Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
106 lines (75 loc) · 4.37 KB

experiments-robust04-monot5-gpu.md

File metadata and controls

106 lines (75 loc) · 4.37 KB

Neural Pointwise Ranking Baselines on Robust04 - with GPU

This page contains instructions for running monoT5 on the Robust 04 collection using GPUs.

To learn more about monoT5, please read "Document Ranking with a Pretrained Sequence-to-Sequence Model" (Nogueira et al., 2020)

Note: Robust04 uses TREC Disks 4 & 5 corpora, which are only available after filling and signing a release form from NIST. Therefore, only proceed with this documentation if you already have the corpus.

We will focus on using monoT5-base since it is difficult to run such a large model without a TPU.

Prior to running this, we suggest looking at our first-stage BM25 ranking instructions.

We rerank the BM25 run files that contain ~1,000 documents per query using monoT5.

MonoT5 is a pointwise reranker. This means that each document is scored independently using T5.

Note that we do not train monoT5 on Robust04. Hence, the results are zero-shot.

Data Prep

We store all the files in the data/robust04 directory:

export DATA_DIR=data/robust04
mkdir ${DATA_DIR}

We download the query, qrels and corpus files. The run file was generated during the BM25 stage and contains ~1,000 documents per query.

You can change the amount of candidate texts by setting the -hits parameter when performing Anserini's BM25 ranking instructions.

In short, the files are:

  • topics.robust04.txt: 250 queries (also called "topics") from Robust04.
  • qrels.robust04.txt: 311,410 pairs of query and relevant document ids.
  • trec_disks_4_and_5_concat.txt: TREC disks 4 & 5 documents (528,164) concatenated as a single text file.
  • run.bm25.txt: 242,339 pairs of queries and retrieved documents using Anserini's BM25 (1,000 hits).

Let's start:

cd ${DATA_DIR}
wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/castorini/anserini/master/src/main/resources/topics-and-qrels/topics.robust04.txt
wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/castorini/anserini/master/src/main/resources/topics-and-qrels/qrels.robust04.txt
wget https://storage.googleapis.com/castorini/robust04/trec_disks_4_and_5_concat.txt
cd ../../

If not generated yet, you can download the run file (1,000 hits):

wget https://storage.googleapis.com/castorini/robust04/run.robust04.bm25.txt

As a sanity check, we can evaluate the first-stage (BM25) retrieved documents using the trec_eval tool:

tools/eval/trec_eval.9.0.4/trec_eval -m map -m ndcg_cut.20 ${DATA_DIR}/qrels.robust04.txt ${DATA_DIR}/run.robust04.bm25.txt

The output should be:

map                     all     0.2531
ndcg_cut_20             all     0.4240

Rerank with monoT5

We use the script below to prepare the query-doc pairs in the monoT5 input format and then rerank it using a monoT5-base model available in pygaggle:

python ./pygaggle/run/robust04_reranker_pipeline_gpu.py \
      --queries=${DATA_DIR}/topics.robust04.txt \
      --run=${DATA_DIR}/run.robust04.bm25.txt \
      --corpus=${DATA_DIR}/trec_disks_4_and_5_concat.txt \
      --output_monot5=${DATA_DIR}/monot5_results.txt \
      >> ${DATA_DIR}/output.log 2>&1

You might want to run this process in background using screen to make sure it does not get killed.

Using a NVIDIA Tesla T4, it takes approximately 16 hours to rerank with monoT5-base for ~1,000 candidate texts per query. It creates an output file containing monoT5 output:

  • monot5_results.txt

Each line in the output follows trec_eval format:

f'{query_id} Q0 {docid} {rank + 1} {1 / (rank + 1)} T5\n'

Evaluate reranked results

After reranking is done, we can evaluate the reranked results using the trec_eval tool:

tools/eval/trec_eval.9.0.4/trec_eval -m map -m ndcg_cut.20 $DATA_DIR/qrels.robust04.txt $DATA_DIR/monot5_results.txt

For monoT5-base, the output should be:

map                   	all	0.3489
ndcg_cut_20           	all	0.5578

Note: These results are slightly higher than the ones obtained with TPUs, probably because we used a more recent version of spacy ('3.0.6' instead of '2.2.4').

If you were able to replicate these results, please submit a PR adding to the replication log. Please mention in your PR if you note any differences.

Replication Log