Search (96 results, page 1 of 5)

  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalalgorithmen"
  1. Fuhr, N.: Ranking-Experimente mit gewichteter Indexierung (1986) 0.06 
    0.06438923 = product of:
  0.12877846 = sum of:
    0.12877846 = sum of:
      0.04311747 = weight(_text_:h in 58) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04311747 = score(doc=58,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13089918 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.32939452 = fieldWeight in 58, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=58)
      0.085660994 = weight(_text_:22 in 58) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.085660994 = score(doc=58,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = 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)
    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
  2. Ding, Y.; Yan, E.; Frazho, A.; Caverlee, J.: PageRank for ranking authors in co-citation networks (2009) 0.06 
    0.059695423 = sum of:
  0.044451095 = product of:
    0.17780438 = sum of:
      0.17780438 = weight(_text_:authors in 3161) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.17780438 = score(doc=3161,freq=12.0), product of:
          0.24019209 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.7402591 = fieldWeight in 3161, product of:
            3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
              12.0 = termFreq=12.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3161)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.015244328 = product of:
    0.030488657 = sum of:
      0.030488657 = weight(_text_:h in 3161) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.030488657 = score(doc=3161,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.13089918 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.2329171 = fieldWeight in 3161, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3161)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)
    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. Ding, Y.: Topic-based PageRank on author cocitation networks (2011) 0.04 
    0.04221104 = sum of:
  0.03143167 = product of:
    0.12572668 = sum of:
      0.12572668 = weight(_text_:authors in 4348) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.12572668 = score(doc=4348,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.24019209 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.52344227 = fieldWeight in 4348, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4348)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.010779368 = product of:
    0.021558736 = sum of:
      0.021558736 = weight(_text_:h in 4348) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.021558736 = score(doc=4348,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13089918 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 4348, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4348)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Ranking authors is vital for identifying a researcher's impact and standing within a scientific field. There are many different ranking methods (e.g., citations, publications, h-index, PageRank, and weighted PageRank), but most of them are topic-independent. This paper proposes topic-dependent ranks based on the combination of a topic model and a weighted PageRank algorithm. The author-conference-topic (ACT) model was used to extract topic distribution of individual authors. Two ways for combining the ACT model with the PageRank algorithm are proposed: simple combination (I_PR) or using a topic distribution as a weighted vector for PageRank (PR_t). Information retrieval was chosen as the test field and representative authors for different topics at different time phases were identified. Principal component analysis (PCA) was applied to analyze the ranking difference between I_PR and PR_t.
  4. Soulier, L.; Jabeur, L.B.; Tamine, L.; Bahsoun, W.: On ranking relevant entities in heterogeneous networks using a language-based model (2013) 0.04 
    0.039232586 = sum of:
  0.021386545 = product of:
    0.08554618 = sum of:
      0.08554618 = weight(_text_:authors in 664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08554618 = score(doc=664,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.24019209 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.35615736 = fieldWeight in 664, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=664)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.01784604 = product of:
    0.03569208 = sum of:
      0.03569208 = weight(_text_:22 in 664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03569208 = score(doc=664,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 664, 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=664)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    A new challenge, accessing multiple relevant entities, arises from the availability of linked heterogeneous data. In this article, we address more specifically the problem of accessing relevant entities, such as publications and authors within a bibliographic network, given an information need. We propose a novel algorithm, called BibRank, that estimates a joint relevance of documents and authors within a bibliographic network. This model ranks each type of entity using a score propagation algorithm with respect to the query topic and the structure of the underlying bi-type information entity network. Evidence sources, namely content-based and network-based scores, are both used to estimate the topical similarity between connected entities. For this purpose, authorship relationships are analyzed through a language model-based score on the one hand and on the other hand, non topically related entities of the same type are detected through marginal citations. The article reports the results of experiments using the Bibrank algorithm for an information retrieval task. The CiteSeerX bibliographic data set forms the basis for the topical query automatic generation and evaluation. We show that a statistically significant improvement over closely related ranking models is achieved.
