-
Voorhees, E.M.; Harman, D.: Overview of the Sixth Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-6) (2000)
0.14
0.14273989 = product of:
0.21410984 = sum of:
0.02470734 = weight(_text_:information in 6438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02470734 = score(doc=6438,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 6438, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6438)
0.18940249 = sum of:
0.09108625 = weight(_text_:management in 6438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09108625 = score(doc=6438,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.521365 = fieldWeight in 6438, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6438)
0.09831624 = weight(_text_:22 in 6438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09831624 = score(doc=6438,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18150859 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6438, 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=6438)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Date
- 11. 8.2001 16:22:19
- Source
- Information processing and management. 36(2000) no.1, S.3-36
-
Petrelli, D.: On the role of user-centred evaluation in the advancement of interactive information retrieval (2008)
0.06
0.06065999 = product of:
0.090989985 = sum of:
0.02334624 = weight(_text_:information in 2026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02334624 = score(doc=2026,freq=14.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.256578 = fieldWeight in 2026, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2026)
0.06764375 = sum of:
0.032530803 = weight(_text_:management in 2026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032530803 = score(doc=2026,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 2026, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2026)
0.035112944 = weight(_text_:22 in 2026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035112944 = score(doc=2026,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18150859 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2026, 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=2026)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- This paper discusses the role of user-centred evaluations as an essential method for researching interactive information retrieval. It draws mainly on the work carried out during the Clarity Project where different user-centred evaluations were run during the lifecycle of a cross-language information retrieval system. The iterative testing was not only instrumental to the development of a usable system, but it enhanced our knowledge of the potential, impact, and actual use of cross-language information retrieval technology. Indeed the role of the user evaluation was dual: by testing a specific prototype it was possible to gain a micro-view and assess the effectiveness of each component of the complex system; by cumulating the result of all the evaluations (in total 43 people were involved) it was possible to build a macro-view of how cross-language retrieval would impact on users and their tasks. By showing the richness of results that can be acquired, this paper aims at stimulating researchers into considering user-centred evaluations as a flexible, adaptable and comprehensive technique for investigating non-traditional information access systems.
- Footnote
- Beitrag eines Themenbereichs: Evaluation of Interactive Information Retrieval Systems
- Source
- Information processing and management. 44(2008) no.1, S.22-38
-
Cole, C.: Intelligent information retrieval : Part IV: Testing the timing of two information retrieval devices in a naturalistic setting (2001)
0.05
0.05047857 = product of:
0.07571785 = sum of:
0.03668089 = weight(_text_:information in 365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03668089 = score(doc=365,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.40312737 = fieldWeight in 365, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=365)
0.039036963 = product of:
0.078073926 = sum of:
0.078073926 = weight(_text_:management in 365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.078073926 = score(doc=365,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.44688427 = fieldWeight in 365, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=365)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 37(2001) no.1, S.163-182
-
Hersh, W.R.; Over, P.: Interactivity at the Text Retrieval Conference (TREC) (2001)
0.05
0.046833646 = product of:
0.07025047 = sum of:
0.02470734 = weight(_text_:information in 5486) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02470734 = score(doc=5486,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 5486, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5486)
0.045543127 = product of:
0.09108625 = sum of:
0.09108625 = weight(_text_:management in 5486) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09108625 = score(doc=5486,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.521365 = fieldWeight in 5486, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5486)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 37(2001) no.3, S.365-367
-
Over, P.: ¬The TREC interactive track : an annotated bibliography (2001)
0.05
0.046833646 = product of:
0.07025047 = sum of:
0.02470734 = weight(_text_:information in 5572) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02470734 = score(doc=5572,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 5572, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5572)
0.045543127 = product of:
0.09108625 = sum of:
0.09108625 = weight(_text_:management in 5572) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09108625 = score(doc=5572,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.521365 = fieldWeight in 5572, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5572)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 37(2001) no.3, S.369-381
-
Voorhees, E.M.: Variations in relevance judgements and the measurement of retrieval effectiveness (2000)
0.05
0.046833646 = product of:
0.07025047 = sum of:
0.02470734 = weight(_text_:information in 8710) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02470734 = score(doc=8710,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 8710, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=8710)
0.045543127 = product of:
0.09108625 = sum of:
0.09108625 = weight(_text_:management in 8710) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09108625 = score(doc=8710,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.521365 = fieldWeight in 8710, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=8710)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 36(2000) no.5, S.697-716
-
Rao, A.; Lu, A.; Meier, E.; Ahmed, S.; Pliske, D.: Query processing in TREC6 (2000)
0.05
0.046833646 = product of:
0.07025047 = sum of:
0.02470734 = weight(_text_:information in 6420) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02470734 = score(doc=6420,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 6420, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6420)
0.045543127 = product of:
0.09108625 = sum of:
0.09108625 = weight(_text_:management in 6420) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09108625 = score(doc=6420,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.521365 = fieldWeight in 6420, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6420)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 36(2000) no.1, S.179-186
-
Smeaton, A.F.: TREC-6: personal highlights (2000)
0.05
0.046833646 = product of:
0.07025047 = sum of:
0.02470734 = weight(_text_:information in 6439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02470734 = score(doc=6439,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 6439, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6439)
0.045543127 = product of:
0.09108625 = sum of:
0.09108625 = weight(_text_:management in 6439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09108625 = score(doc=6439,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.521365 = fieldWeight in 6439, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6439)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 36(2000) no.1, S.87-94
-
Robertson, S.E.; Walker, S.; Beaulieu, M.: Experimentation as a way of life : Okapi at TREC (2000)
0.04
0.040143125 = product of:
0.060214683 = sum of:
0.02117772 = weight(_text_:information in 6030) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02117772 = score(doc=6030,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 6030, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6030)
0.039036963 = product of:
0.078073926 = sum of:
0.078073926 = weight(_text_:management in 6030) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.078073926 = score(doc=6030,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.44688427 = fieldWeight in 6030, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6030)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 36(2000) no.1, S.95-108
-
Pedersen, J.O.; Silverstein, C.; Vogt, C.C.: Verity at TREC-6 : out-of-the-box and beyond (2000)
0.04
0.040143125 = product of:
0.060214683 = sum of:
0.02117772 = weight(_text_:information in 6427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02117772 = score(doc=6427,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 6427, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6427)
0.039036963 = product of:
0.078073926 = sum of:
0.078073926 = weight(_text_:management in 6427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.078073926 = score(doc=6427,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.44688427 = fieldWeight in 6427, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6427)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 36(2000) no.1, S.187-196
-
Cormack, G.V.; Clarke, C.L.A.; Palmer, C.R.; To, S.S.L.: Passage-based refinement : MultiText experiments for TREC-6 (2000)
0.04
0.040143125 = product of:
0.060214683 = sum of:
0.02117772 = weight(_text_:information in 6435) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02117772 = score(doc=6435,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 6435, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6435)
0.039036963 = product of:
0.078073926 = sum of:
0.078073926 = weight(_text_:management in 6435) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.078073926 = score(doc=6435,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.44688427 = fieldWeight in 6435, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6435)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 36(2000) no.1, S.133-153
-
Serrano Cobos, J.; Quintero Orta, A.: Design, development and management of an information recovery system for an Internet Website : from documentary theory to practice (2003)
0.03
0.030629165 = product of:
0.04594375 = sum of:
0.018340444 = weight(_text_:information in 2726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018340444 = score(doc=2726,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 2726, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2726)
0.027603304 = product of:
0.055206608 = sum of:
0.055206608 = weight(_text_:management in 2726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055206608 = score(doc=2726,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.31599492 = fieldWeight in 2726, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2726)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- A real case study is shown, explaining in a timeline the whole process of design, development and evaluation of a search engine used as a navigational help tool for end users and clients an a content website, e-commerce driven. The nature of the website is a community website, which will determine the core design of the information service. This study will involve several steps, such as information recovery system analysis, comparative analysis of other commercial search engines, service design, functionalities and scope; software selection, design of the project, project management, future service administration and conclusions.
-
Blandford, A.; Adams, A.; Attfield, S.; Buchanan, G.; Gow, J.; Makri, S.; Rimmer, J.; Warwick, C.: ¬The PRET A Rapporter framework : evaluating digital libraries from the perspective of information work (2008)
0.03
0.028797261 = product of:
0.043195892 = sum of:
0.02367741 = weight(_text_:information in 2021) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02367741 = score(doc=2021,freq=10.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 2021, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2021)
0.019518482 = product of:
0.039036963 = sum of:
0.039036963 = weight(_text_:management in 2021) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039036963 = score(doc=2021,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 2021, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2021)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- The strongest tradition of IR systems evaluation has focused on system effectiveness; more recently, there has been a growing interest in evaluation of Interactive IR systems, balancing system and user-oriented evaluation criteria. In this paper we shift the focus to considering how IR systems, and particularly digital libraries, can be evaluated to assess (and improve) their fit with users' broader work activities. Taking this focus, we answer a different set of evaluation questions that reveal more about the design of interfaces, user-system interactions and how systems may be deployed in the information working context. The planning and conduct of such evaluation studies share some features with the established methods for conducting IR evaluation studies, but come with a shift in emphasis; for example, a greater range of ethical considerations may be pertinent. We present the PRET A Rapporter framework for structuring user-centred evaluation studies and illustrate its application to three evaluation studies of digital library systems.
