Search (97 results, page 2 of 5)

  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalstudien"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Schoger, A.; Frommer, J.: Heterogen - was nun? : Evaluierung heterogener bibliographischer Metadaten (2000) 0.02 
    0.015271729 = product of:
  0.030543458 = sum of:
    0.030543458 = product of:
      0.061086915 = sum of:
        0.061086915 = weight(_text_:j in 4465) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.061086915 = score(doc=4465,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14500295 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = queryNorm
            0.4212805 = fieldWeight in 4465, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4465)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  2. Rapke, K.: Automatische Indexierung von Volltexten für die Gruner+Jahr Pressedatenbank (2001) 0.02 
    0.015271729 = product of:
  0.030543458 = sum of:
    0.030543458 = product of:
      0.061086915 = sum of:
        0.061086915 = weight(_text_:j in 6386) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.061086915 = score(doc=6386,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.14500295 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = queryNorm
            0.4212805 = fieldWeight in 6386, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6386)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Retrieval Tests sind die anerkannteste Methode, um neue Verfahren der Inhaltserschließung gegenüber traditionellen Verfahren zu rechtfertigen. Im Rahmen einer Diplomarbeit wurden zwei grundsätzlich unterschiedliche Systeme der automatischen inhaltlichen Erschließung anhand der Pressedatenbank des Verlagshauses Gruner + Jahr (G+J) getestet und evaluiert. Untersucht wurde dabei natürlichsprachliches Retrieval im Vergleich zu Booleschem Retrieval. Bei den beiden Systemen handelt es sich zum einen um Autonomy von Autonomy Inc. und DocCat, das von IBM an die Datenbankstruktur der G+J Pressedatenbank angepasst wurde. Ersteres ist ein auf natürlichsprachlichem Retrieval basierendes, probabilistisches System. DocCat demgegenüber basiert auf Booleschem Retrieval und ist ein lernendes System, das auf Grund einer intellektuell erstellten Trainingsvorlage indexiert. Methodisch geht die Evaluation vom realen Anwendungskontext der Textdokumentation von G+J aus. Die Tests werden sowohl unter statistischen wie auch qualitativen Gesichtspunkten bewertet. Ein Ergebnis der Tests ist, dass DocCat einige Mängel gegenüber der intellektuellen Inhaltserschließung aufweist, die noch behoben werden müssen, während das natürlichsprachliche Retrieval von Autonomy in diesem Rahmen und für die speziellen Anforderungen der G+J Textdokumentation so nicht einsetzbar ist
  3. Chevallet, J.-P.; Bruandet, M.F.: Impact de l'utilisation de multi terms sur la qualité des résponses dùn système de recherche d'information a indexation automatique (1999) 0.01 
    0.014398323 = product of:
  0.028796647 = sum of:
    0.028796647 = product of:
      0.057593293 = sum of:
        0.057593293 = weight(_text_:j in 6253) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057593293 = score(doc=6253,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14500295 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = queryNorm
            0.39718705 = fieldWeight in 6253, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6253)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Organisation des connaissances en vue de leur intégration dans les systèmes de représentation et de recherche d'information. Ed.: J. Maniez, et al
  4. ¬The Second Text Retrieval Conference : TREC-2 (1995) 0.01 
    0.013225704 = product of:
  0.026451409 = sum of:
    0.026451409 = product of:
      0.052902818 = sum of:
        0.052902818 = weight(_text_:j in 1320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.052902818 = score(doc=1320,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.14500295 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = queryNorm
            0.3648396 = fieldWeight in 1320, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1320)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Enthält die Beiträge: HARMAN, D.: Overview of the Second Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-2); SPRACK JONES, K.: Reflections on TREC; BUCKLEY, C., J. ALLAN u. G. SALTON: Automatic routing and retrieval using SMART: TREC-2; CALLAN, J.P., W.B. CROFT u. J. BROGLIO: TREC and TIPSTER experiments with INQUERY; ROBERTSON, S.R., S. WALKER u. M.M. HANCOCK-BEAULIEU: Large test collection experiments on an operational, interactive system: OKAPI at TREC; ZOBEL, J., A. MOFFAT, R. WILKINSON u. R. SACKS-DAVIS: Efficient retrieval of partial documents; METTLER, M. u. F. NORDBY: TREC routing experiments with the TRW/Paracel Fast Data Finder; EVANS, D.A. u. R.G. LEFFERTS: CLARIT-TREC experiments; STRZALKOWSKI, T.: Natural language information retrieval; CAID, W.R., S.T. DUMAIS u. S.I. GALLANT: Learned vector-space models for document retrieval; BELKIN, N.J. P. KANTOR, E.A. FOX u. J.A. SHAW: Combining the evidence of multiple query representations for information retrieval
  5. Lundquist, C.; Grossmann, D.A.; Reichart, J.; Holmes, D.O.; Chowdhury, A.; Frieder, O.: Using relevance feedback within the relational model for TREC-5 (1997) 0.01 
    0.01272644 = product of:
  0.02545288 = sum of:
    0.02545288 = product of:
      0.05090576 = sum of:
        0.05090576 = weight(_text_:j in 3093) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05090576 = score(doc=3093,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14500295 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = queryNorm