    Date
    22. 3.2013 19:34:49
  5. Chang, C.-H.; Hsu, C.-C.: Integrating query expansion and conceptual relevance feedback for personalized Web information retrieval (1998) 0.04 
    0.037560385 = product of:
  0.07512077 = sum of:
    0.07512077 = sum of:
      0.025151858 = weight(_text_:h in 1319) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.025151858 = score(doc=1319,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13089918 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.19214681 = fieldWeight in 1319, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1319)
      0.049968913 = weight(_text_:22 in 1319) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049968913 = score(doc=1319,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1319, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1319)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:08:06
  6. Kanaeva, Z.: Ranking: Google und CiteSeer (2005) 0.04 
    0.037560385 = product of:
  0.07512077 = sum of:
    0.07512077 = sum of:
      0.025151858 = weight(_text_:h in 3276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.025151858 = score(doc=3276,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13089918 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.19214681 = fieldWeight in 3276, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3276)
      0.049968913 = weight(_text_:22 in 3276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049968913 = score(doc=3276,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3276, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3276)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    20. 3.2005 16:23:22
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 56(2005) H.2, S.87-92
  7. Fan, W.; Fox, E.A.; Pathak, P.; Wu, H.: ¬The effects of fitness functions an genetic programming-based ranking discovery for Web search (2004) 0.03 
    0.032194614 = product of:
  0.06438923 = sum of:
    0.06438923 = sum of:
      0.021558736 = weight(_text_:h in 2239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.021558736 = score(doc=2239,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13089918 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 2239, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2239)
      0.042830497 = weight(_text_:22 in 2239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042830497 = score(doc=2239,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2239, 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=2239)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    31. 5.2004 19:22:06
  8. Voorhees, E.M.: Implementing agglomerative hierarchic clustering algorithms for use in document retrieval (1986) 0.03 
    0.028553665 = product of:
  0.05710733 = sum of:
    0.05710733 = product of:
      0.11421466 = sum of:
        0.11421466 = weight(_text_:22 in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11421466 = score(doc=402,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052687407 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 22(1986) no.6, S.465-476
  9. Smeaton, A.F.; Rijsbergen, C.J. van: ¬The retrieval effects of query expansion on a feedback document retrieval system (1983) 0.02 
    0.024984457 = product of:
  0.049968913 = sum of:
    0.049968913 = product of:
      0.09993783 = sum of:
        0.09993783 = weight(_text_:22 in 2134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09993783 = score(doc=2134,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052687407 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    30. 3.2001 13:32:22
  10. Back, J.: ¬An evaluation of relevancy ranking techniques used by Internet search engines (2000) 0.02 
    0.024984457 = product of:
  0.049968913 = sum of:
    0.049968913 = product of:
      0.09993783 = sum of:
        0.09993783 = weight(_text_:22 in 3445) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09993783 = score(doc=3445,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052687407 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    25. 8.2005 17:42:22
  11. Khoo, C.S.G.; Wan, K.-W.: ¬A simple relevancy-ranking strategy for an interface to Boolean OPACs (2004) 0.02 
    0.023078028 = sum of:
  0.010585799 = product of:
    0.042343196 = sum of:
      0.042343196 = weight(_text_:authors in 2509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042343196 = score(doc=2509,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24019209 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.17628889 = fieldWeight in 2509, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2509)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.012492228 = product of:
    0.024984457 = sum of:
      0.024984457 = weight(_text_:22 in 2509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024984457 = score(doc=2509,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 2509, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2509)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    A relevancy-ranking algorithm for a natural language interface to Boolean online public access catalogs (OPACs) was formulated and compared with that currently used in a knowledge-based search interface called the E-Referencer, being developed by the authors. The algorithm makes use of seven weIl-known ranking criteria: breadth of match, section weighting, proximity of query words, variant word forms (stemming), document frequency, term frequency and document length. The algorithm converts a natural language query into a series of increasingly broader Boolean search statements. In a small experiment with ten subjects in which the algorithm was simulated by hand, the algorithm obtained good results with a mean overall precision of 0.42 and mean average precision of 0.62, representing a 27 percent improvement in precision and 41 percent improvement in average precision compared to the E-Referencer. The usefulness of each step in the algorithm was analyzed and suggestions are made for improving the algorithm.
