Search (135 results, page 2 of 7)

  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalalgorithmen"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Fuhr, N.: Rankingexperimente mit gewichteter Indexierung (1986) 0.00 
    0.0030007032 = product of:
  0.034508087 = sum of:
    0.015349354 = weight(_text_:und in 2051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015349354 = score(doc=2051,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.29385152 = fieldWeight in 2051, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2051)
    0.019158732 = product of:
      0.038317464 = sum of:
        0.038317464 = weight(_text_:22 in 2051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038317464 = score(doc=2051,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2051, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2051)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
    Date
    14. 6.2015 22:12:56
    Source
    Automatische Indexierung zwischen Forschung und Anwendung, Hrsg.: G. Lustig
  2. Weller, K.; Stock, W.G.: Transitive meronymy : automatic concept-based query expansion using weighted transitive part-whole relations (2008) 0.00 
    0.0028922216 = product of:
  0.033260547 = sum of:
    0.012662571 = weight(_text_:und in 1835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012662571 = score(doc=1835,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24241515 = fieldWeight in 1835, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1835)
    0.020597974 = weight(_text_:im in 1835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020597974 = score(doc=1835,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.066621356 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.30917975 = fieldWeight in 1835, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1835)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
    Abstract
    Transitive Meronymie. Automatische begriffsbasierte Suchanfrageerweiterung unter Nutzung gewichteter transitiver Teil-Ganzes-Relationen. Unsere theoretisch orientierte Arbeit isoliert transitive Teil-Ganzes-Beziehungen. Wir diskutieren den Einsatz der Meronymie bei der automatischen begriffsbasierten Suchanfrageerweiterung im Information Retrieval. Aus praktischen Gründen schlagen wir vor, die Bestandsrelationen zu spezifizieren und die einzelnen Arten mit unterschiedlichen Gewichtungswerten zu versehen, die im Retrieval genutzt werden. Für das Design von Wissensordnungen ist bedeutsam, dass innerhalb der Begriffsleiter einer Abstraktionsrelation ein Begriff alle seine Teile (sowie alle transitiven Teile der Teile) an seine Unterbegriffe vererbt.
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 59(2008) H.3, S.165-170
  3. Fuhr, N.: Ranking-Experimente mit gewichteter Indexierung (1986) 0.00 
    0.002485787 = product of:
  0.028586552 = sum of:
    0.0094278185 = product of:
      0.018855637 = sum of:
        0.018855637 = weight(_text_:1 in 58) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018855637 = score(doc=58,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.32568932 = fieldWeight in 58, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=58)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.019158732 = product of:
      0.038317464 = sum of:
        0.038317464 = weight(_text_:22 in 58) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038317464 = score(doc=58,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 58, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=58)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
    Date
    14. 6.2015 22:12:44
    Source
    Deutscher Dokumentartag 1985, Nürnberg, 1.-4.10.1985: Fachinformation: Methodik - Management - Markt; neue Entwicklungen, Berufe, Produkte. Bearb.: H. Strohl-Goebel
  4. Mayr, P.: Bradfordizing mit Katalogdaten : Alternative Sicht auf Suchergebnisse und Publikationsquellen durch Re-Ranking (2010) 0.00 
    0.0020446046 = product of:
  0.023512952 = sum of:
    0.018799042 = weight(_text_:und in 4301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018799042 = score(doc=4301,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.35989314 = fieldWeight in 4301, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4301)
    0.0047139092 = product of:
      0.0094278185 = sum of:
        0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 4301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0094278185 = score(doc=4301,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 4301, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4301)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
    Abstract
    Nutzer erwarten für Literaturrecherchen in wissenschaftlichen Suchsystemen einen möglichst hohen Anteil an relevanten und qualitativen Dokumenten in den Trefferergebnissen. Insbesondere die Reihenfolge und Struktur der gelisteten Ergebnisse (Ranking) spielt, neben dem direkten Volltextzugriff auf die Dokumente, für viele Nutzer inzwischen eine entscheidende Rolle. Abgegrenzt wird Ranking oder Relevance Ranking von sogenannten Sortierungen zum Beispiel nach dem Erscheinungsjahr der Publikation, obwohl hier die Grenze zu »nach inhaltlicher Relevanz« gerankten Listen konzeptuell nicht sauber zu ziehen ist. Das Ranking von Dokumenten führt letztlich dazu, dass sich die Benutzer fokussiert mit den oberen Treffermengen eines Suchergebnisses beschäftigen. Der mittlere und untere Bereich eines Suchergebnisses wird häufig nicht mehr in Betracht gezogen. Aufgrund der Vielzahl an relevanten und verfügbaren Informationsquellen ist es daher notwendig, Kernbereiche in den Suchräumen zu identifizieren und diese anschließend dem Nutzer hervorgehoben zu präsentieren. Phillipp Mayr fasst hier die Ergebnisse seiner Dissertation zum Thema »Re-Ranking auf Basis von Bradfordizing für die verteilte Suche in Digitalen Bibliotheken« zusammen.
