Search (462 results, page 3 of 24)

  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalstudien"
  1. Harter, S.P.: ¬The Cranfield II relevance assessments : a critical evaluation (1971) 0.00 
    0.003827074 = product of:
  0.007654148 = sum of:
    0.007654148 = product of:
      0.015308296 = sum of:
        0.015308296 = weight(_text_:a in 5364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015308296 = score(doc=5364,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.28826174 = fieldWeight in 5364, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5364)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  2. Yerbury, H.; Parker, J.: Novice searchers' use of familiar structures in searching bibliographic information retrieval systems (1998) 0.00 
    0.0037970573 = product of:
  0.0075941146 = sum of:
    0.0075941146 = product of:
      0.015188229 = sum of:
        0.015188229 = weight(_text_:a in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015188229 = score(doc=2874,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.28600082 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
              5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
                28.0 = termFreq=28.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Reports results of a study of the use of metaphors as problem solving mechanisms by novice searchers of bibliographic databases. Metaphors provide a framework or 'familiar structure' of credible associations within which relationships in other domains may be considered. 28 students taking an undergraduate course in information retrieval at Sydney University of Technology, were recorded as they 'talked through' a search on a bibliographic retrieval system. The transcripts were analyzed using conventional methods and the NUDIST software package for qualitative research. A range of metaphors was apparent from the language use by students in the search process. Those which predominated were: a journey; human interaction; a building or matching process; a problem solving process, and a search for a quantity. Many of the studentes experiencing the interaction as a problem solving process or a search for quantity perceived the outcomes as successful. Concludes that when memory for operating methods and procedures is incomplete an unconscious approach through the use of a conceptual system which is consonant with the task at hand may also lead to success in bibliographic searching
    Type
    a
  3. Kristensen, J.: Expanding end-users' query statements for free text searching with a search-aid thesaurus (1993) 0.00 
    0.0035799001 = product of:
  0.0071598003 = sum of:
    0.0071598003 = product of:
      0.014319601 = sum of:
        0.014319601 = weight(_text_:a in 6621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014319601 = score(doc=6621,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.26964417 = fieldWeight in 6621, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6621)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Tests the effectiveness of a thesaurus as a search-aid in free text searching of a full text database. A set of queries was searched against a large full text database of newspaper articles. The thesaurus contained equivalence, hierarchical and associative relationships. Each query was searched in five modes: basic search, synonym search, narrower term search, related term search, and union of all previous searches. The searches were analyzed in terms of relative recall and precision
    Type
    a
  4. Rijsbergen, C.J. van: Foundations of evaluation (1974) 0.00 
    0.0033826875 = product of:
  0.006765375 = sum of:
    0.006765375 = product of:
      0.01353075 = sum of:
        0.01353075 = weight(_text_:a in 1078) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01353075 = score(doc=1078,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.25478977 = fieldWeight in 1078, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=1078)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  5. Harter, S.P.: Search term combinations and retrieval overlap : a proposed methodology and case study (1990) 0.00 
    0.00334869 = product of:
  0.00669738 = sum of:
    0.00669738 = product of:
      0.01339476 = sum of:
        0.01339476 = weight(_text_:a in 339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01339476 = score(doc=339,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.25222903 = fieldWeight in 339, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=339)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  6. Foster, A.; Ford, N.: Serendipity and information seeking : an empirical study (2003) 0.00 
    0.00334869 = product of:
  0.00669738 = sum of:
    0.00669738 = product of:
      0.01339476 = sum of:
        0.01339476 = weight(_text_:a in 1083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01339476 = score(doc=1083,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.25222903 = fieldWeight in 1083, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1083)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  7. Singhal, A.: Document length normalization (1996) 0.00 
