Modern Search: Using ML & NLP advances to enhance search and discovery
•
0 gefällt mir•15 views
Presented at Open Source Charlotte Presented by Grant Ingersoll Title: Modern Search: Using ML & NLP advances to enhance search and discovery Abstract: With the recent advances in natural language processing and machine learning thanks to deep learning and large general purpose models, many search applications are confronted with how best to upgrade their systems, if at all. In this talk, we’ll look at practical ways to enhance search using neural and other machine learning techniques across ranking, content understanding and query understanding. We’ll also look at the tradeoffs of traditional approaches with a goal of helping you decide what’s best for your application. For more info on Open Source Charlotte: https://www.meetup.com/open-source-charlotte/
Empfohlen
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Ähnlich wie Modern Search: Using ML & NLP advances to enhance search and discovery
Ähnlich wie Modern Search: Using ML & NLP advances to enhance search and discovery (20)
Mehr von All Things Open
Mehr von All Things Open (20)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
Modern Search: Using ML & NLP advances to enhance search and discovery
- 1. Grant Ingersoll, @gsingers Modern Search Using ML & NLP advances to enhance search and discovery
- 5. - Keyword Search AKA Classical Search AKA Sparse Vector Search “Reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated”
- 7. The term information need is often understood as an individual or group's desire to locate and obtain information to satisfy a conscious or unconscious need. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_needs
- 8. Query Understanding Ranking Content Understanding
- 10. Content Classification vs. Content Annotation Technology Machine Learning Artificial Intelligence
- 11. Embeddings
- 12. Embeddings for supervised and unsupervised ML. Unsupervised: ● Synonyms ● Content Similarity Does not require labeled training data! Supervised: ● Content Classification ● Content Annotation Requires labeled training data!
- 13. And you can use embeddings for dense retrieval.
- 15. Multi-phase ranking Learning to Rank (LTR)
- 16. Three Approaches to LTR • Pointwise — Use an ML model to predict the score of a doc for a query • Pairwise — Use an ML model to compare pairs of documents for a query • Listwise — Try to predict the whole list for a query
- 17. Requirements • Judgments — either implicit or explicit (or both) • Query logs — with positive and negative examples, along with position and other metadata (sessions, etc.) • Metrics: precision/recall, MRR, (N)DCG • Nice to have: A/B testing framework
- 18. LTR and ML • Deep learning approaches are considered SOTA (state of the art), but LTR can still be done e ff ectively using tools like XGBoost at much less expense • Your baseline matters in LTR (BM25, out of the box scoring in your engine) • Investigate click models as a means to better leverage your query logs. • See “Click Models for Web Search” — https://clickmodels.weebly.com/the- book.html
- 20. Query understanding is about queries, not results.
- 21. Query understanding often leads to query rewriting. User Query: all things upon news (all things open) (“all things open”) ((all things) (things open)) (type:conference) (all things upon) … Boost by recency
- 22. Increasing Recall: Query Expansion blow up jacuzzi ((blow up) OR inflatable) AND (jacuzzi OR (hot tub))
- 23. Increasing Recall: Query Relaxation cat eating sushi shirt
- 24. Increasing Precision: Query Segmentation hot dog
- 27. Classify frequent queries manually or heuristically Classify head queries manually. Torso: use dominant clicked category. Tail? Note: tail queries are often highly correlated with head queries! Use both as training data!
- 28. Query Understanding and ML • ML, esp. neural approaches, is fast and e ff ective at classifying queries as well as aiding in query expansion, when done with care • Requirements: • Query logs • Categories for associated clicked docs or some other labels • Super simple training data creation: query->clicked document->category of docs
- 29. Recommendations Photo by Qingbao Meng on Unsplash
- 30. Recommendations • Now • Get your logs, metrics and testing house in order • UI/UX goes a long way (e.g. autocomplete, other best practices) • Query Understanding: classify queries • ML for LTR (or at least a statistical model based on clicks) • Next • Explore hybrid matching approaches using embeddings and dense vector search functionality • Use embeddings for content annotation ( fi ltered) and classi fi cation • Later • Consider moving to an engine that has native support for hybrid or neural only as it adds more functions or your data/ monetization goals warrant • If it’s a new project, I’d start with an engine that supports both
- 31. Neural Search Pros and Cons • Pros • Where the action/$$$ is • Word Sense Disambiguation & Synonyms built-in • Long Queries, Q&A • Multi-modal content (images, audio, text) • Cons • Explainability • Compute costs • Domain portability? • Ranking factors
- 32. Search Architecture Query Classi fi er(s) Spelling & Normaliz ation Query * Categorize query * Set Search Strategy * Label query parts Models … Neural/Q&A Knowledge Graph (caveat emptor!) Classical IR LTR Rules & Aggre gator
- 33. Questions?
- 34. Shameless Plug Search Fundamentals — 2 week class - Starts June ’23 Search with Machine Learning — 4 weeks Both taught by Daniel Tunkelang and Grant Ingersoll Search Engineering — 4 weeks - Starts 4/4 Taught by Grant Ingersoll and Dave Anderson https://corise.com/#search-track?utm_source=daniel Discount code: GRANT10 for 10% o ff our next run
- 36. Resources • Dense Vectors: Capturing Meaning with Code (https://www.pinecone.io/learn/ dense-vector-embeddings-nlp/) • https://sease.io/2021/12/using-bert-to-improve-search-relevance.html