{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.009857612267250822, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.391608391608392, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Reliable information retrieval evaluation with incomplete and biased judgements

Information retrieval evaluation based on the pooling method is inherently biased against systems that did not contribute to the pool of judged documents. This may distort the results obtained about the relative quality of the systems evaluated and thus lead to incorrect conclusions about the performance of a particular ranking technique.
 We examine the magnitude of this effect and explore how it can be countered by automatically building an unbiased set of judgements from the original, biased judgements obtained through pooling. We compare the performance of this method with other approaches to the problem of incomplete judgements, such as bpref, and show that the proposed method leads to higher evaluation accuracy, especially if the set of manual judgements is rich in documents, but highly biased against some systems.