IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,292,895
Granted Patent B2
US 12,292,895 · App. 18/529,025 · Granted May 6, 2025

User click modelling in search queries

Inventors: Jianghong Zhou (Atlanta, GA); Sayyed Zahiri (Atlanta, GA); Simon Hughes (Atlanta, GA); Surya Kallumadi (Atlanta, GA); Khalifeh Al Jadda (Atlanta, GA); Eugene Agichtein (Atlanta, GA)
Assignee: Home Depot Product Authority, LLC
G06F16/24578G06F16/248G06F16/93G06N20/00
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,292,895
App. No.
18/529,025
Granted
May 6, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

A method for ranking documents in search results includes defining a first training data set, the first training data set including, for each of a plurality of user queries, information respective of a document selected by a user from results responsive to the query and information respective of one or more documents within an observation window after the selected document in the results, and defining a second training data set, the second training data set including, for each of the plurality of user queries, information respective of the selected document. The method further includes training a first machine learning model with the first training data set, training a second machine learning model with the second training data set, and ranking documents of a further search result set according to the output of the first machine learning model and the output of the second machine learning model.

Claims (75)

1. A method for ranking documents in search results, the method comprising:

retrieving a plurality of search result sets, each search result set being associated with a user query and comprising an ordered plurality of documents;

defining a training data set based on the plurality of search result sets by, for each search result set:

determining an observation window including a pre-defined number of documents ordered after a responsive document from the search result set, the responsive document representative of a document selected by a user from the search result set; and

discarding documents from the search result set that are ordered below the pre-defined number of documents after the responsive document;

training a machine learning model via the training data set;

receiving a further user query;

presenting a list of responsive documents ranked by the trained machine learning model;

receiving indication of a responsive document from the presented list of responsive documents;

processing the list of responsive documents to discard documents from the list of responsive documents that are outside of the observation window from the indicated responsive document; and

adding the processed list of responsive documents to the training data set,

wherein, by not including the discarded documents, the training data set reduces a bias representative of a user selection of the responsive document over the discarded documents at the machine learning model.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein training the machine learning model comprises:

conducting reinforcement learning on the machine learning model to maximize a prediction accuracy of the machine learning model.

3. The method of claim 1 , wherein the observation window includes between one and three documents after the responsive document.

4. The method of claim 1 , wherein:

the plurality of search result sets comprises:

a plurality of previous search result sets; and

one or more current search result sets; and

training the machine learning model with the defined training data set comprises:

batch training the machine learning model according to the previous search result sets; and

conducting reinforcement learning on the machine learning model according to the one or more current search result sets.

5. The method of claim 4 , wherein conducting reinforcement learning comprises maximizing a prediction accuracy of the machine learning model.

6. The method of claim 1 , wherein presenting the list of responsive documents comprises displaying the ranked further search result set on a user device.

7. A system comprising:

a non-transitory, computer-readable medium storing instructions; and

a processor configured to execute the instructions to:

retrieve a plurality of search result sets, each search result set being associated with a user query and comprising an ordered plurality of documents;

define a training data set based on the plurality of search result sets by, for each search result set:

determine an observation window including a pre-defined number of documents ordered after a responsive document from the search result set, the responsive document representative of a document selected by a user from the search result set; and

discard documents from the search result set that are ordered below the pre-defined number of documents after the responsive document;

train a machine learning model via the training data set;

receive a further user query;

present a list of responsive documents ranked by the trained machine learning model;

receiving indication of a responsive document from the presented list of responsive documents;

processing the list of responsive documents to discard documents from the list of responsive documents that are outside of the observation window from the indicated responsive document; and

adding the processed list of responsive documents to the training data set,

wherein, by not including the discarded documents, the training data set reduces a bias representative of a user selection of the responsive document over the discarded documents at the machine learning model.

8. The system of claim 7 , wherein training the machine learning model comprises:

conducting reinforcement learning on the machine learning model to maximize a prediction accuracy of the machine learning model.

9. The system of claim 7 , wherein the observation window includes between one and three documents after the responsive document.

10. The system of claim 7 , wherein:

the plurality of search result sets comprises:

a plurality of previous search result sets; and

one or more current search result sets; and

training the machine learning model with the defined training data set comprises:

batch training the machine learning model according to the previous search result sets; and

conducting reinforcement learning on the machine learning model according to the one or more current search result sets.

11. The system of claim 10 , wherein conducting reinforcement learning comprises maximizing a prediction accuracy of the machine learning model.

12. The system of claim 7 , wherein presenting the list of responsive documents comprises displaying the ranked further search result set on a user device.

13. A method for presenting search results, the method comprising:

retrieving a plurality of search result sets, each search result set being associated with a user query and comprising an ordered plurality of documents;

defining a first training data set based on the plurality of search result sets by, for each search result set:

determining an observation window including a pre-defined number of documents ordered after a responsive document from the search result set, the responsive document representative of a document selected by a user from the search result set; and

discarding documents from the search result set that are ordered below the pre-defined number of documents after the responsive document;

training a first machine learning model via the first training data set;

defining a second training data set based on the responsive document from each of the plurality of search result sets;

training a second machine learning model via the second training data set;

receiving a further user query;

presenting a list of responsive documents ranked according to the first and second trained machine learning models;

receiving indication of a responsive document from the presented list of responsive documents;

processing the list of responsive documents to discard documents from the list of responsive documents that are outside of the observation window from the indicated responsive document; and

adding the processed list of responsive documents to the training data set,

wherein, by not including the discarded documents, the first training data set reduces a bias representative of a user selection of the responsive document over the discarded documents at the first machine learning model.

