IRGAN: A Minimax Game for Unifying Generative and Discriminative Information Retrieval Models (1705.10513v2)

Abstract: This paper provides a unified account of two schools of thinking in information retrieval modelling: the generative retrieval focusing on predicting relevant documents given a query, and the discriminative retrieval focusing on predicting relevancy given a query-document pair. We propose a game theoretical minimax game to iteratively optimise both models. On one hand, the discriminative model, aiming to mine signals from labelled and unlabelled data, provides guidance to train the generative model towards fitting the underlying relevance distribution over documents given the query. On the other hand, the generative model, acting as an attacker to the current discriminative model, generates difficult examples for the discriminative model in an adversarial way by minimising its discrimination objective. With the competition between these two models, we show that the unified framework takes advantage of both schools of thinking: (i) the generative model learns to fit the relevance distribution over documents via the signals from the discriminative model, and (ii) the discriminative model is able to exploit the unlabelled data selected by the generative model to achieve a better estimation for document ranking. Our experimental results have demonstrated significant performance gains as much as 23.96% on Precision@5 and 15.50% on MAP over strong baselines in a variety of applications including web search, item recommendation, and question answering.

Analysis of an Unspecified Computer Science Research Paper

The content to be analyzed is missing, with only the structural elements of a LaTeX document provided. Given the absence of specific information regarding the methodologies, results, or claims from the original research, a comprehensive and detail-oriented overview cannot be articulated without access to the actual paper content.

However, experts in the field of computer science would typically engage with the paper's contribution by examining several key components, presumed to be included in a typical research document. These components include:

• Abstract and Introduction: This section would normally offer a concise overview of the problem addressed, the hypothesis or research question, and the methods employed.
• Literature Review: Researchers would expect a detailed comparison with existing works, identifying gaps that the current paper aims to fill.
• Methodology: A thorough analysis of the experimental or theoretical framework used in the paper would be critical. This may involve the use of algorithmic paradigms, data sets, or computational environments specific to computer science.
• Results and Discussion: The efficacy of proposed methods or solutions, supported by quantitative data or qualitative evaluations, would be scrutinized. It would be vital to understand any statistical or computational advantages highlighted by the authors.
• Conclusion and Future Work: Reflection on the implications of the findings, both practical and theoretical, along with suggestions for future research directions, would be particularly valuable for readers aiming to extend or replicate the paper.

When provided, researchers in the field would pay attention to any strong numerical outcomes or bold assertions that challenge existing paradigms, considering how these might lead to shifts in current understanding or application.

Given the constraints, further examination remains speculative until the actual paper content is available for review. Moving forward, accessing the full text would be essential for a precise scholarly critique, enabling peers to engage effectively with the researchers' full contributions and findings within the domain.