-info-2003/.
[3]
R. Baeza-Yates, F. Saint-Jean, and C. Castillo. Web structure, dynamics and page quality. In Proc. String Processing and Information Retrieval, 2002.
[4]
S. Chakrabarti, A. Frieze, and J. Vera. The effect of search engines on preferential attachment. In Proc. SODA, 2005.
[5]
J. Cho and S. Roy. Impact of Search Engines on Page Popularity. In Proc. WWW, 2004.
[6]
J. Cho, S. Roy, and R. Adams. Page quality: In search of an unbiased web ranking. In Proc. SIGMOD, 2005.
[7]
S. L. Gerhart. Do Web search engines suppress controversy? http://firstmonday. dk/issues/issue9_1/gerhart/index.html#notes.
[8]
M. Hindman, K. Tsioutsiouliklis, and J. A. Johnson. Googlearchy.: How a Few Heavily-Linked Sites Dominate Politics on the Web. http://www.princeton.edu/~mhindman/googlearchy-hindman.pdf.
[9]
L. Introna and H. Nissenbaum. Defining the Web: The Politics of search Engines. IEEE Computer Magazine, 33(1):54--62, 2000.
[10]
G. Jeh and J. Widom. Scaling Personalized Web Search. In Proc. WWW, 2003.
[11]
T. Joachims. Optimizing Search Engines Using Clickthrough Data. In Proc. KDD, 2002.
[12]
S. R. Kumar, P. Raghavan, S. Rajagopalan, and A. Tomkins. Recommendation systems: A probabilistic analysis. In Proc. FOCS, 1998.
[13]
R. Lempel and S. Moran. Predictive Caching and Prefetching of Query Results in Search Engines. In Proc. WWW, 2003.
[14]
A. Mowshowitz and A. Kawaguchi. Bias on the Web. Communcations of the ACM, 45(9):56--60, 2002.
[15]
A. Ntoulas, J. Cho, and C. Olston. What's New on the Web? The Evolution of the Web from a Search Engine Perspective. In Proc. WWW, 2004.
[16]
L. Page, S. Brin, R. Motwani, and T. Winograd. The PageRank Citation Ranking: Bringing Order to the Web. Stanford Digital Library Tech. Project, 1998.
[17]
S. Pandey, S. Roy, C. Olston, J. Cho, and S. Chakrabarti. Shuffling a stacked deck: The case for partially randomized ranking of search engine results, June 2005. Technical report, available via http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~spandey/TechReps/rank.pdf.
[18]
Search engine watch. http://searchenginewatch.com/.
[19]
C. Sherman. Are Search Engines Biased? http://searchenginewatch.com/searchday/article.php/2159431.
[20]
H. R. Varian. Resources on collaborative filtering. http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/resources/collab/.
[21]
J. Walker. Links and power: The political economy of linking on the web. In Proc. Hypertext, 2002.
[22]
P. S. Yu, X. Li, and B. Liu. On the Temporal Dimension of Search. In Proc. WWW, Poster Track, 2004.

Cited By

View all
  • (2014)Relevance Ranking for Vertical Search EnginesundefinedOnline publication date: 14-Feb-2014
  • (2012)Probabilistic news recommender systems with feedbackProceedings of the sixth ACM conference on Recommender systems10.1145/2365952.2366008(257-260)Online publication date: 9-Sep-2012
  • (2012)Recommendation challenges in web media settingsProceedings of the sixth ACM conference on Recommender systems10.1145/2365952.2365992(205-206)Online publication date: 9-Sep-2012
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Shuffling a stacked deck: the case for partially randomized ranking of search engine results

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Information & Contributors

        Information

        Published In

        cover image DL Hosted proceedings
        VLDB '05: Proceedings of the 31st international conference on Very large data bases
        August 2005
        1392 pages
        ISBN:1595931546

        Publisher

        VLDB Endowment

        Publication History

        Published: 30 August 2005

        Qualifiers

        • Article

        Conference

        ICMI05

        Contributors

        Other Metrics

        Bibliometrics & Citations

        Bibliometrics

        Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)2
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
        Reflects downloads up to 12 Jan 2025

        Other Metrics

        Citations

        Cited By

        View all
        • (2014)Relevance Ranking for Vertical Search EnginesundefinedOnline publication date: 14-Feb-2014
        • (2012)Probabilistic news recommender systems with feedbackProceedings of the sixth ACM conference on Recommender systems10.1145/2365952.2366008(257-260)Online publication date: 9-Sep-2012
        • (2012)Recommendation challenges in web media settingsProceedings of the sixth ACM conference on Recommender systems10.1145/2365952.2365992(205-206)Online publication date: 9-Sep-2012
        • (2012)Domain bias in web searchProceedings of the fifth ACM international conference on Web search and data mining10.1145/2124295.2124345(413-422)Online publication date: 8-Feb-2012
        • (2011)Learning to rank user intentProceedings of the 20th ACM international conference on Information and knowledge management10.1145/2063576.2063609(195-200)Online publication date: 24-Oct-2011
        • (2010)Learning recurrent event queries for web searchProceedings of the 2010 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing10.5555/1870658.1870768(1129-1139)Online publication date: 9-Oct-2010
        • (2010)Towards recency ranking in web searchProceedings of the third ACM international conference on Web search and data mining10.1145/1718487.1718490(11-20)Online publication date: 4-Feb-2010
        • (2009)What's in a sessionProceedings of the 20th ACM conference on Hypertext and hypermedia10.1145/1557914.1557946(173-182)Online publication date: 29-Jun-2009
        • (2009)Comparing the performance of us college football teams in the web and on the fieldProceedings of the 20th ACM conference on Hypertext and hypermedia10.1145/1557914.1557929(63-72)Online publication date: 29-Jun-2009
        • (2008)Boosting the ranking function learning process using clusteringProceedings of the 10th ACM workshop on Web information and data management10.1145/1458502.1458523(125-132)Online publication date: 30-Oct-2008
        • Show More Cited By

        View Options

        Login options

        View options

        PDF

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        Media

        Figures

        Other

        Tables

        Share

        Share

        Share this Publication link

        Share on social media