    Source
    BuB. 62(2010) H.1, S.61-63
  5. Behnert, C.; Plassmeier, K.; Borst, T.; Lewandowski, D.: Evaluierung von Rankingverfahren für bibliothekarische Informationssysteme (2019) 0.00 
    0.0020354036 = product of:
  0.02340714 = sum of:
    0.01790758 = weight(_text_:und in 5023) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01790758 = score(doc=5023,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.34282678 = fieldWeight in 5023, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5023)
    0.005499561 = product of:
      0.010999122 = sum of:
        0.010999122 = weight(_text_:1 in 5023) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010999122 = score(doc=5023,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.18998542 = fieldWeight in 5023, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5023)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
    Abstract
    Dieser Beitrag beschreibt eine Studie zur Entwicklung und Evaluierung von Rankingverfahren für bibliothekarische Informationssysteme. Dazu wurden mögliche Faktoren für das Relevanzranking ausgehend von den Verfahren in Websuchmaschinen identifiziert, auf den Bibliothekskontext übertragen und systematisch evaluiert. Mithilfe eines Testsystems, das auf dem ZBW-Informationsportal EconBiz und einer web-basierten Software zur Evaluierung von Suchsystemen aufsetzt, wurden verschiedene Relevanzfaktoren (z. B. Popularität in Verbindung mit Aktualität) getestet. Obwohl die getesteten Rankingverfahren auf einer theoretischen Ebene divers sind, konnten keine einheitlichen Verbesserungen gegenüber den Baseline-Rankings gemessen werden. Die Ergebnisse deuten darauf hin, dass eine Adaptierung des Rankings auf individuelle Nutzer bzw. Nutzungskontexte notwendig sein könnte, um eine höhere Performance zu erzielen.
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 70(2019) H.1, S.14-23
  6. Vechtomova, O.; Karamuftuoglu, M.: Lexical cohesion and term proximity in document ranking (2008) 0.00 
    0.0016672731 = product of:
  0.03834728 = sum of:
    0.03834728 = sum of:
      0.012570425 = weight(_text_:1 in 2101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.012570425 = score(doc=2101,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
            0.023567878 = queryNorm
          0.2171262 = fieldWeight in 2101, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2101)
      0.025776858 = weight(_text_:29 in 2101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.025776858 = score(doc=2101,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.023567878 = queryNorm
          0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 2101, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2101)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Date
    1. 8.2008 12:29:05
  7. Furner, J.: ¬A unifying model of document relatedness for hybrid search engines (2003) 0.00 
    0.0015888979 = product of:
  0.018272325 = sum of:
    0.008692958 = product of:
      0.017385917 = sum of:
        0.017385917 = weight(_text_:international in 2717) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017385917 = score(doc=2717,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.22113968 = fieldWeight in 2717, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2717)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.009579366 = product of:
      0.019158732 = sum of:
        0.019158732 = weight(_text_:22 in 2717) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019158732 = score(doc=2717,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2717, 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=2717)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
    Date
    11. 9.2004 17:32:22
    Source
    Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas
  8. Otterbacher, J.; Erkan, G.; Radev, D.R.: Biased LexRank : passage retrieval using random walks with question-based priors (2009) 0.00 
    0.0014588641 = product of:
  0.033553872 = sum of:
    0.033553872 = sum of:
      0.010999122 = weight(_text_:1 in 2450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.010999122 = score(doc=2450,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
            0.023567878 = queryNorm
          0.18998542 = fieldWeight in 2450, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2450)
      0.02255475 = weight(_text_:29 in 2450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02255475 = score(doc=2450,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.023567878 = queryNorm
          0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 2450, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2450)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Date
    22.11.2008 17:11:29
    Source
    Information processing and management. 45(2009) no.1, S.42-54
  9. Oberhauser, O.: Relevance Ranking in den Online-Katalogen der "nächsten Generation" (2010) 0.00 
    0.0013536992 = product of:
  0.015567541 = sum of:
    0.010853632 = weight(_text_:und in 4308) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010853632 = score(doc=4308,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.20778441 = fieldWeight in 4308, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4308)