    Source
    Electronic library. 22(2004) no.2, S.112-120
  12. Fuhr, N.: Rankingexperimente mit gewichteter Indexierung (1986) 0.02 
    0.021415249 = product of:
  0.042830497 = sum of:
    0.042830497 = product of:
      0.085660994 = sum of:
        0.085660994 = weight(_text_:22 in 2051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.085660994 = score(doc=2051,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052687407 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    14. 6.2015 22:12:56
  13. Langville, A.N.; Meyer, C.D.: Google's PageRank and beyond : the science of search engine rankings (2006) 0.02 
    0.016695706 = sum of:
  0.009073542 = product of:
    0.03629417 = sum of:
      0.03629417 = weight(_text_:authors in 6) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03629417 = score(doc=6,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24019209 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.15110476 = fieldWeight in 6, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=6)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.007622164 = product of:
    0.015244328 = sum of:
      0.015244328 = weight(_text_:h in 6) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.015244328 = score(doc=6,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.13089918 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.11645855 = fieldWeight in 6, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=6)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Why doesn't your home page appear on the first page of search results, even when you query your own name? How do other Web pages always appear at the top? What creates these powerful rankings? And how? The first book ever about the science of Web page rankings, "Google's PageRank and Beyond" supplies the answers to these and other questions and more. The book serves two very different audiences: the curious science reader and the technical computational reader. The chapters build in mathematical sophistication, so that the first five are accessible to the general academic reader. While other chapters are much more mathematical in nature, each one contains something for both audiences. For example, the authors include entertaining asides such as how search engines make money and how the Great Firewall of China influences research. The book includes an extensive background chapter designed to help readers learn more about the mathematics of search engines, and it contains several MATLAB codes and links to sample Web data sets. The philosophy throughout is to encourage readers to experiment with the ideas and algorithms in the text. Any business seriously interested in improving its rankings in the major search engines can benefit from the clear examples, sample code, and list of resources provided. It includes: many illustrative examples and entertaining asides; MATLAB code; accessible and informal style; and complete and self-contained section for mathematics review.
    Content
    Inhalt: Chapter 1. Introduction to Web Search Engines: 1.1 A Short History of Information Retrieval - 1.2 An Overview of Traditional Information Retrieval - 1.3 Web Information Retrieval Chapter 2. Crawling, Indexing, and Query Processing: 2.1 Crawling - 2.2 The Content Index - 2.3 Query Processing Chapter 3. Ranking Webpages by Popularity: 3.1 The Scene in 1998 - 3.2 Two Theses - 3.3 Query-Independence Chapter 4. The Mathematics of Google's PageRank: 4.1 The Original Summation Formula for PageRank - 4.2 Matrix Representation of the Summation Equations - 4.3 Problems with the Iterative Process - 4.4 A Little Markov Chain Theory - 4.5 Early Adjustments to the Basic Model - 4.6 Computation of the PageRank Vector - 4.7 Theorem and Proof for Spectrum of the Google Matrix Chapter 5. Parameters in the PageRank Model: 5.1 The a Factor - 5.2 The Hyperlink Matrix H - 5.3 The Teleportation Matrix E Chapter 6. The Sensitivity of PageRank; 6.1 Sensitivity with respect to alpha - 6.2 Sensitivity with respect to H - 6.3 Sensitivity with respect to vT - 6.4 Other Analyses of Sensitivity - 6.5 Sensitivity Theorems and Proofs Chapter 7. The PageRank Problem as a Linear System: 7.1 Properties of (I - alphaS) - 7.2 Properties of (I - alphaH) - 7.3 Proof of the PageRank Sparse Linear System Chapter 8. Issues in Large-Scale Implementation of PageRank: 8.1 Storage Issues - 8.2 Convergence Criterion - 8.3 Accuracy - 8.4 Dangling Nodes - 8.5 Back Button Modeling
  14. Wu, H.; Salton, G.: ¬The estimation of term relevance weights using relevance feedback (1981) 0.01 
    0.014372491 = product of:
  0.028744983 = sum of:
    0.028744983 = product of:
      0.057489965 = sum of:
        0.057489965 = weight(_text_:h in 4728) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057489965 = score(doc=4728,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13089918 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052687407 = queryNorm
            0.4391927 = fieldWeight in 4728, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4728)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  15. MacFarlane, A.; Robertson, S.E.; McCann, J.A.: Parallel computing for passage retrieval (2004) 0.01 
