-
Sanderson, M.: ¬The Reuters test collection (1996)
0.15
0.14501782 = product of:
0.21752672 = sum of:
0.19115403 = weight(_text_:specialist in 6971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.19115403 = score(doc=6971,freq=2.0), product of:
0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.5892364 = fieldWeight in 6971, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6971)
0.026372686 = product of:
0.052745372 = sum of:
0.052745372 = weight(_text_:22 in 6971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052745372 = score(doc=6971,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- 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
-
Crestani, F.; Rijsbergen, C.J. van: Information retrieval by imaging (1996)
0.11
0.10876336 = product of:
0.16314504 = sum of:
0.14336552 = weight(_text_:specialist in 6967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14336552 = score(doc=6967,freq=2.0), product of:
0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.44192728 = fieldWeight in 6967, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6967)
0.019779515 = product of:
0.03955903 = sum of:
0.03955903 = weight(_text_:22 in 6967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03955903 = score(doc=6967,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 6967, 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=6967)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- 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
-
Smeaton, A.F.; Harman, D.: ¬The TREC experiments and their impact on Europe (1997)
0.06
0.06371801 = product of:
0.19115403 = sum of:
0.19115403 = weight(_text_:specialist in 7702) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.19115403 = score(doc=7702,freq=2.0), product of:
0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.5892364 = fieldWeight in 7702, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7702)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Reviews the overall results of the TREC experiments in information retrieval, which differed from other information retrieval research projects in that the document collections used in the research were massive, and the groups participating in the collaborative evaluation are among the main organizations in the field. Reviews the findings of TREC, the way in which it operates and the specialist 'tracks' it supports and concentrates on european involvement in TREC, examining the participants and the emergence of European TREC like exercises
-
Aldous, K.J.: ¬A system for the automatic retrieval of information from a specialist database (1996)
0.05
0.04778851 = product of:
0.14336552 = sum of:
0.14336552 = weight(_text_:specialist in 4078) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14336552 = score(doc=4078,freq=2.0), product of:
0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.44192728 = fieldWeight in 4078, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4078)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
-
Tomaiuolo, N.G.; Parker, J.: Maximizing relevant retrieval : keyword and natural language searching (1998)
0.02
0.015384067 = product of:
0.0461522 = sum of:
0.0461522 = product of:
0.0923044 = sum of:
0.0923044 = weight(_text_:22 in 6418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0923044 = score(doc=6418,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6418, 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=6418)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Online. 22(1998) no.6, S.57-58
-
Dalrymple, P.W.: Retrieval by reformulation in two library catalogs : toward a cognitive model of searching behavior (1990)
0.02
0.015384067 = product of:
0.0461522 = sum of:
0.0461522 = product of:
0.0923044 = sum of:
0.0923044 = weight(_text_:22 in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0923044 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 5089, 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=5089)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 18:43:54
-
Voorbij, H.: Title keywords and subject descriptors : a comparison of subject search entries of books in the humanities and social sciences (1998)
0.01
0.0127141215 = product of:
0.038142364 = sum of:
0.038142364 = product of:
0.07628473 = sum of:
0.07628473 = weight(_text_:librarians in 4721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07628473 = score(doc=4721,freq=4.0), product of:
0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.34995657 = fieldWeight in 4721, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4721)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- In order to compare the value of subject descriptors and title keywords as entries to subject searches, two studies were carried out. Both studies concentrated on monographs in the humanities and social sciences, held by the online public access catalogue of the National Library of the Netherlands. In the first study, a comparison was made by subject librarians between the subject descriptors and the title keywords of 475 records. They could express their opinion on a scale from 1 (descriptor is exactly or almost the same as word in title) to 7 (descriptor does not appear in title at all). It was concluded that 37 per cent of the records are considerably enhanced by a subject descriptor, and 49 per cent slightly or considerably enhanced. In the second study, subject librarians performed subject searches using title keywords and subject descriptors on the same topic. The relative recall amounted to 48 per cent and 86 per cent respectively. Failure analysis revealed the reasons why so many records that were found by subject descriptors were not found by title keywords. First, although completely meaningless titles hardly ever appear, the title of a publication does not always offer sufficient clues for title keyword searching. In those cases, descriptors may enhance the record of a publication. A second and even more important task of subject descriptors is controlling the vocabulary. Many relevant titles cannot be retrieved by title keyword searching because of the wide diversity of ways of expressing a topic. Descriptors take away the burden of vocabulary control from the user.
-
Lancaster, F.W.; Connell, T.H.; Bishop, N.; McCowan, S.: Identifying barriers to effective subject access in library catalogs (1991)
0.01
0.012586337 = product of:
0.03775901 = sum of:
0.03775901 = product of:
0.07551802 = sum of:
0.07551802 = weight(_text_:librarians in 2259) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07551802 = score(doc=2259,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.3464393 = fieldWeight in 2259, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2259)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- 51 subject searches were performed in an online catalog containing about 4,5 million records. Their success was judges in terms of lists of items, known to be relevant to the various topics, compiled by subject specialists (faculty members or authors of articles in specialized encyclopedias). Many of the items known to be relevant were not retrieved, even in very broad searches that sometimes retrieved several hundred records, and very little could be done to make them retrievable within the constraints of present cataloging practice. Librarians should recognize that library catalogs, as now implemented, offer only the most primitive of subject access and should seek to develop different types of subject access tools. - Vgl auch Letter (B.H. Weinberg) in: LTRS 36(1992) S.123-124.