    0.00334869 = product of:
  0.00669738 = sum of:
    0.00669738 = product of:
      0.01339476 = sum of:
        0.01339476 = weight(_text_:a in 6630) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01339476 = score(doc=6630,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.25222903 = fieldWeight in 6630, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6630)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    In the Text REtrieval Conference (TREC) collection - a large full text experimental text collection with varying documents lengths - observes that the likelihood of a document being judged relevant by a user increases with the document length. A retrieval strategy, such as the vector space cosine match, that retrieves documents of different lengths with roughly equal chances, will not optimally retrieve useful documents from such a collection. Presents a modified technique (pivoted cosine normalization) that attempts to match the likelihood of retrieving documents of all lengths to the likelihood of their relevance and shows that this technique yields significant improvements in retrieval effectiveness
    Type
    a
  8. Della Mea, V.; Mizzaro, S.: Measuring retrieval effectiveness : a new proposal and a first experimental validation (2004) 0.00 
    0.00334869 = product of:
  0.00669738 = sum of:
    0.00669738 = product of:
      0.01339476 = sum of:
        0.01339476 = weight(_text_:a in 2263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01339476 = score(doc=2263,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.25222903 = fieldWeight in 2263, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2263)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Most common effectiveness measures for information retrieval systems are based an the assumptions of binary relevance (either a document is relevant to a given query or it is not) and binary retrieval (either a document is retrieved or it is not). In this article, these assumptions are questioned, and a new measure named ADM (average distance measure) is proposed, discussed from a conceptual point of view, and experimentally validated an Text Retrieval Conference (TREC) data. Both conceptual analysis and experimental evidence demonstrate ADM's adequacy in measuring the effectiveness of information retrieval systems. Some potential problems about precision and recall are also highlighted and discussed.
    Type
    a
  9. Beaulieu, M.: Approaches to user-based studies in information seeking and retrieval : a Sheffield perspective (2003) 0.00 
    0.00334869 = product of:
  0.00669738 = sum of:
    0.00669738 = product of:
      0.01339476 = sum of:
        0.01339476 = weight(_text_:a in 4692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01339476 = score(doc=4692,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.25222903 = fieldWeight in 4692, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4692)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  10. Hartley, D.: ¬A 'laboratory' method for the comparison of retrieval effectiveness in manual and online searching (1984) 0.00 
    0.0033143433 = product of:
  0.0066286866 = sum of:
    0.0066286866 = product of:
      0.013257373 = sum of:
        0.013257373 = weight(_text_:a in 8919) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013257373 = score(doc=8919,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.24964198 = fieldWeight in 8919, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8919)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The paper provides a brief review of a number of published studies of the comparative retrieval effectiveness of manual and online searching. A description of a 'laboratory' approach to the comparison of retrieval effectiveness of manual and online searching is presented. Results, which have been obtained, using this approach are presented. it is suggested that the methodology could be adopted easily elsewhere
    Type
    a
  11. Bar-Ilan, J.: Methods for measuring search engine performance over time (2002) 0.00 
    0.0033143433 = product of:
  0.0066286866 = sum of:
    0.0066286866 = product of:
      0.013257373 = sum of:
        0.013257373 = weight(_text_:a in 305) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013257373 = score(doc=305,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.24964198 = fieldWeight in 305, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=305)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This study introduces methods for evaluating search engine performance over a time period. Several measures are defined, which as a whole describe search engine functionality over time. The necessary setup for such studies is described, and the use of these measures is illustrated through a specific example. The set of measures introduced here may serve as a guideline for the search engines for testing and improving their functionality. We recommend setting up a standard suite of measures for evaluating search engine performance.
