The purpose of the Strategic Workshop on Information Retrieval in Lorne (SWIRL)¹ is to explore the long-range issues of the information retrieval (IR) field, to recognise challenges that are on – or even over – the horizon, to build consensus on key challenges, and to disseminate the resulting information to the research community. The intent is that this description of open problems will help to inspire researchers and graduate students to address the questions and will provide funding agencies with data to focus and coordinate support for IR research.

Evaluating the interactions between users and systems presents many challenges. Simulation offers a reliable, re-usable, and repeatable methodology to explore how different users, user behaviours and/or retrieval systems impact performance. With Large Language Models and Generative AI now widely available and accessible, new affordances are possible. These allow researchers to create more ''realistic'' simulated users that can generate queries and judge items like humans, and to develop new retrieval systems where responses and interactions are conversational and based on retrieval augmented generation. This resource paper presents a community-led initiative to update the Simulation of Interactive Information Retrieval (SimIIR) Framework to enable the simulation of conversational search using LLMs. The largest update provides a conversational search workflow which involves a number of new possible interactions with a search system or agent - enabling a host of new development and evaluation opportunities. Other developments include the Markovian Users, Cognitive States, LLM-based components for assessing snippets/documents/responses, generating queries, deciding on when to stop/continue, and PyTerrier integration. This paper aims to mark the release of SimIIR 3.0 and invites the community to build, extend, and use the resource.

Advertisements, sponsored links, clickbait, in-house recommendations and similar elements pervasively shroud featured content. Such elements vie for people's attention, potentially distracting people from their task at hand. The effects of such "distractors"is likely to increase people's cognitive workload and reduce their performance as they need to work harder to discern the relevant from non-relevant. In this paper, we investigate how people of varying cognitive abilities (measured using Perceptual Speed and Cognitive Failure instruments) are affected by these different types of distractions when completing search tasks. We performed a crowdsourced within-subjects user study, where 102 participants completed four search tasks using our news search engine over four different interface conditions: (i) one with no additional distractors; (ii) one with advertisements; (iii) one with sponsored links; and (iv) one with in-house recommendations. Our results highlight a number of important trends and findings. Participants perceived the interface condition without distractors as significantly better across numerous dimensions. Participants reported higher satisfaction, lower workload, higher topic recall, and found it easier to concentrate. Behaviourally, participants issued queries faster and clicked results earlier when compared to the interfaces with distractors. When using the interfaces with distractors, one in ten participants clicked on a distractor - and despite engaging with a distractor for less than twenty seconds, their task time increased by approximately two minutes. We found that the effects were magnified depending on cognitive abilities - with a greater impact of distractors on participants with lower perceptual speed, and for those with a higher propensity of cognitive failures. Distractors - regardless of their type - have negative consequences on a user's search experience and performance. As a consequence, interfaces containing visually distracting elements are creating poorer search experiences due to the "distractor tax"being placed on people's limited attention.