Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

SARA: A Collection of Sensitivity-Aware Relevance Assessments

Published 10 Jan 2024 in cs.IR | (2401.05144v1)

Abstract: Large archival collections, such as email or government documents, must be manually reviewed to identify any sensitive information before the collection can be released publicly. Sensitivity classification has received a lot of attention in the literature. However, more recently, there has been increasing interest in developing sensitivity-aware search engines that can provide users with relevant search results, while ensuring that no sensitive documents are returned to the user. Sensitivity-aware search would mitigate the need for a manual sensitivity review prior to collections being made available publicly. To develop such systems, there is a need for test collections that contain relevance assessments for a set of information needs as well as ground-truth labels for a variety of sensitivity categories. The well-known Enron email collection contains a classification ground-truth that can be used to represent sensitive information, e.g., the Purely Personal and Personal but in Professional Context categories can be used to represent sensitive personal information. However, the existing Enron collection does not contain a set of information needs and relevance assessments. In this work, we present a collection of fifty information needs (topics) with crowdsourced query formulations (3 per topic) and relevance assessments (11,471 in total) for the Enron collection (mean number of relevant documents per topic = 11, variance = 34.7). The developed information needs, queries and relevance judgements are available on GitHub and will be available along with the existing Enron collection through the popular ir_datasets library. Our proposed collection results in the first freely available test collection for developing sensitivity-aware search systems.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (28)
  1. 2003. Final report on price manipulation in western markets: Fact-finding investigation of potential manipulation of electric and natural gas prices. FERC (Mar 2003). http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/common/opennat.asp?fileID=9666688
  2. 2019. AI Sector Deal. UK Government (2019). https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/artificial-intelligence-sector-deal/ai-sector-deal
  3. Sabah Al-Fedaghi and Abdul Aziz Rashid Al-Azmi. 2012. Experimentation with personal identifiable information. Intelligent Information Management 4 (2012). Issue 4.
  4. Michael W Berry and Murray Browne. 2010. The 2001 annotated (by topic) Enron email data set. URL http://cis. jhu. edu/parky/Enron/Anno_ Topic_exp_LDC. pdf (2010).
  5. Latent dirichlet allocation. Journal of machine Learning research 3 (2003), 993–1022.
  6. Chris Buckley and Ellen M Voorhees. 2004. Retrieval evaluation with incomplete information. In Proceedings of the 27th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval. 25–32.
  7. Overview of the TREC 2010 Legal Track.. In TREC.
  8. On Using Information Retrieval for the Selection and Sensitivity Review of Digital Public Records.. In PIR@ SIGIR. 39–40.
  9. Marti A Hearst. 2005. Teaching applied natural language processing: Triumphs and tribulations. In Proc. of Workshop on Effective Tools and Methodologies for Teaching NLP and CL.
  10. Faith M Heikkila. 2008. E-discovery: Identifying and mitigating security risks during litigation. IT Professional 10, 4 (2008), 20–25.
  11. Kalervo Järvelin and Jaana Kekäläinen. 2003. Cumulated gain-based evaluation of IR techniques. Transactions on Information Systems 20, 4 (2003), 422–446.
  12. Bryan Klimt and Yiming Yang. 2004. Introducing the Enron corpus.. In Proc. of CEAS.
  13. Craig Macdonald and Nicola Tonellotto. 2020. Declarative Experimentation in Information Retrieval using PyTerrier. In Proc. of ICTIR.
  14. Using part-of-speech n-grams for sensitive-text classification. In Proc. of ICTIR.
  15. Enhancing sensitivity classification with semantic features using word embeddings. In Proc. of ECIR.
  16. Active learning strategies for technology assisted sensitivity review. In Proc. of ECIR.
  17. How the accuracy and confidence of sensitivity classification affects digital sensitivity review. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS) 39, 1 (2020), 1–34.
  18. Towards a classifier for digital sensitivity review. In Proc of ECIR.
  19. The Role of Latent Semantic Categories and Clustering in Enhancing the Efficiency of Human Sensitivity Review. In CHIIR @ SIGIR.
  20. Sensitivity Review of Large Collections by Identifying and Prioritising Coherent Documents Groups. In Proc. of CIKM.
  21. MS MARCO: A human generated machine reading comprehension dataset. choice 2640 (2016), 660.
  22. Avocado research email collection. LDC2015T03 (2015).
  23. Evaluation of information retrieval for E-discovery. Artificial Intelligence and Law 18 (2010), 347–386.
  24. A test collection for relevance and sensitivity. In Proc. of SIGIR.
  25. Mahmoud F Sayed and Douglas W Oard. 2019. Jointly modeling relevance and sensitivity for search among sensitive content. In Proc of SIGIR.
  26. Natural language processing for structuring clinical text data on depression using UK-CRIS. BMJ Ment Health 23, 1 (2020), 21–26.
  27. Ellen M Voorhees. 2002. The philosophy of information retrieval evaluation. In Proc. of CLEF.
  28. Overview of the TREC 2019 Deep Learning Track. (2020).

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.