    Type
    a
  12. Wilkes, A.; Nelson, A.: Subject searching in two online catalogs : authority control vs. non authority control (1995) 0.00 
    0.0031324127 = product of:
  0.0062648254 = sum of:
    0.0062648254 = product of:
      0.012529651 = sum of:
        0.012529651 = weight(_text_:a in 4450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012529651 = score(doc=4450,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.23593865 = fieldWeight in 4450, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4450)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Compares the results of subject searching in 2 online catalogue systems, one system with authority control, the other without. Transaction logs from Library A (no authority control) were analyzed to identify searching patterns of users; 885 searches were attempted, 351 (39,7%) by subject. 142 (40,6%) of these subject searches were unsuccessful. Identical searches were performed in a comparable library that has authority control, Library B. Terms identified in 'see' references at Library B were searched in Library A. 105 (73,9%) of the searches that appeared to fail would have retrievd at least one, and usually many, records if a link had been provided between the term chosen by the user and the term used by the system
    Type
    a
  13. Leppanen, E.: Homografiongelma tekstihaussa ja homografien disambiguoinnin vaikutukset (1996) 0.00 
    0.0030444188 = product of:
  0.0060888375 = sum of:
    0.0060888375 = product of:
      0.012177675 = sum of:
        0.012177675 = weight(_text_:a in 27) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012177675 = score(doc=27,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.22931081 = fieldWeight in 27, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=27)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Homonymy is known to often cause false drops in free text searching in a full text database. The problem is quite common and difficult to avoid in Finnish, but nobody has examined it before. Reports on a study that examined the frequency of, and solutions to, the homonymy problem, based on searches made in a Finnish full text database containing about 55.000 newspaper articles. The results indicate that homonymy is not a very serious problem in full text searching, with only about 1 search result set out of 4 containing false drops caused by homonymy. Several other reasons for nonrelevance were much more common. However, in some set results there were a considerable number of homonymy errors, so the number seems to be very random. A study was also made into whether homonyms can be disambiguated by syntactic analysis. The result was that 75,2% of homonyms were disambiguated by this method. Verb homonyms were considerably easier to disambiguate than substantives. Although homonymy is not a very big problem it could perhaps easily be eliminated if there was a suitable syntactic analyzer in the IR system
    Type
    a
  14. Zhang, X.: Collaborative relevance judgment : a group consensus method for evaluating user search performance (2002) 0.00 
    0.0030444188 = product of:
  0.0060888375 = sum of:
    0.0060888375 = product of:
      0.012177675 = sum of:
        0.012177675 = weight(_text_:a in 250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012177675 = score(doc=250,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.22931081 = fieldWeight in 250, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=250)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Relevance judgment has traditionally been considered a personal and subjective matter. A user's search and the search result are treated as an isolated event. To consider the collaborative nature of information retrieval (IR) in a group/organization or even societal context, this article proposes a method that measures relevance based on group/peer consensus. The method can be used in IR experiments. In this method, the relevance of a document is decided by group consensus, or more specifically, by the number of users (or experiment participants) who retrieve it for the same search question. The more users who retrieve it, the more relevant the document will be considered. A user's search performance can be measured by a relevance score based on this notion. The article reports the results of an experiment using this method to compare the search performance of different types of users. Related issues with the method and future directions are also discussed
    Type
    a
  15. Beall, J.; Kafadar, K.: Measuring typographical errors' impact on retrieval in bibliographic databases (2007) 0.00 
    0.0030444188 = product of:
  0.0060888375 = sum of:
    0.0060888375 = product of:
      0.012177675 = sum of:
        0.012177675 = weight(_text_:a in 261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012177675 = score(doc=261,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.22931081 = fieldWeight in 261, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=261)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Typographical errors can block access to records in online catalogs; but, when a word contains a typo and is also spelled correctly elsewhere in the same record, access may not be blocked. To quantify the effect of typographical errors in records on information retrieval, we conducted a study to measure the proportion of records that contain a typographical error but that do not also contain a correct spelling of the same word. This article presents the experimental design, results of the study, and a statistical analysis of the results.We find that the average proportion of records that are blocked by the presence of a typo (that is, records in which a correct spelling of the word does not also occur) ranges from 35% to 99%, depending upon the frequency of the word being searched and the likelihood of the word being misspelled.
