Search (28 results, page 2 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalalgorithmen"
  • × theme_ss:"Suchmaschinen"
  1. Thelwall, M.; Vaughan, L.: New versions of PageRank employing alternative Web document models (2004) 0.00
    0.0034387745 = product of:
      0.0103163235 = sum of:
        0.0103163235 = product of:
          0.03094897 = sum of:
            0.03094897 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03094897 = score(doc=674,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 674, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=674)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Introduces several new versions of PageRank (the link based Web page ranking algorithm), based on an information science perspective on the concept of the Web document. Although the Web page is the typical indivisible unit of information in search engine results and most Web information retrieval algorithms, other research has suggested that aggregating pages based on directories and domains gives promising alternatives, particularly when Web links are the object of study. The new algorithms introduced based on these alternatives were used to rank four sets of Web pages. The ranking results were compared with human subjects' rankings. The results of the tests were somewhat inconclusive: the new approach worked well for the set that includes pages from different Web sites; however, it does not work well in ranking pages that are from the same site. It seems that the new algorithms may be effective for some tasks but not for others, especially when only low numbers of links are involved or the pages to be ranked are from the same site or directory.
  2. Ding, Y.; Yan, E.; Frazho, A.; Caverlee, J.: PageRank for ranking authors in co-citation networks (2009) 0.00
    0.0034387745 = product of:
      0.0103163235 = sum of:
        0.0103163235 = product of:
          0.03094897 = sum of:
            0.03094897 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3161) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03094897 = score(doc=3161,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 3161, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3161)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This paper studies how varied damping factors in the PageRank algorithm influence the ranking of authors and proposes weighted PageRank algorithms. We selected the 108 most highly cited authors in the information retrieval (IR) area from the 1970s to 2008 to form the author co-citation network. We calculated the ranks of these 108 authors based on PageRank with the damping factor ranging from 0.05 to 0.95. In order to test the relationship between different measures, we compared PageRank and weighted PageRank results with the citation ranking, h-index, and centrality measures. We found that in our author co-citation network, citation rank is highly correlated with PageRank with different damping factors and also with different weighted PageRank algorithms; citation rank and PageRank are not significantly correlated with centrality measures; and h-index rank does not significantly correlate with centrality measures but does significantly correlate with other measures. The key factors that have impact on the PageRank of authors in the author co-citation network are being co-cited with important authors.
  3. Meghabghab, G.: Google's Web page ranking applied to different topological Web graph structures (2001) 0.00
    0.0028656456 = product of:
      0.008596936 = sum of:
        0.008596936 = product of:
          0.025790809 = sum of:
            0.025790809 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6028) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.025790809 = score(doc=6028,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 6028, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6028)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This research is part of the ongoing study to better understand web page ranking on the web. It looks at a web page as a graph structure or a web graph, and tries to classify different web graphs in the new coordinate space: (out-degree, in-degree). The out-degree coordinate od is defined as the number of outgoing web pages from a given web page. The in-degree id coordinate is the number of web pages that point to a given web page. In this new coordinate space a metric is built to classify how close or far different web graphs are. Google's web ranking algorithm (Brin & Page, 1998) on ranking web pages is applied in this new coordinate space. The results of the algorithm has been modified to fit different topological web graph structures. Also the algorithm was not successful in the case of general web graphs and new ranking web algorithms have to be considered. This study does not look at enhancing web ranking by adding any contextual information. It only considers web links as a source to web page ranking. The author believes that understanding the underlying web page as a graph will help design better ranking web algorithms, enhance retrieval and web performance, and recommends using graphs as a part of visual aid for browsing engine designers
  4. White, R.W.; Jose, J.M.; Ruthven, I.: Using top-ranking sentences to facilitate effective information access (2005) 0.00
    0.0028656456 = product of:
      0.008596936 = sum of:
        0.008596936 = product of:
          0.025790809 = sum of:
            0.025790809 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.025790809 = score(doc=3881,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 3881, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3881)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Web searchers typically fall to view search results beyond the first page nor fully examine those results presented to them. In this article we describe an approach that encourages a deeper examination of the contents of the document set retrieved in response to a searcher's query. The approach shifts the focus of perusal and interaction away from potentially uninformative document surrogates (such as titles, sentence fragments, and URLs) to actual document content, and uses this content to drive the information seeking process. Current search interfaces assume searchers examine results document-by-document. In contrast our approach extracts, ranks, and presents the contents of the top-ranked document set. We use query-relevant topranking sentences extracted from the top documents at retrieval time as fine-grained representations of topranked document content and, when combined in a ranked list, an overview of these documents. The interaction of the searcher provides implicit evidence that is used to reorder the sentences where appropriate. We evaluate our approach in three separate user studies, each applying these sentences in a different way. The findings of these studies show that top-ranking sentences can facilitate effective information access.
  5. Chen, Z.; Meng, X.; Fowler, R.H.; Zhu, B.: Real-time adaptive feature and document learning for Web search (2001) 0.00
    0.0028656456 = product of:
      0.008596936 = sum of:
        0.008596936 = product of:
          0.025790809 = sum of:
            0.025790809 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5209) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.025790809 = score(doc=5209,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 5209, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5209)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Chen et alia report on the design of FEATURES, a web search engine with adaptive features based on minimal relevance feedback. Rather than developing user profiles from previous searcher activity either at the server or client location, or updating indexes after search completion, FEATURES allows for index and user characterization files to be updated during query modification on retrieval from a general purpose search engine. Indexing terms relevant to a query are defined as the union of all terms assigned to documents retrieved by the initial search run and are used to build a vector space model on this retrieved set. The top ten weighted terms are presented to the user for a relevant non-relevant choice which is used to modify the term weights. Documents are chosen if their summed term weights are greater than some threshold. A user evaluation of the top ten ranked documents as non-relevant will decrease these term weights and a positive judgement will increase them. A new ordering of the retrieved set will generate new display lists of terms and documents. Precision is improved in a test on Alta Vista searches.
  6. Agosti, M.; Pretto, L.: ¬A theoretical study of a generalized version of kleinberg's HITS algorithm (2005) 0.00
    0.0028656456 = product of:
      0.008596936 = sum of:
        0.008596936 = product of:
          0.025790809 = sum of:
            0.025790809 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.025790809 = score(doc=4,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 4, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Advances in mathematical/formal methods in information retrieval. 8(2005) no.2 , S.219-243
  7. Bhansali, D.; Desai, H.; Deulkar, K.: ¬A study of different ranking approaches for semantic search (2015) 0.00
    0.0028656456 = product of:
      0.008596936 = sum of:
        0.008596936 = product of:
          0.025790809 = sum of:
            0.025790809 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.025790809 = score(doc=2696,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 2696, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2696)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  8. Bilal, D.: Ranking, relevance judgment, and precision of information retrieval on children's queries : evaluation of Google, Yahoo!, Bing, Yahoo! Kids, and ask Kids (2012) 0.00
    0.0022925164 = product of:
      0.006877549 = sum of:
        0.006877549 = product of:
          0.020632647 = sum of:
            0.020632647 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020632647 = score(doc=393,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.13368362 = fieldWeight in 393, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=393)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    

Languages

  • e 19
  • d 9

Types

  • a 23
  • m 3
  • el 1
  • r 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…