Adam Roegiest
University of Waterloo
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Adam Roegiest.
international acm sigir conference on research and development in information retrieval | 2016
Luchen Tan; Adam Roegiest; Charles L. A. Clarke; Jimmy J. Lin
Push notifications from social media provide a method to keep up-to-date on topics of personal interest. To be effective, notifications must achieve a balance between pushing too much and pushing too little. Push too little and the user misses important updates; push too much and the user is overwhelmed by unwanted information. Using data from the TREC 2015 Microblog track, we explore simple dynamic emission strategies for microblog push notifications. The key to effective notifications lies in establishing and maintaining appropriate thresholds for pushing updates. We explore and evaluate multiple threshold setting strategies, including purely static thresholds, dynamic thresholds without user feedback, and dynamic thresholds with daily feedback. Our best technique takes advantage of daily feedback in a simple yet effective manner, achieving the best known result reported in the literature to date.
international acm sigir conference on research and development in information retrieval | 2014
Gaurav Baruah; Adam Roegiest; Mark D. Smucker
We examine the effects of expanding a judged set of sentences with their duplicates from a corpus. Including new sentences that are exact duplicates of the previously judged sentences may allow for better estimation of performance metrics and enhance the reusability of a test collection. We perform experiments in context of the Temporal Summarization Track at TREC 2013. We find that adding duplicate sentences to the judged set does not significantly affect relative system performance. However, we do find statistically significant changes in the performance of nearly half the systems that participated in the Track. We recommend adding exact duplicate sentences to the set of relevance judgements in order to obtain a more accurate estimate of system performance.
international acm sigir conference on research and development in information retrieval | 2017
Adam Roegiest; Luchen Tan; Jimmy J. Lin
Real-time push notification systems monitor continuous document streams such as social media posts and alert users to relevant content directly on their mobile devices. We describe a user study of such systems in the context of the TREC 2016 Real-Time Summarization Track, where system updates are immediately delivered as push notifications to the mobile devices of a cohort of users. Our study represents, to our knowledge, the first deployment of an interleaved evaluation framework for prospective information needs, and also provides an opportunity to examine user behavior in a realistic setting. Results of our online in-situ evaluation are correlated against the results a more traditional post-hoc batch evaluation. We observe substantial correlations between many online and batch evaluation metrics, especially for those that share the same basic design (e.g., are utility-based). For some metrics, we observe little correlation, but are able to identify the volume of messages that a system pushes as one major source of differences.
international acm sigir conference on research and development in information retrieval | 2015
Adam Roegiest; Gordon V. Cormack; Charles L. A. Clarke; Maura R. Grossman
We are concerned with the effect of using a surrogate assessor to train a passive (i.e., batch) supervised-learning method to rank documents for subsequent review, where the effectiveness of the ranking will be evaluated using a different assessor deemed to be authoritative. Previous studies suggest that surrogate assessments may be a reasonable proxy for authoritative assessments for this task. Nonetheless, concern persists in some application domains---such as electronic discovery---that errors in surrogate training assessments will be amplified by the learning method, materially degrading performance. We demonstrate, through a re-analysis of data used in previous studies, that, with passive supervised-learning methods, using surrogate assessments for training can substantially impair classifier performance, relative to using the same deemed-authoritative assessor for both training and assessment. In particular, using a single surrogate to replace the authoritative assessor for training often yields a ranking that must be traversed much lower to achieve the same level of recall as the ranking that would have resulted had the authoritative assessor been used for training. We also show that steps can be taken to mitigate, and sometimes overcome, the impact of surrogate assessments for training: relevance assessments may be diversified through the use of multiple surrogates; and, a more liberal view of relevance can be adopted by having the surrogate label borderline documents as relevant. By taking these steps, rankings derived from surrogate assessments can match, and sometimes exceed, the performance of the ranking that would have been achieved, had the authority been used for training. Finally, we show that our results still hold when the role of surrogate and authority are interchanged, indicating that the results may simply reflect differing conceptions of relevance between surrogate and authority, as opposed to the authority having special skill or knowledge lacked by the surrogate.
international acm sigir conference on research and development in information retrieval | 2016
Adam Roegiest; Gordon V. Cormack
In a laboratory study, human assessors were significantly more likely to judge the same documents as relevant when they were presented for assessment within the context of documents selected using random or uncertainty sampling, as compared to relevance sampling. The effect is substantial and significant [0.54 vs. 0.42, p<0.0002] across a population of documents including both relevant and non-relevant documents, for several definitions of ground truth. This result is in accord with Smucker and Jethanis SIGIR 2010 finding that documents were more likely to be judged relevant when assessed within low-precision versus high-precision ranked lists. Our study supports the notion that relevance is malleable, and that one should take care in assuming any labeling to be ground truth, whether for training, tuning, or evaluating text classifiers.
international acm sigir conference on research and development in information retrieval | 2018
Adam Roegiest; Alexander K. Hudek; Anne McNulty
We present and formalize the due diligence problem, where lawyers extract data from legal documents to assess risk in a potential merger or acquisition, as an information retrieval task. Furthermore, we describe the creation and annotation of a document collection for the due diligence problem that will foster research in this area. This dataset comprises 50 topics over 4,412 documents and ~15 million sentences and is a subset of our own internal training data. Using this dataset, we present what we have found to be the state of the art for information extraction in the due diligence problem. In particular, we find that when treating documents as sequences of labelled and unlabelled sentences, Conditional Random Fields significantly and substantially outperform other techniques for sequence-based (Hidden Markov Models) and non-sequence based machine learning (logistic regression). Included in this is an analysis of what we perceive to be the major failure cases when extraction is performed based upon sentence labels.
international conference on the theory of information retrieval | 2015
Gaurav Baruah; Adam Roegiest; Mark D. Smucker
Traditional TREC-style pooling methodology relies on using predicted relevance by systems to select documents for judgment. This coincides with typical search behaviour (e.g., web search). In the case of temporally ordered streams of documents, the order that users encounter documents is in this temporal order and not some predetermined rank order. We investigate a user oriented pooling methodology focusing on the documents that simulated users would likely read in such temporally ordered streams. Under this user model, many of the relevant documents found in the TREC 2013 Temporal Summarization Tracks pooling effort would never be read. Not only does our pooling strategy focus on pooling documents that will be read by (simulated) users, the resultant pools are different from the standard TREC pools.
text retrieval conference | 2015
Luchen Tan; Adam Roegiest; Charles L. A. Clarke
international acm sigir conference on research and development in information retrieval | 2016
Luchen Tan; Adam Roegiest; Jimmy J. Lin; Charles L. A. Clarke
international acm sigir conference on research and development in information retrieval | 2017
Maura R. Grossman; Gordon V. Cormack; Adam Roegiest