Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × language_ss:"d"
  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalstudien"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Lepsky, K.; Siepmann, J.; Zimmermann, A.: Automatische Indexierung für Online-Kataloge : Ergebnisse eines Retrievaltests (1996) 0.03
    0.025427131 = product of:
      0.050854262 = sum of:
        0.050854262 = product of:
          0.101708524 = sum of:
            0.101708524 = weight(_text_:indexing in 3251) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.101708524 = score(doc=3251,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.19835205 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051817898 = queryNorm
                0.5127677 = fieldWeight in 3251, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3251)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Examines the effectiveness of automated indexing and presents the results of a study of information retrieval from a segment (40.000 items) of the ULB Düsseldorf database. The segment was selected randomly and all the documents included were indexed automatically. The search topics included 50 subject areas ranging from economic growth to alternative energy sources. While there were 876 relevant documents in the database segment for each of the 50 search topics, the recall ranged from 1 to 244 references, with the average being 17.52 documents per topic. Therefore it seems that, in the immediate future, automatic indexing should be used in combination with intellectual indexing
  2. Gödert, W.; Liebig, M.: Maschinelle Indexierung auf dem Prüfstand : Ergebnisse eines Retrievaltests zum MILOS II Projekt (1997) 0.03
    0.025427131 = product of:
      0.050854262 = sum of:
        0.050854262 = product of:
          0.101708524 = sum of:
            0.101708524 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1174) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.101708524 = score(doc=1174,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.19835205 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051817898 = queryNorm
                0.5127677 = fieldWeight in 1174, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1174)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The test ran between Nov 95-Aug 96 in Cologne Fachhochschule fur Bibliothekswesen (College of Librarianship).The test basis was a database of 190,000 book titles published between 1990-95. MILOS II mechanized indexing methods proved helpful in avoiding or reducing numbers of unsatisfied/no result retrieval searches. Retrieval from mechanised indexing is 3 times more successful than from title keyword data. MILOS II also used a standardized semantic vocabulary. Mechanised indexing demands high quality software and output data
  3. Kluck, M.: ¬Eine deutschsprachige Testdatenbank für moderne Erschließungs- und Retrievalsysteme : German Indexing and Retrieval Testdatabase - GIRT (1996) 0.03
    0.025166333 = product of:
      0.050332665 = sum of:
        0.050332665 = product of:
          0.10066533 = sum of:
            0.10066533 = weight(_text_:indexing in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.10066533 = score(doc=5269,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19835205 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051817898 = queryNorm
                0.5075084 = fieldWeight in 5269, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5269)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  4. Fuhr, N.; Niewelt, B.: ¬Ein Retrievaltest mit automatisch indexierten Dokumenten (1984) 0.02
    0.024572134 = product of:
      0.049144268 = sum of:
        0.049144268 = product of:
          0.098288536 = sum of:
            0.098288536 = weight(_text_:22 in 262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.098288536 = score(doc=262,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18145745 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051817898 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 262, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=262)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    20.10.2000 12:22:23
  5. Dresel, R.; Hörnig, D.; Kaluza, H.; Peter, A.; Roßmann, A.; Sieber, W.: Evaluation deutscher Web-Suchwerkzeuge : Ein vergleichender Retrievaltest (2001) 0.01
    0.014041219 = product of:
      0.028082438 = sum of:
        0.028082438 = product of:
          0.056164876 = sum of:
            0.056164876 = weight(_text_:22 in 261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.056164876 = score(doc=261,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18145745 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051817898 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 261, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=261)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Die deutschen Suchmaschinen, Abacho, Acoon, Fireball und Lycos sowie die Web-Kataloge Web.de und Yahoo! werden einem Qualitätstest nach relativem Recall, Precision und Availability unterzogen. Die Methoden der Retrievaltests werden vorgestellt. Im Durchschnitt werden bei einem Cut-Off-Wert von 25 ein Recall von rund 22%, eine Precision von knapp 19% und eine Verfügbarkeit von 24% erreicht
  6. Reichert, S.; Mayr, P.: Untersuchung von Relevanzeigenschaften in einem kontrollierten Eyetracking-Experiment (2012) 0.01
    0.010530914 = product of:
      0.021061828 = sum of:
        0.021061828 = product of:
          0.042123657 = sum of:
            0.042123657 = weight(_text_:22 in 328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.042123657 = score(doc=328,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18145745 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051817898 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 328, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=328)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2012 19:25:54