            0.35106707 = fieldWeight in 3093, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3093)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  6. Hull, D.; Grefenstette, G.; Schulze, B.M.; Gaussier, E.; Schütze, H.; Pedersen, J.: Xerox TREC-5 site reports : routing, filtering, NLP, and Spanisch tracks (1997) 0.01 
    0.01272644 = product of:
  0.02545288 = sum of:
    0.02545288 = product of:
      0.05090576 = sum of:
        0.05090576 = weight(_text_:j in 3096) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05090576 = score(doc=3096,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14500295 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = queryNorm
            0.35106707 = fieldWeight in 3096, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3096)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  7. Ballerini, J.-P.; Büchel, M.; Domenig, R.; Knaus, D.; Mateev, B.; Mittendorf, E.; Schäuble, P.; Wechsler, M.; Sheridan, P.: SPIDER retrieval system at TREC-5 (1997) 0.01 
    0.01272644 = product of:
  0.02545288 = sum of:
    0.02545288 = product of:
      0.05090576 = sum of:
        0.05090576 = weight(_text_:j in 3104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05090576 = score(doc=3104,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14500295 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = queryNorm
            0.35106707 = fieldWeight in 3104, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3104)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  8. Rapke, K.: Automatische Indexierung von Volltexten für die Gruner+Jahr Pressedatenbank (2001) 0.01 
    0.01272644 = product of:
  0.02545288 = sum of:
    0.02545288 = product of:
      0.05090576 = sum of:
        0.05090576 = weight(_text_:j in 5863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05090576 = score(doc=5863,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.14500295 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = queryNorm
            0.35106707 = fieldWeight in 5863, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5863)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Retrievaltests sind die anerkannteste Methode, um neue Verfahren der Inhaltserschließung gegenüber traditionellen Verfahren zu rechtfertigen. Im Rahmen einer Diplomarbeit wurden zwei grundsätzlich unterschiedliche Systeme der automatischen inhaltlichen Erschließung anhand der Pressedatenbank des Verlagshauses Gruner + Jahr (G+J) getestet und evaluiert. Untersucht wurde dabei natürlichsprachliches Retrieval im Vergleich zu Booleschem Retrieval. Bei den beiden Systemen handelt es sich zum einen um Autonomy von Autonomy Inc. und DocCat, das von IBM an die Datenbankstruktur der G+J Pressedatenbank angepasst wurde. Ersteres ist ein auf natürlichsprachlichem Retrieval basierendes, probabilistisches System. DocCat demgegenüber basiert auf Booleschem Retrieval und ist ein lernendes System, das aufgrund einer intellektuell erstellten Trainingsvorlage indexiert. Methodisch geht die Evaluation vom realen Anwendungskontext der Textdokumentation von G+J aus. Die Tests werden sowohl unter statistischen wie auch qualitativen Gesichtspunkten bewertet. Ein Ergebnis der Tests ist, dass DocCat einige Mängel gegenüber der intellektuellen Inhaltserschließung aufweist, die noch behoben werden müssen, während das natürlichsprachliche Retrieval von Autonomy in diesem Rahmen und für die speziellen Anforderungen der G+J Textdokumentation so nicht einsetzbar ist
  9. Griesbaum, J.; Rittberger, M.; Bekavac, B.: Deutsche Suchmaschinen im Vergleich : AltaVista.de, Fireball.de, Google.de und Lycos.de (2002) 0.01 
    0.01272644 = product of:
  0.02545288 = sum of:
    0.02545288 = product of:
      0.05090576 = sum of:
        0.05090576 = weight(_text_:j in 1159) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05090576 = score(doc=1159,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14500295 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = queryNorm
            0.35106707 = fieldWeight in 1159, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1159)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  10. Rijsbergen, C.J. van: ¬A test for the separation of relevant and non-relevant documents in experimental retrieval collections (1973) 0.01 
    0.012365646 = product of:
  0.024731291 = sum of:
    0.024731291 = product of:
      0.049462583 = sum of:
        0.049462583 = weight(_text_:22 in 5002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049462583 = score(doc=5002,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15980367 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5002, 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=5002)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    19. 3.1996 11:22:12
  11. Sanderson, M.: ¬The Reuters test collection (1996) 0.01 
    0.012365646 = product of:
  0.024731291 = sum of:
    0.024731291 = product of:
      0.049462583 = sum of:
        0.049462583 = weight(_text_:22 in 6971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049462583 = score(doc=6971,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15980367 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6971, 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=6971)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Information retrieval: new systems and current research. Proceedings of the 16th Research Colloquium of the British Computer Society Information Retrieval Specialist Group, Drymen, Scotland, 22-23 Mar 94. Ed.: R. Leon
  12. Lespinasse, K.: TREC: une conference pour l'evaluation des systemes de recherche d'information (1997) 0.01 
    0.012365646 = product of:
  0.024731291 = sum of:
    0.024731291 = product of:
      0.049462583 = sum of:
        0.049462583 = weight(_text_:22 in 744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049462583 = score(doc=744,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15980367 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 744, 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=744)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
  13. Pemberton, J.K.; Ojala, M.; Garman, N.: Head to head : searching the Web versus traditional services (1998) 0.01 
    0.012365646 = product of:
  0.024731291 = sum of:
    0.024731291 = product of:
      0.049462583 = sum of:
        0.049462583 = weight(_text_:22 in 3572) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049462583 = score(doc=3572,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15980367 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3572, 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=3572)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Online. 22(1998) no.3, S.24-26,28
  14. Dresel, R.; Hörnig, D.; Kaluza, H.; Peter, A.; Roßmann, A.; Sieber, W.: Evaluation deutscher Web-Suchwerkzeuge : Ein vergleichender Retrievaltest (2001) 0.01 
    0.012365646 = product of:
  0.024731291 = sum of:
    0.024731291 = product of:
      0.049462583 = sum of:
        0.049462583 = weight(_text_:22 in 261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049462583 = score(doc=261,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15980367 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = 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
  15. Blagden, J.F.: How much noise in a role-free and link-free co-ordinate indexing system? (1966) 0.01 
    0.01081994 = product of:
  0.02163988 = sum of:
    0.02163988 = product of:
      0.04327976 = sum of:
        0.04327976 = weight(_text_:22 in 2718) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04327976 = score(doc=2718,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15980367 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2718, 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=2718)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 22(1966), S.203-209
  16. Smithson, S.: Information retrieval evaluation in practice : a case study approach (1994) 0.01 
    0.01081994 = product of:
  0.02163988 = sum of:
    0.02163988 = product of:
      0.04327976 = sum of:
        0.04327976 = weight(_text_:22 in 7302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04327976 = score(doc=7302,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15980367 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7302, 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=7302)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The evaluation of information retrieval systems is an important yet difficult operation. This paper describes an exploratory evaluation study that takes an interpretive approach to evaluation. The longitudinal study examines evaluation through the information-seeking behaviour of 22 case studies of 'real' users. The eclectic approach to data collection produced behavioral data that is compared with relevance judgements and satisfaction ratings. The study demonstrates considerable variations among the cases, among different evaluation measures within the same case, and among the same measures at different stages within a single case. It is argued that those involved in evaluation should be aware of the difficulties, and base any evaluation on a good understanding of the cases in question
  17. Blair, D.C.: STAIRS Redux : thoughts on the STAIRS evaluation, ten years after (1996) 0.01 
    0.01081994 = product of:
  0.02163988 = sum of:
    0.02163988 = product of:
      0.04327976 = sum of:
        0.04327976 = weight(_text_:22 in 3002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04327976 = score(doc=3002,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15980367 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3002, 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=3002)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 47(1996) no.1, S.4-22
  18. Losee, R.M.: Determining information retrieval and filtering performance without experimentation (1995) 0.01 
    0.01081994 = product of:
  0.02163988 = sum of:
    0.02163988 = product of:
      0.04327976 = sum of:
        0.04327976 = weight(_text_:22 in 3368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04327976 = score(doc=3368,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15980367 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3368, 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=3368)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 2.1996 13:14:10
  19. Hodges, P.R.: Keyword in title indexes : effectiveness of retrieval in computer searches (1983) 0.01 
    0.01081994 = product of:
  0.02163988 = sum of:
    0.02163988 = product of:
      0.04327976 = sum of:
        0.04327976 = weight(_text_:22 in 5001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04327976 = score(doc=5001,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15980367 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5001, 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=5001)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    14. 3.1996 13:22:21
  20. Brown, M.E.: By any other name : accounting for failure in the naming of subject categories (1995) 0.01 
    0.01081994 = product of:
  0.02163988 = sum of:
    0.02163988 = product of:
      0.04327976 = sum of:
        0.04327976 = weight(_text_:22 in 5598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04327976 = score(doc=5598,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15980367 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045634337 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5598, 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=5598)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    2.11.1996 13:08:22

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 83
  • d 11
  • f 2
  • chi 1
  • More… Less…

Themes