Ranked lists are encountered in research and daily life, and it is often of interest to compare these lists, even when they are incomplete or have only some members in common. An example is document rankings returned for the same query by different search engines. A measure of the similarity between incomplete rankings should handle non-conjointness, weight high ranks more heavily than low, and be monotonic with increasing depth of evaluation; but no measure satisfying all these criteria currently exists. In this article, we propose a new measure having these qualities, namely rank-biased overlap (RBO). The RBO measure is based on a simple probabilistic user model. It provides monotonicity by calculating, at a given depth of evaluation, a base score that is non-decreasing with additional evaluation, and a maximum score that is non-increasing. An extrapolated score can be calculated between these bounds if a point estimate is required. RBO has a parameter which determines the strength of the weighting to top ranks. We extend RBO to handle tied ranks and rankings of different lengths. Finally, we give examples of the use of the measure in comparing the results produced by public search engines, and in assessing retrieval systems in the laboratory.

Two principal query-evaluation methodologies have been described for clusterbased implementation of distributed information retrieval systems: document partitioning and term partitioning. In a document-partitioned system, each of the processors hosts a subset of the documents in the collection, and executes every query against its local subcollection. In a term-partitioned system, each of the processors hosts a subset of the inverted lists that make up the index of the collection, and serves them to a central machine as they are required for query evaluation.In this paper we introduce a pipelined query-evaluation methodology, based on a termpartitioned index, in which partially evaluated queries are passed amongst the set of processors that host the query terms. This arrangement retains the disk read benefits of term partitioning, but more effectively shares the computational load. We compare the three methodologies experimentally, and show that term distribution is inefficient and scales poorly. The new pipelined approach offers efficient memory utilization and efficient use of disk accesses, but suffers from problems with load balancing between nodes. Until these problems are resolved, document partitioning remains the preferred method.

Large-scale web and text retrieval systems deal with amounts of data that greatly exceed the capacity of any single machine. To handle the necessary data volumes and query throughput rates, parallel systems are used, in which the document and index data are split across tightly-clustered distributed computing systems. The index data can be distributed either by document or by term. In this paper we examine methods for load balancing in term-distributed parallel architectures, and propose a suite of techniques for reducing net querying costs. In combination, the techniques we describe allow a 30% improvement in query throughput when tested on an eight-node parallel computer system.

Relevance judgments are used to compare text retrieval systems. Given a collection of documents and queries, and a set of systems being compared, a standard approach to forming judgments is to manually examine all documents that are highly ranked by any of the systems. However, not all of these relevance judgments provide the same benefit to the final result, particularly if the aim is to identify which systems are best, rather than to fully order them. In this paper we propose new experimental methodologies that can significantly reduce the volume of judgments required in system comparisons. Using rank-biased precision, a recently proposed effectiveness measure, we show that judging around 200 documents for each of 50 queries in a TREC-scale system evaluation containing over 100 runs is sufficient to identify the best systems.