Learning to Rank with Variable Result Presentation Lengths
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Learning to Rank (LTR) methods generally assume that each document in a top-K ranking is presented in an equal format. However, previous work has shown that users' perceptions of relevance can be changed by varying presentations, i.e., allocating more vertical space to some documents to provide additional textual or image information. Furthermore, presentation length can also redirect attention, as users are more likely to notice longer presentations when scrolling through results. Deciding on the document presentation lengths in a fixed vertical space ranking is an important problem that has not been addressed by existing LTR methods. We address this gap by introducing the variable presentation length ranking task, where simultaneously the ordering of documents and their presentation length is decided. Despite being a generalization of standard ranking, we show that this setting brings significant new challenges: Firstly, the probability ranking principle no longer applies to this setting, and secondly, the problem cannot be divided into separate ordering and length selection tasks. We therefore propose VLPL - a new family of Plackett-Luce list-wise gradient estimation methods for the joint optimization of document ordering and lengths. Our semi-synthetic experiments show that VLPL can effectively balance the expected exposure and attractiveness of all documents, achieving the best performance across different ranking settings. Furthermore, we observe that even simple length-aware methods can achieve significant performance improvements over fixed-length models. Altogether, our theoretical and empirical results highlight the importance and difficulties of combining document presentation with LTR.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Jun 2025.
Builds on
13 of 42 references.
References · 13
- 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 37,240
- 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,305
- 2020Fairness in Machine Learning: A Surveycited by 370
- 2016Recommendations as Treatments: Debiasing Learning and Evaluationcited by 248
- 2013Introducing LETOR 4.0 Datasetscited by 121
- 2021Computationally Efficient Optimization of Plackett-Luce Ranking Models for Relevance and Fairnesscited by 36
- 2018Intervention Harvesting for Context-Dependent Examination-Bias Estimationcited by 14
- 2020StochasticRank: Global Optimization of Scale-Free Discrete Functionscited by 13
- 2022Learning-to-Rank at the Speed of Sampling: Plackett-Luce Gradient Estimation With Minimal Computational Complexitycited by 13
- 2023On (Normalised) Discounted Cumulative Gain as an Off-Policy Evaluation Metric for Top-n Recommendationcited by 13
- 2022Whole Page Unbiased Learning to Rankcited by 2
- 2024Ranking Heterogeneous Search Result Pages using the Interactive Probability Ranking Principlecited by 1
1 more
Built on by
Not cited yet.