-
Nicholas, D.: Are information professionals really better online searchers than end-users? : (and whose story do you believe?) (1995)
0.01
0.012586337 = product of:
0.03775901 = sum of:
0.03775901 = product of:
0.07551802 = sum of:
0.07551802 = weight(_text_:librarians in 3871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07551802 = score(doc=3871,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.3464393 = fieldWeight in 3871, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3871)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Examines the searching behaviour of Guardian journalists searching FT PROFILE online system. Using transactional log analysis compares the searching styles of journalists with those of Guardian librarians. In some respects end users conform to the picture that professionals have of them - they search with a very limited range of commands - but in other respects they confound that image - they are very quick and economical searchers. Their behaviour relates to their general information seeking behaviour, and their searching styles would be seen in this regard
-
Allan, J.; Callan, J.P.; Croft, W.B.; Ballesteros, L.; Broglio, J.; Xu, J.; Shu, H.: INQUERY at TREC-5 (1997)
0.01
0.010988619 = product of:
0.032965858 = sum of:
0.032965858 = product of:
0.065931715 = sum of:
0.065931715 = weight(_text_:22 in 3103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.065931715 = score(doc=3103,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3103, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3103)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 27. 2.1999 20:55:22
-
Ng, K.B.; Loewenstern, D.; Basu, C.; Hirsh, H.; Kantor, P.B.: Data fusion of machine-learning methods for the TREC5 routing tak (and other work) (1997)
0.01
0.010988619 = product of:
0.032965858 = sum of:
0.032965858 = product of:
0.065931715 = sum of:
0.065931715 = weight(_text_:22 in 3107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.065931715 = score(doc=3107,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3107, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3107)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 27. 2.1999 20:59:22
-
Lespinasse, K.: TREC: une conference pour l'evaluation des systemes de recherche d'information (1997)
0.01
0.008790895 = product of:
0.026372686 = sum of:
0.026372686 = product of:
0.052745372 = sum of:
0.052745372 = weight(_text_:22 in 744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052745372 = score(doc=744,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
-
¬The Fifth Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-5) (1997)
0.01
0.008790895 = product of:
0.026372686 = sum of:
0.026372686 = product of:
0.052745372 = sum of:
0.052745372 = weight(_text_:22 in 3087) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052745372 = score(doc=3087,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3087, 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=3087)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Proceedings of the 5th TREC-confrerence held in Gaithersburgh, Maryland, Nov 20-22, 1996. Aim of the conference was discussion on retrieval techniques for large test collections. Different research groups used different techniques, such as automated thesauri, term weighting, natural language techniques, relevance feedback and advanced pattern matching, for information retrieval from the same large database. This procedure makes it possible to compare the results. The proceedings include papers, tables of the system results, and brief system descriptions including timing and storage information
-
Pemberton, J.K.; Ojala, M.; Garman, N.: Head to head : searching the Web versus traditional services (1998)
0.01
0.008790895 = product of:
0.026372686 = sum of:
0.026372686 = product of:
0.052745372 = sum of:
0.052745372 = weight(_text_:22 in 3572) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052745372 = score(doc=3572,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Online. 22(1998) no.3, S.24-26,28
-
Ellis, D.: Progress and problems in information retrieval (1996)
0.01
0.008790895 = product of:
0.026372686 = sum of:
0.026372686 = product of:
0.052745372 = sum of:
0.052745372 = weight(_text_:22 in 789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052745372 = score(doc=789,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 789, 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=789)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 26. 7.2002 20:22:46
-
Smithson, S.: Information retrieval evaluation in practice : a case study approach (1994)
0.01
0.0076920334 = product of:
0.0230761 = sum of:
0.0230761 = product of:
0.0461522 = sum of:
0.0461522 = weight(_text_:22 in 7302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0461522 = score(doc=7302,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- 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
-
Blair, D.C.: STAIRS Redux : thoughts on the STAIRS evaluation, ten years after (1996)
0.01
0.0076920334 = product of:
0.0230761 = sum of:
0.0230761 = product of:
0.0461522 = sum of:
0.0461522 = weight(_text_:22 in 3002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0461522 = score(doc=3002,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 47(1996) no.1, S.4-22
-
Losee, R.M.: Determining information retrieval and filtering performance without experimentation (1995)
0.01
0.0076920334 = product of:
0.0230761 = sum of:
0.0230761 = product of:
0.0461522 = sum of:
0.0461522 = weight(_text_:22 in 3368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0461522 = score(doc=3368,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 22. 2.1996 13:14:10
-
Brown, M.E.: By any other name : accounting for failure in the naming of subject categories (1995)
0.01
0.0076920334 = product of:
0.0230761 = sum of:
0.0230761 = product of:
0.0461522 = sum of:
0.0461522 = weight(_text_:22 in 5598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0461522 = score(doc=5598,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 2.11.1996 13:08:22
-
Iivonen, M.: Consistency in the selection of search concepts and search terms (1995)
0.01
0.0065931715 = product of:
0.019779515 = sum of:
0.019779515 = product of:
0.03955903 = sum of:
0.03955903 = weight(_text_:22 in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03955903 = score(doc=1757,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1757, 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=1757)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Considers intersearcher and intrasearcher consistency in the selection of search terms. Based on an empirical study where 22 searchers from 4 different types of search environments analyzed altogether 12 search requests of 4 different types in 2 separate test situations between which 2 months elapsed. Statistically very significant differences in consistency were found according to the types of search environments and search requests. Consistency was also considered according to the extent of the scope of search concept. At level I search terms were compared character by character. At level II different search terms were accepted as the same search concept with a rather simple evaluation of linguistic expressions. At level III, in addition to level II, the hierarchical approach of the search request was also controlled. At level IV different search terms were accepted as the same search concept with a broad interpretation of the search concept. Both intersearcher and intrasearcher consistency grew most immediately after a rather simple evaluation of linguistic impressions
