Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

0.01916282 = product of:
  0.07665128 = sum of:
    0.07665128 = weight(_text_:engines in 2744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07665128 = score(doc=2744,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04479146 = queryNorm
        0.33681408 = fieldWeight in 2744, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2744)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Information retrieval is a long established subfield of library and information science. Since its inception in the early- to mid -1950s, it has grown as a result, in part, of well-regarded retrieval system evaluation exercises/campaigns, the proliferation of Web search engines, and the expansion of digital libraries. Although researchers have examined the intellectual structure and nature of the general field of library and information science, the same cannot be said about the subfield of information retrieval. We address that in this work by sketching the information retrieval intellectual landscape through visualizations of citation behaviors. Citation data for 10 years (2000-2009) were retrieved from the Web of Science and analyzed using existing visualization techniques. Our results address information retrieval's co-authorship network, highly productive authors, highly cited journals and papers, author-assigned keywords, active institutions, and the import of ideas from other disciplines.

0.015969018 = product of:
  0.06387607 = sum of:
    0.06387607 = weight(_text_:engines in 2122) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06387607 = score(doc=2122,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04479146 = queryNorm
        0.2806784 = fieldWeight in 2122, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2122)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Although images are visual information sources with little or no text associated with them, users still tend to use text to describe images and formulate queries. This is because digital libraries and search engines provide mostly text query options and rely on text annotations for representation and retrieval of the semantic content of images. While the main focus of image research is on indexing and retrieval of individual images, the general topic of image browsing and indexing, and retrieval of groups of images has not been adequately investigated. Comparisons of descriptions of individual images as well as labels of groups of images supplied by users using cognitive models are scarce. This work fills this gap. Using the basic level theory as a framework, a comparison of the descriptions of individual images and labels assigned to groups of images by 180 participants in three studies found a marked difference in their level of abstraction. Results confirm assertions by previous researchers in LIS and other fields that groups of images are labeled using more superordinate level terms while individual image descriptions are mainly at the basic level. Implications for design of image browsing interfaces, taxonomies, thesauri, and similar tools are discussed.