14. The method of claim 13 , wherein training the first machine learning model and training the second machine learning model comprises:

conducting reinforcement learning on the first machine learning model and the second machine learning model to maximize a reward, the reward comprising a combination of a prediction accuracy of the first machine learning model and a prediction accuracy of the second machine learning model.

15. The method of claim 13 , wherein the observation window includes between one and three documents after the responsive document.

16. The method of claim 13 , wherein:

the plurality of search result sets comprises:

a plurality of previous search result sets; and

one or more current search result sets; and

training the first machine learning model with the first training data set comprises:

batch training the machine learning model according to the previous search result sets; and

conducting reinforcement learning on the machine learning model according to the one or more current search result sets.

17. The method of claim 16 , wherein conducting reinforcement learning comprises maximizing a reward, the reward comprising a combination of a prediction accuracy of the first machine learning model and a prediction accuracy of the second machine learning model.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Dec 5, 2023
From: ZHOU, JIANGHONG; ZAHIRI, SAYYED; HUGHES, SIMON; KALLUMADI, SURYA; AL JADDA, KHALIFEH; AGICHTEIN, EUGENE
To: HOME DEPOT PRODUCT AUTHORITY, LLC
Reel/Frame 065763/0328 →
Continuity (4)
Continuation 17514522 · Oct 29, 2021
Provisional Application 63155890 · Mar 3, 2021
Provisional Application 63108031 · Oct 30, 2020
Related Publication 20240119059A1 · Apr 11, 2024
References Cited (36)
US 10354205B1 · Pham · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 11853309B2 · Zhou · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20110289025A1 · Yan · 2011 [cited by examiner]
US 20110302169A1 · Brdiczka · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20150039589A1 · Collins · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20150347519A1 · Hornkvist · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20160335263A1 · Yin · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20180150466A1 · Paquet · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20190130285A1 · Snyder · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190188295A1 · Sirotkovic · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190294692A1 · Zhao · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20200210537A1 · Wang · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200372406A1 · Wick · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200401644A1 · Hewlett · 2020 [cited by applicant]
Agarwal et al., “Estimating position bias without intrusive interventions.” Proceedings of the Twelfth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining. 2019, 9 pp. [cited by applicant]
Borisov et al., A neural click model for web search. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on World Wide Web Apr. 11, 2016 (pp. 531-541). [cited by applicant]
Carreira-Perpiñán, Mode-Finding for Mixtures of Gaussian Distributions, IEEE transaction on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 22, No. 11, Nov. 2000, 1318-1323. [cited by applicant]
Chapelle et al., 2009. Expected reciprocal rank for graded relevance. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on Information and knowledge management. 621-630. [cited by applicant]
Chapelle et al., A dynamic bayesian network click model for web search ranking. In Proceedings of the 18th international conference on World wide web Apr. 20, 2009 (pp. 1-10). [cited by applicant]
Chuklin et al., 2013. Evaluating aggregated search using interleaving. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM international conference on Information & Knowledge Management. 669-678. [cited by applicant]
Chuklin et al., Click models for web search. Synthesis lectures on information concepts, retrieval, and services. Jul. 24, 2015;7(3):1-15., 35 pp. [cited by applicant]
Craswell, Nick, et al. “ORCAS: 20 million clicked query-document pairs for analyzing search.” Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management. 2020., 8 pp. [cited by applicant]
Dupret et al., A user browsing model to predict search engine click data from past observations. In Proceedings of the 31st annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval … [cited by applicant]
Guo et al., Click chain model in web search. In Proceedings of the 18th international conference on World wide web Apr. 20, 2009 (pp. 11-20). [cited by applicant]
Guo et al., Efficient multiple-click models in web search. In Proceedings of the second ACM international conference on web search and data mining Feb. 9, 2009 (pp. 124-131). [cited by applicant]
Huang et al., “Bidirectional LSTM-CRF models for sequence tagging.” arXiv preprint arXiv: 1508.01991 (2015), 10 pp. [cited by applicant]
International Search Report and Written Opinion issued from international application No. PCT/US21/57518, dated Jan. 28, 2022, 6 pp. [cited by applicant]
Joachims et al., “Unbiased learning-to-rank with biased feedback.” Proceedings of the tenth ACM international conference on web search and data mining. 2017. [cited by applicant]
Koller et al., Probabilistic graphical models: principles and techniques. MIT press; 2009., 16 pp., (Only introduction provided). [cited by applicant]
Krizhevsky et al., 2012. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. In Advances in neural information processing systems. 1097-1105. [cited by applicant]
Qin et al., 2010. LETOR: A benchmark collection for research on learning to rank for information retrieval. Information Retrieval 13, 4 (2010), 346-374. [cited by applicant]
Serdyukov et al., WSCD2013: workshop on web search click data 2013. In Proceedings of the sixth ACM international conference on Web search and data mining Feb. 4, 2013 (pp. 787-788). [cited by applicant]
Sutton et al., Reinforcement learning: An introduction. MIT press; Oct. 19, 2018, 352 pp. [cited by applicant]
Yang et al., Recurrent neural network-based language models with variation in net topology, language, and granularity. In 2016 International Conference on Asian Language Processing (IALP) Nov. 21, 2016 (pp. 71-74). IEEE. [cited by applicant]
Zhou et al., Diversifying Multi-aspect Search Results Using Simpson's Diversity Index. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Information Knowledge Management Oct. 19, 2020 (pp. 2345-2348). [cited by applicant]
Zhou et al., RLIRank: Learning to Rank with Reinforcement Learning for Dynamic Search. In Proceedings of the Web Conference Apr. 20, 2020 (pp. 2842-2848). [cited by applicant]