    Type
    a
  16. Blandford, A.; Adams, A.; Attfield, S.; Buchanan, G.; Gow, J.; Makri, S.; Rimmer, J.; Warwick, C.: ¬The PRET A Rapporter framework : evaluating digital libraries from the perspective of information work (2008) 0.00 
    0.0030444188 = product of:
  0.0060888375 = sum of:
    0.0060888375 = product of:
      0.012177675 = sum of:
        0.012177675 = weight(_text_:a in 2021) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012177675 = score(doc=2021,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.22931081 = fieldWeight in 2021, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2021)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The strongest tradition of IR systems evaluation has focused on system effectiveness; more recently, there has been a growing interest in evaluation of Interactive IR systems, balancing system and user-oriented evaluation criteria. In this paper we shift the focus to considering how IR systems, and particularly digital libraries, can be evaluated to assess (and improve) their fit with users' broader work activities. Taking this focus, we answer a different set of evaluation questions that reveal more about the design of interfaces, user-system interactions and how systems may be deployed in the information working context. The planning and conduct of such evaluation studies share some features with the established methods for conducting IR evaluation studies, but come with a shift in emphasis; for example, a greater range of ethical considerations may be pertinent. We present the PRET A Rapporter framework for structuring user-centred evaluation studies and illustrate its application to three evaluation studies of digital library systems.
    Type
    a
  17. Bates, M.J.: Document familiarity, relevance, and Bradford's law : the Getty Online Searching Project report; no.5 (1996) 0.00 
    0.0030255679 = product of:
  0.0060511357 = sum of:
    0.0060511357 = product of:
      0.012102271 = sum of:
        0.012102271 = weight(_text_:a in 6978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012102271 = score(doc=6978,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.22789092 = fieldWeight in 6978, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6978)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The Getty Online Searching Project studied the end user searching behaviour of 27 humanities scholars over a 2 year period. A number of scholars anticipated that they were already familiar with a percentage of records their searches retrieved. High document familiarity can be a significant factor in searching: Draws implications regarding the impact of high document familiarity on relevance and information retrieval theory. Makes speculations regarding high document familiarity and Bradford's law
    Type
    a
  18. Carterette, B.: Test collections (2009) 0.00 
    0.0030255679 = product of:
  0.0060511357 = sum of:
    0.0060511357 = product of:
      0.012102271 = sum of:
        0.012102271 = weight(_text_:a in 3891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012102271 = score(doc=3891,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.22789092 = fieldWeight in 3891, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3891)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Research and development of search engines and other information retrieval (IR) systems proceeds by a cycle of design, implementation, and experimentation, with the results of each experiment influencing design decisions in the next iteration of the cycle. Batch experiments on test collections help ensure that this process goes as smoothly and as quickly as possible. A test collection comprises a collection of documents, a set of information needs, and judgments of the relevance of documents to those needs.
    Type
    a
  19. Crestani, F.; Ruthven, I.; Sanderson, M.; Rijsbergen, C.J. van: ¬The troubles with using a logical model of IR on a large collection of documents : experimenting retrieval by logical imaging on TREC (1996) 0.00 
    0.0029294936 = product of:
  0.005858987 = sum of:
    0.005858987 = product of:
      0.011717974 = sum of:
        0.011717974 = weight(_text_:a in 7522) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011717974 = score(doc=7522,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.22065444 = fieldWeight in 7522, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=7522)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  20. Brown, E.W.; Carmel, D.; Franz, M.; Ittycheriah, A.; Kanungo, T.; Maarek, Y.; McCarley, J.S.; Mack, R.L.; Prager, J.M.; Smith, J.R.; Soffer, A.; Zien, J.Y.; Marwick, A.D.: IBM research activities at TREC (2005) 0.00 
    0.0029294936 = product of:
  0.005858987 = sum of:
    0.005858987 = product of:
      0.011717974 = sum of:
        0.011717974 = weight(_text_:a in 5093) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011717974 = score(doc=5093,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.22065444 = fieldWeight in 5093, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5093)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a

Authors

Years

Languages

Types

  • a 443
  • el 9
  • s 9
  • r 5
  • m 4
  • p 2
  • d 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications