Search (10 results, page 1 of 1)

0.012897282 = product of:
  0.09028097 = sum of:
    0.045140486 = weight(_text_:classification in 2091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045140486 = score(doc=2091,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4720747 = fieldWeight in 2091, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2091)
    0.045140486 = weight(_text_:classification in 2091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045140486 = score(doc=2091,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4720747 = fieldWeight in 2091, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2091)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Abstract

In this paper, we define and present a comprehensive classification of user intent for Web searching. The classification consists of three hierarchical levels of informational, navigational, and transactional intent. After deriving attributes of each, we then developed a software application that automatically classified queries using a Web search engine log of over a million and a half queries submitted by several hundred thousand users. Our findings show that more than 80% of Web queries are informational in nature, with about 10% each being navigational and transactional. In order to validate the accuracy of our algorithm, we manually coded 400 queries and compared the results from this manual classification to the results determined by the automated method. This comparison showed that the automatic classification has an accuracy of 74%. Of the remaining 25% of the queries, the user intent is vague or multi-faceted, pointing to the need for probabilistic classification. We discuss how search engines can use knowledge of user intent to provide more targeted and relevant results in Web searching.

0.005739506 = product of:
  0.04017654 = sum of:
    0.030006537 = weight(_text_:subject in 297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030006537 = score(doc=297,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.27942157 = fieldWeight in 297, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=297)
    0.010170003 = product of:
      0.020340007 = sum of:
        0.020340007 = weight(_text_:22 in 297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020340007 = score(doc=297,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 297, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=297)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Abstract

In information needs, seeking and use (INSU) research, individuals have most commonly been perceived as users (e.g., Kuhlthau, 1991; Dervin & Nilan, 1986; Dervin, 1989; Belkin, 1980). The concept user originates from the user of libraries and other information services and information systems. Over the years the scope of the concept has become wider and it is nowadays often understood in the sense of seekers of information (e.g., Wilson, 1981; Marchionini, 1995) and users of information (e.g., Streatfield, 1983). Nevertheless, the concept has remained ambiguous by being on the one hand universal and on the other hand extremely specific. The purpose of this paper is to map and evaluate views on people whose information behaviour has been in one way or another the core of our research area. The goal is to shed some light on various relationships between the different aspects of doers in INSU studies. The paper is inspired by Dervin's (1997) analysis of context where she identified among other themes the nature of subject by contrasting a `transcendental individual' with a `decentered subject', and Talja's (1997) presentation about constituting `information' and `user' from the discourse analytic viewpoint as opposed to the cognitive viewpoint. Instead of the metatheoretical approach applied by Dervin and Talja, a more concrete approach is valid in the present analysis where no direct arguments for or against the underlying metatheories are itemised. The focus is on doers in INSU studies leaving other, even closely-related concepts (i.e., information, information seeking, knowledge etc.), outside the scope of the paper.

Date

22. 3.2002 9:55:52

0.003388893 = product of:
  0.0474445 = sum of:
    0.0474445 = weight(_text_:subject in 587) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0474445 = score(doc=587,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4418043 = fieldWeight in 587, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=587)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

Subject content analysis of Web query terms is essential to understand Web searching interests. Such analysis includes exploring search topics and observing changes in their frequency distributions with time. To provide a basis for in-depth analysis of users' search interests on a larger scale, this article presents a query categorization approach to automatically classifying Web query terms into broad subject categories. Because a query is short in length and simple in structure, its intended subject(s) of search is difficult to judge. Our approach, therefore, combines the search processes of real-world search engines to obtain highly ranked Web documents based on each unknown query term. These documents are used to extract cooccurring terms and to create a feature set. An effective ranking function has also been developed to find the most appropriate categories. Three search engine logs in Taiwan were collected and tested. They contained over 5 million queries from different periods of time. The achieved performance is quite encouraging compared with that of human categorization. The experimental results demonstrate that the approach is efficient in dealing with large numbers of queries and adaptable to the dynamic Web environment. Through good integration of human and machine efforts, the frequency distributions of subject categories in response to changes in users' search interests can be systematically observed in real time. The approach has also shown potential for use in various information retrieval applications, and provides a basis for further Web searching studies.

0.0025179111 = product of:
  0.035250753 = sum of:
    0.035250753 = product of:
      0.07050151 = sum of:
        0.07050151 = weight(_text_:texts in 193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07050151 = score(doc=193,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16460659 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4822793 = idf(docFreq=499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.42830306 = fieldWeight in 193, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.4822793 = idf(docFreq=499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=193)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

It is common to distinguish sharply between leisure reading undertaken purely for pleasure and utilitarian reading that satisfies what Peter Mann (1969, 53-61) has called `extrinsic' interests: reference materials for work and home such as medical books, cook books and repair manuals. We might suppose that information-seeking is concerned only with utilitarian reading. However, once we adopt a definition of information as something that fills in a gap in understanding or makes a difference to an individual's cognitive structure or helps people with their lives, it follows that we cannot deduce uses simply by looking at the texts themselves. Since meanings are constructed by readers, we must ask the readers about the uses they make of texts in the context of their lives. Findings from a research project focussed on 194 readers who read for pleasure indicate that for a broad understanding of the information behaviour of ordinary people, we need to think beyond reference books to include extended narrative forms, particularly biography, history, and fiction. People who are avid readers for pleasure report that during the course of wide reading they serendipitously encounter information that helps them in their lives

0.0021547303 = product of:
  0.030166224 = sum of:
    0.030166224 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030166224 = score(doc=5651,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 5651, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5651)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

0.0021217826 = product of:
  0.029704956 = sum of:
    0.029704956 = weight(_text_:subject in 239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029704956 = score(doc=239,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.27661324 = fieldWeight in 239, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=239)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

The study explored how people in two different cultures conduct two types of subject searches. Twenty-four American students and 40 Taiwanese students were given the same task looking for answers on the Internet by navigating through directories and by using keywords in the American-based Yahoo services. The findings pointed to differences between the groups due to their familiarity with the English language. On the other hand, presumed cultural differences did not seem to result in different search behaviors or preferences. These findings were preliminary and suggestions for future research were made.

0.0020340008 = product of:
  0.02847601 = sum of:
    0.02847601 = product of:
      0.05695202 = sum of:
        0.05695202 = weight(_text_:22 in 3924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05695202 = score(doc=3924,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3924, 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=3924)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Source

Library and information science research. 22(2000) no.4, S.371-382

7.264289E-4 = product of:
  0.010170003 = sum of:
    0.010170003 = product of:
      0.020340007 = sum of:
        0.020340007 = weight(_text_:22 in 1177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020340007 = score(doc=1177,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1177, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1177)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Date

26. 1.2014 18:48:22

7.264289E-4 = product of:
  0.010170003 = sum of:
    0.010170003 = product of:
      0.020340007 = sum of:
        0.020340007 = weight(_text_:22 in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020340007 = score(doc=2680,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2680, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2680)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Date

25. 1.2016 18:46:22

5.811431E-4 = product of:
  0.008136002 = sum of:
    0.008136002 = product of:
      0.016272005 = sum of:
        0.016272005 = weight(_text_:22 in 296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016272005 = score(doc=296,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 296, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=296)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Date

22. 3.2002 9:54:13