    0.0047139092 = product of:
      0.0094278185 = sum of:
        0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 4308) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0094278185 = score(doc=4308,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 4308, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4308)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
    Abstract
    Relevance Ranking in Online-Katalogen ist zwar kein neues Thema, doch liegt dazu nicht allzu viel Literatur vor, die das Prädikat "ernstzunehmen" verdient. Dies ist zum einen darin begründet, dass das Interesse an der Ausgabe ranggereihter Ergebnislisten auf Seiten aller Beteiligter (Bibliothekare, Softwarehersteller, Benutzer) traditionell gering war. Zum anderen ging die seit einigen Jahren populär gewordene Kritik an den bestehenden OPACs vielfach von einer unzureichenden Wissensbasis aus und produzierte oft nur polemische oder emotional gefärbte Beiträge, die zum Thema Ranking wenig beitrugen. ... Der hier beschriebene Test ist natürlich in keiner Weise erschöpfend oder repräsentativ. Dennoch gibt er, wie ich glaube, Anlass zu einiger Hoffnung. Er lässt vermuten, dass die "neuen" OPACs - zumindest was das Relevance Ranking betrifft - auf dem Weg in die richtige Richtung sind. Wie gut es wirklich gelingen wird, die Rankingleistung von Suchmaschinen wie Google, die unter völlig anderen Voraussetzungen arbeiten, einzuholen, wird aber erst die Zukunft zeigen.
    Source
    Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 63(2010) H.1/2, S.25-37
  10. Witschel, H.F.: Global term weights in distributed environments (2008) 0.00 
    0.0012428935 = product of:
  0.014293276 = sum of:
    0.0047139092 = product of:
      0.0094278185 = sum of:
        0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 2096) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0094278185 = score(doc=2096,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 2096, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2096)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.009579366 = product of:
      0.019158732 = sum of:
        0.019158732 = weight(_text_:22 in 2096) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019158732 = score(doc=2096,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2096, 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=2096)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
    Date
    1. 8.2008 9:44:22
  11. Voorhees, E.M.: Implementing agglomerative hierarchic clustering algorithms for use in document retrieval (1986) 0.00 
    0.0011106512 = product of:
  0.025544977 = sum of:
    0.025544977 = product of:
      0.051089954 = sum of:
        0.051089954 = weight(_text_:22 in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051089954 = score(doc=402,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 22(1986) no.6, S.465-476
  12. Silva, R.M.; Gonçalves, M.A.; Veloso, A.: ¬A Two-stage active learning method for learning to rank (2014) 0.00 
    0.0010420457 = product of:
  0.02396705 = sum of:
    0.02396705 = sum of:
      0.007856515 = weight(_text_:1 in 1184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.007856515 = score(doc=1184,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
            0.023567878 = queryNorm
          0.13570388 = fieldWeight in 1184, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1184)
      0.016110536 = weight(_text_:29 in 1184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.016110536 = score(doc=1184,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.023567878 = queryNorm
          0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 1184, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1184)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Date
    26. 1.2014 20:29:57
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.1, S.109-128
  13. Fuhr, N.: Zur Überwindung der Diskrepanz zwischen Retrievalforschung und -praxis (1990) 0.00 
    9.948465E-4 = product of:
  0.022881467 = sum of:
    0.022881467 = weight(_text_:und in 6625) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022881467 = score(doc=6625,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.438048 = fieldWeight in 6625, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6625)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Abstract
    In diesem Beitrag werden einige Forschungsergebnisse des Information Retrieval vorgestellt, die unmittelbar zur Verbesserung der Retrievalqualität für bereits existierende Datenbanken eingesetzt werden können: Linguistische Algorithmen zur Grund- und Stammformreduktion unterstützen die Suche nach Flexions- und Derivationsformen von Suchtermen. Rankingalgorithmen, die Frage- und Dokumentterme gewichten, führen zu signifikant besseren Retrievalergebnissen als beim Booleschen Retrieval. Durch Relevance Feedback können die Retrievalqualität weiter gesteigert und außerdem der Benutzer bei der sukzessiven Modifikation seiner Frageformulierung unterstützt werden. Es wird eine benutzerfreundliche Bedienungsoberfläche für ein System vorgestellt, das auf diesen Konzepten basiert.