- Footnote
- Beitrag eines Themenbereichs: Evaluation of Interactive Information Retrieval Systems
- Source
- Information processing and management. 44(2008) no.1, S.4-21
- Theme
- Information Gateway
-
López-Ostenero, F.; Peinado, V.; Gonzalo, J.; Verdejo, F.: Interactive question answering : Is Cross-Language harder than monolingual searching? (2008)
0.03
0.027130803 = product of:
0.040696204 = sum of:
0.02117772 = weight(_text_:information in 2023) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02117772 = score(doc=2023,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 2023, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2023)
0.019518482 = product of:
0.039036963 = sum of:
0.039036963 = weight(_text_:management in 2023) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039036963 = score(doc=2023,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 2023, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2023)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Is Cross-Language answer finding harder than Monolingual answer finding for users? In this paper we provide initial quantitative and qualitative evidence to answer this question. In our study, which involves 16 users searching questions under four different system conditions, we find that interactive cross-language answer finding is not substantially harder (in terms of accuracy) than its monolingual counterpart, using general purpose Machine Translation systems and standard Information Retrieval machinery, although it takes more time. We have also seen that users need more context to provide accurate answers (full documents) than what is usually considered by systems (paragraphs or passages). Finally, we also discuss the limitations of standard evaluation methodologies for interactive Information Retrieval experiments in the case of cross-language question answering.
- Footnote
- Beitrag eines Themenbereichs: Evaluation of Interactive Information Retrieval Systems
- Source
- Information processing and management. 44(2008) no.1, S.66-81
-
Rokaya, M.; Atlam, E.; Fuketa, M.; Dorji, T.C.; Aoe, J.-i.: Ranking of field association terms using Co-word analysis (2008)
0.03
0.027130803 = product of:
0.040696204 = sum of:
0.02117772 = weight(_text_:information in 2060) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02117772 = score(doc=2060,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 2060, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2060)
0.019518482 = product of:
0.039036963 = sum of:
0.039036963 = weight(_text_:management in 2060) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039036963 = score(doc=2060,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 2060, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2060)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Information retrieval involves finding some desired information in a store of information or a database. In this paper, Co-word analysis will be used to achieve a ranking of a selected sample of FA terms. Based on this ranking a better arranging of search results can be achieved. Experimental results achieved using 41 MB of data (7660 documents) in the field of sports. The corpus was collected from CNN newspaper, sports field. This corpus was chosen to be distributed over 11 sub-fields of the field sports from the experimental results, the average precision increased by 18.3% after applying the proposed arranging scheme depending on the absolute frequency to count the terms weights, and the average precision increased by 17.2% after applying the proposed arranging scheme depending on a formula based on "TF*IDF" to count the terms weights.
- Source
- Information processing and management. 44(2008) no.2, S.738-755
-
Blair, D.C.: Some thoughts on the reported results of TREC (2002)
0.03
0.026762083 = product of:
0.040143125 = sum of:
0.01411848 = weight(_text_:information in 2583) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01411848 = score(doc=2583,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 2583, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2583)
0.026024643 = product of:
0.052049287 = sum of:
0.052049287 = weight(_text_:management in 2583) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052049287 = score(doc=2583,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.29792285 = fieldWeight in 2583, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2583)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 38(2002) no.3, S.445-451
-
King, D.W.: Blazing new trails : in celebration of an audacious career (2000)
0.03
0.026113927 = product of:
0.03917089 = sum of:
0.02161442 = weight(_text_:information in 1184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02161442 = score(doc=1184,freq=12.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.23754507 = fieldWeight in 1184, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1184)
0.017556472 = product of:
0.035112944 = sum of:
0.035112944 = weight(_text_:22 in 1184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035112944 = score(doc=1184,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18150859 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1184, 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=1184)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- I had the distinct pleasure of working with Pauline Atherton (Cochrane) during the 1960s, a period that can be considered the heyday of automated information system design and evaluation in the United States. I first met Pauline at the 1962 American Documentation Institute annual meeting in North Hollywood, Florida. My company, Westat Research Analysts, had recently been awarded a contract by the U.S. Patent Office to provide statistical support for the design of experiments with automated information retrieval systems. I was asked to attend the meeting to learn more about information retrieval systems and to begin informing others of U.S. Patent Office activities in this area. At one session, Pauline and I questioned a speaker about the research that he presented. Pauline's questions concerned the logic of their approach and mine, the statistical aspects. After the session, she came over to talk to me and we began a professional and personal friendship that continues to this day. During the 1960s, Pauline was involved in several important information-retrieval projects including a series of studies for the American Institute of Physics, a dissertation examining the relevance of retrieved documents, and development and evaluation of an online information-retrieval system. I had the opportunity to work with Pauline and her colleagues an four of those projects and will briefly describe her work in the 1960s.