    0.014276832 = product of:
  0.028553665 = sum of:
    0.028553665 = product of:
      0.05710733 = sum of:
        0.05710733 = weight(_text_:22 in 5108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05710733 = score(doc=5108,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052687407 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5108, 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=5108)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    20. 1.2007 18:30:22
  16. Faloutsos, C.: Signature files (1992) 0.01 
    0.014276832 = product of:
  0.028553665 = sum of:
    0.028553665 = product of:
      0.05710733 = sum of:
        0.05710733 = weight(_text_:22 in 3499) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05710733 = score(doc=3499,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052687407 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3499, 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=3499)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    7. 5.1999 15:22:48
  17. Losada, D.E.; Barreiro, A.: Emebedding term similarity and inverse document frequency into a logical model of information retrieval (2003) 0.01 
    0.014276832 = product of:
  0.028553665 = sum of:
    0.028553665 = product of:
      0.05710733 = sum of:
        0.05710733 = weight(_text_:22 in 1422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05710733 = score(doc=1422,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052687407 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1422, 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=1422)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 3.2003 19:27:23
  18. Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.: From P100 to P100' : a new citation-rank approach (2014) 0.01 
    0.014276832 = product of:
  0.028553665 = sum of:
    0.028553665 = product of:
      0.05710733 = sum of:
        0.05710733 = weight(_text_:22 in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05710733 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052687407 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1431, 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=1431)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 8.2014 17:05:18
  19. Tober, M.; Hennig, L.; Furch, D.: SEO Ranking-Faktoren und Rang-Korrelationen 2014 : Google Deutschland (2014) 0.01 
    0.014276832 = product of:
  0.028553665 = sum of:
    0.028553665 = product of:
      0.05710733 = sum of:
        0.05710733 = weight(_text_:22 in 1484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05710733 = score(doc=1484,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052687407 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1484, 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=1484)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    13. 9.2014 14:45:22
  20. Wei, F.; Li, W.; Liu, S.: iRANK: a rank-learn-combine framework for unsupervised ensemble ranking (2010) 0.01 
    0.013096532 = product of:
  0.026193064 = sum of:
    0.026193064 = product of:
      0.104772255 = sum of:
        0.104772255 = weight(_text_:authors in 3472) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.104772255 = score(doc=3472,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.24019209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052687407 = queryNorm
            0.43620193 = fieldWeight in 3472, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3472)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The authors address the problem of unsupervised ensemble ranking. Traditional approaches either combine multiple ranking criteria into a unified representation to obtain an overall ranking score or to utilize certain rank fusion or aggregation techniques to combine the ranking results. Beyond the aforementioned combine-then-rank and rank-then-combine approaches, the authors propose a novel rank-learn-combine ranking framework, called Interactive Ranking (iRANK), which allows two base rankers to teach each other before combination during the ranking process by providing their own ranking results as feedback to the others to boost the ranking performance. This mutual ranking refinement process continues until the two base rankers cannot learn from each other any more. The overall performance is improved by the enhancement of the base rankers through the mutual learning mechanism. The authors further design two ranking refinement strategies to efficiently and effectively use the feedback based on reasonable assumptions and rational analysis. Although iRANK is applicable to many applications, as a case study, they apply this framework to the sentence ranking problem in query-focused summarization and evaluate its effectiveness on the DUC 2005 and 2006 data sets. The results are encouraging with consistent and promising improvements.

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 71
  • d 24
  • m 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 86
  • m 7
  • s 3
  • r 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications