Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalstudien"
  • × theme_ss:"Suchmaschinen"
  1. Griesbaum, J.; Rittberger, M.; Bekavac, B.: Deutsche Suchmaschinen im Vergleich : AltaVista.de, Fireball.de, Google.de und Lycos.de (2002) 0.02 
    0.01810809 = product of:
  0.03621618 = sum of:
    0.03621618 = product of:
      0.07243236 = sum of:
        0.07243236 = weight(_text_:b in 1159) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07243236 = score(doc=1159,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18503809 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052226946 = queryNorm
            0.3914457 = fieldWeight in 1159, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1159)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  2. Dresel, R.; Hörnig, D.; Kaluza, H.; Peter, A.; Roßmann, A.; Sieber, W.: Evaluation deutscher Web-Suchwerkzeuge : Ein vergleichender Retrievaltest (2001) 0.01 
    0.01415206 = product of:
  0.02830412 = sum of:
    0.02830412 = product of:
      0.05660824 = sum of:
        0.05660824 = weight(_text_:22 in 261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05660824 = score(doc=261,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18288986 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052226946 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 261, 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=261)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Die deutschen Suchmaschinen, Abacho, Acoon, Fireball und Lycos sowie die Web-Kataloge Web.de und Yahoo! werden einem Qualitätstest nach relativem Recall, Precision und Availability unterzogen. Die Methoden der Retrievaltests werden vorgestellt. Im Durchschnitt werden bei einem Cut-Off-Wert von 25 ein Recall von rund 22%, eine Precision von knapp 19% und eine Verfügbarkeit von 24% erreicht
  3. Sarigil, E.; Sengor Altingovde, I.; Blanco, R.; Barla Cambazoglu, B.; Ozcan, R.; Ulusoy, Ö.: Characterizing, predicting, and handling web search queries that match very few or no results (2018) 0.01 
    0.009054045 = product of:
  0.01810809 = sum of:
    0.01810809 = product of:
      0.03621618 = sum of:
        0.03621618 = weight(_text_:b in 4039) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03621618 = score(doc=4039,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18503809 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052226946 = queryNorm
            0.19572285 = fieldWeight in 4039, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4039)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  4. Vegt, A. van der; Zuccon, G.; Koopman, B.: Do better search engines really equate to better clinical decisions? : If not, why not? (2021) 0.01 
    0.009054045 = product of:
  0.01810809 = sum of:
    0.01810809 = product of:
      0.03621618 = sum of:
        0.03621618 = weight(_text_:b in 150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03621618 = score(doc=150,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18503809 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052226946 = queryNorm
            0.19572285 = fieldWeight in 150, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=150)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  5. Oppenheim, C.; Morris, A.; McKnight, C.: ¬The evaluation of WWW search engines (2000) 0.01 
    0.008994244 = product of:
  0.017988488 = sum of:
    0.017988488 = product of:
      0.07195395 = sum of:
        0.07195395 = weight(_text_:authors in 4546) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07195395 = score(doc=4546,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.23809293 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052226946 = queryNorm
            0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 4546, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4546)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The literature of the evaluation of Internet search engines is reviewed. Although there have been many studies, there has been little consistency in the way such studies have been carried out. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that recall is virtually impossible to calculate in the fast changing Internet environment, and therefore the traditional Cranfield type of evaluation is not usually possible. A variety of alternative evaluation methods has been suggested to overcome this difficulty. The authors recommend that a standardised set of tools is developed for the evaluation of web search engines so that, in future, comparisons can be made between search engines more effectively, and that variations in performance of any given search engine over time can be tracked. The paper itself does not provide such a standard set of tools, but it investigates the issues and makes preliminary recommendations of the types of tools needed

Authors

Years

Languages

Types