  14. Archuby, C.G.: Interfaces se recuperacion para catalogos en linea con salidas ordenadas por probable relevancia (2000) 0.00 
    9.905973E-4 = product of:
  0.022783738 = sum of:
    0.022783738 = product of:
      0.045567475 = sum of:
        0.045567475 = weight(_text_:29 in 5727) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045567475 = score(doc=5727,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.5496386 = fieldWeight in 5727, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5727)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Date
    29. 1.1996 18:23:13
    Source
    Ciencia da informacao. 29(2000) no.3, S.5-13
  15. Crestani, F.: Combination of similarity measures for effective spoken document retrieval (2003) 0.00 
    9.806413E-4 = product of:
  0.02255475 = sum of:
    0.02255475 = product of:
      0.0451095 = sum of:
        0.0451095 = weight(_text_:29 in 4690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0451095 = score(doc=4690,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.5441145 = fieldWeight in 4690, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4690)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Source
    Journal of information science. 29(2003) no.2, S.87-96
  16. Smeaton, A.F.; Rijsbergen, C.J. van: ¬The retrieval effects of query expansion on a feedback document retrieval system (1983) 0.00 
    9.7181974E-4 = product of:
  0.022351854 = sum of:
    0.022351854 = product of:
      0.044703707 = sum of:
        0.044703707 = weight(_text_:22 in 2134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.044703707 = score(doc=2134,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2134, 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=2134)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Date
    30. 3.2001 13:32:22
  17. Back, J.: ¬An evaluation of relevancy ranking techniques used by Internet search engines (2000) 0.00 
    9.7181974E-4 = product of:
  0.022351854 = sum of:
    0.022351854 = product of:
      0.044703707 = sum of:
        0.044703707 = weight(_text_:22 in 3445) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.044703707 = score(doc=3445,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3445, 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=3445)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Date
    25. 8.2005 17:42:22
  18. Dreßler, H.: Fuzzy Information Retrieval (2008) 0.00 
    9.632559E-4 = product of:
  0.022154884 = sum of:
    0.022154884 = weight(_text_:und in 2300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022154884 = score(doc=2300,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.42413816 = fieldWeight in 2300, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2300)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Abstract
    Nach einer Erläuterung der Grundlagen der Fuzzylogik wird das Prinzip der unscharfen Suche dargestellt und die Unterschiede zum herkömmlichen Information Retrieval beschrieben. Am Beispiel der Suche nach Steinen für ein Mauerwerk wird gezeigt, wie eine unscharfe Suche in der D&WFuzzydatenbank erfolgreich durchgeführt werden kann und zu eindeutigen Ergebnissen führt.
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 59(2008) H.6/7, S.351-352
  19. Weinstein, A.: Hochprozentig : Tipps and tricks für ein Top-Ranking (2002) 0.00 
    9.046564E-4 = product of:
  0.020807097 = sum of:
    0.020807097 = weight(_text_:im in 1083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020807097 = score(doc=1083,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.066621356 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.3123187 = fieldWeight in 1083, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1083)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Abstract
    Die Suchmaschinen haben in den letzten Monaten an ihren Ranking-Algorithmen gefeilt, um Spamern das Handwerk zu erschweren. Internet Pro beleuchtet die Trends im Suchmaschinen-Marketing
  20. Okada, M.; Ando, K.; Lee, S.S.; Hayashi, Y.; Aoe, J.I.: ¬An efficient substring search method by using delayed keyword extraction (2001) 0.00 
    8.4054976E-4 = product of:
  0.019332644 = sum of:
    0.019332644 = product of:
      0.038665287 = sum of:
        0.038665287 = weight(_text_:29 in 6415) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038665287 = score(doc=6415,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.46638384 = fieldWeight in 6415, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6415)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Date
    29. 3.2002 17:24:03

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 104
  • d 29
  • pt 1
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Themes