- Date
- 22. 9.1997 19:16:05
- Imprint
- Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science
-
Savoy , J.: Cross-language information retrieval : experiments based an CLEF 2000 corpora (2003)
0.03
0.025239285 = product of:
0.037858926 = sum of:
0.018340444 = weight(_text_:information in 1034) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018340444 = score(doc=1034,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 1034, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1034)
0.019518482 = product of:
0.039036963 = sum of:
0.039036963 = weight(_text_:management in 1034) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039036963 = score(doc=1034,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 1034, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1034)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Search engines play an essential role in the usability of Internet-based information systems and without them the Web would be much less accessible, and at the very least would develop at a much slower rate. Given that non-English users now tend to make up the majority in this environment, our main objective is to analyze and evaluate the retrieval effectiveness of various indexing and search strategies based on test-collections written in four different languages: English, French, German, and Italian. Our second objective is to describe and evaluate various approaches that might be implemented in order to effectively access document collections written in another language. As a third objective, we will explore the underlying problems involved in searching document collections written in the four different languages, and we will suggest and evaluate different database merging strategies capable of providing the user with a single unique result list.
- Source
- Information processing and management. 39(2003) no.1, S.75-115
-
Abdou, S.; Savoy, J.: Searching in Medline : query expansion and manual indexing evaluation (2008)
0.03
0.025239285 = product of:
0.037858926 = sum of:
0.018340444 = weight(_text_:information in 2062) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018340444 = score(doc=2062,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 2062, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2062)
0.019518482 = product of:
0.039036963 = sum of:
0.039036963 = weight(_text_:management in 2062) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039036963 = score(doc=2062,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 2062, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2062)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Based on a relatively large subset representing one third of the Medline collection, this paper evaluates ten different IR models, including recent developments in both probabilistic and language models. We show that the best performing IR models is a probabilistic model developed within the Divergence from Randomness framework [Amati, G., & van Rijsbergen, C.J. (2002) Probabilistic models of information retrieval based on measuring the divergence from randomness. ACM-Transactions on Information Systems 20(4), 357-389], which result in 170% enhancements in mean average precision when compared to the classical tf idf vector-space model. This paper also reports on our impact evaluations on the retrieval effectiveness of manually assigned descriptors (MeSH or Medical Subject Headings), showing that by including these terms retrieval performance can improve from 2.4% to 13.5%, depending on the underling IR model. Finally, we design a new general blind-query expansion approach showing improved retrieval performances compared to those obtained using the Rocchio approach.
- Source
- Information processing and management. 44(2008) no.2, S.781-789
-
Baillie, M.; Azzopardi, L.; Ruthven, I.: Evaluating epistemic uncertainty under incomplete assessments (2008)
0.03
0.025239285 = product of:
0.037858926 = sum of:
0.018340444 = weight(_text_:information in 2065) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018340444 = score(doc=2065,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 2065, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2065)
0.019518482 = product of:
0.039036963 = sum of:
0.039036963 = weight(_text_:management in 2065) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039036963 = score(doc=2065,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0518325 = queryNorm
0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 2065, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2065)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- The thesis of this study is to propose an extended methodology for laboratory based Information Retrieval evaluation under incomplete relevance assessments. This new methodology aims to identify potential uncertainty during system comparison that may result from incompleteness. The adoption of this methodology is advantageous, because the detection of epistemic uncertainty - the amount of knowledge (or ignorance) we have about the estimate of a system's performance - during the evaluation process can guide and direct researchers when evaluating new systems over existing and future test collections. Across a series of experiments we demonstrate how this methodology can lead towards a finer grained analysis of systems. In particular, we show through experimentation how the current practice in Information Retrieval evaluation of using a measurement depth larger than the pooling depth increases uncertainty during system comparison.
- Source
- Information processing and management. 44(2008) no.2, S.811-837
