Improving the accuracy of the information retrieval evaluation process by considering unjudged document lists from the relevant judgment sets

Abstract

Introduction. To improve user satisfaction and loyalty to the search engines, the performance of the retrieval systems has to be better in terms of the number of relevant documents retrieved. This can be evaluated through the information retrieval evaluation process. This study identifies two methodologies that help to recover and better rank relevant information resources based on a query, while at the same time suppressing the irrelevant one. Method. A combination of techniques was used. Documents that were relevant and not retrieved by the systems were found from the document corpus and assigned new scores based on the Manifold fusion techniques then moved into the relevant judgment sets. Documents based on judgment sets and good contributing systems have been considered in the proposed methodologies. Analysis. Kendall Tau Correlation Coefficient, Mean Average Precision (MAP), Normalized Discounted Cumulative Gain (NDCG), and Rank Biased Precision (Rbp) have been used to evaluate the performance of the methodologies. Results. The proposed methodologies outperformed the baseline works and enhanced the quality of the judgment sets, achieving a better result even with lesser pool depth. Conclusion. This research proposes two methodologies that increase the quality of the relevant documents in the judgment sets based on document similarity techniques and, thus, raise the evaluation process accuracy and reliability of the systems.