Search (91 results, page 1 of 5)

  • × theme_ss:"Suchmaschinen"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Gardner, T.; Iannella, R.: Architecture and software solutions (2000) 0.10 
    0.1019371 = product of:
  0.2038742 = sum of:
    0.2038742 = sum of:
      0.14906852 = weight(_text_:light in 4867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.14906852 = score(doc=4867,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.51047 = fieldWeight in 4867, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4867)
      0.054805685 = weight(_text_:22 in 4867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.054805685 = score(doc=4867,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4867, 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=4867)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The current subject gateways have evolved over time when the discipline of Internet resource discovery was in its infancy. This is reflected by the lack of well-established, light-weight, deployable, easy-to-use, standards for metadata and information retrieval. We provide an introduction to the architecture, standards and software solutions in use by subject gateways, and to the issues that must be addressed to support future subject gateways
    Date
    22. 6.2002 19:38:24
  2. Stock, M.; Stock, W.G.: Internet-Suchwerkzeuge im Vergleich (III) : Informationslinguistik und -statistik: AltaVista, FAST und Northern Light (2001) 0.05 
    0.052703682 = product of:
  0.105407365 = sum of:
    0.105407365 = product of:
      0.21081473 = sum of:
        0.21081473 = weight(_text_:light in 5578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.21081473 = score(doc=5578,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.7219136 = fieldWeight in 5578, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5578)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Suchmaschinen im World Wide Web arbeiten automatisch: Sie spüren Dokumente auf, indexieren sie, halten die Datenbank (mehr oder minder) aktuell und bieten den Kunden Retrievaloberflächen an. In unserem Known-Item-Retrievaltest (Password 11/2000) schnitten - in dieser Reihenfolge - Google, Alta Vista, Northern Light und FAST (All the Web) am besten ab. Die letzten drei Systeme arbeiten mit einer Kombination aus informationslinguistischen und informationsstatistischen Algorithmen, weshalb wir sie hier gemeinsam besprechen wollen. Im Zentrum unserer informationswissenschaftlichen Analysen stehen die "Highlights" der jeweiligen Suchwerkzeuge
  3. Sirapyan, N.: In Search of... (2001) 0.03 
    0.027950348 = product of:
  0.055900697 = sum of:
    0.055900697 = product of:
      0.11180139 = sum of:
        0.11180139 = weight(_text_:light in 5661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11180139 = score(doc=5661,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.3828525 = fieldWeight in 5661, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5661)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    In a series of capsule reviews of 20 search engines Sirapyan gives a good overview of the state of Internet search tools. She starts out with a clear discussion of the types of search tools available, the availability of advanced features such as Boolean queries and differences between directories, regular search engines and metasearch engines. It is unclear from the article whether the author and other testers used the same searches across all of the 20 tools but each review clearly outlines perceived strengths and weaknesses, gives tips on the advanced features, if any, of the search tool in question and suggests the types of searches that are most successful. The tools which receive top honors are Google, Northern Light, HotBot and Oingo. Finally, there is an extra sidebar the discusses meta and specialized search tools such as Infozoid and FirstGov. I can't help thinking that the usefulness of this article is related to the fact that Sirapyan is PC Magazine's librarian and goes into greater depth on those features that are of interest to information professionals
  4. Landoni, M.; Bell, S.: Information retrieval techniques for evaluating search engines : a critical overview (2000) 0.03 
    0.027950348 = product of:
  0.055900697 = sum of:
    0.055900697 = product of:
      0.11180139 = sum of:
        0.11180139 = weight(_text_:light in 716) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11180139 = score(doc=716,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.3828525 = fieldWeight in 716, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=716)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The objective of this paper is to highlight the importance of a scientifically sounded approach to search engine evaluation. Nowadays there is a flourishing literature which describes various attempts at conducting such evaluation by following all sort of approaches, but very often only the final results are published with little, if any, information about the methodology and the procedures adopted. These various experiments have been critically investigated and catalogued according to their scientific foundation by Bell [1] in the attempt to provide a valuable framework for future studies in this area. This paper reconsiders some of Bell's ideas in the light of the crisis of classic evaluation techniques for information retrieval and tries to envisage some form of collaboration between the IR and web communities in order to design a better and more consistent platform for the evaluation of tools for interactive information retrieval.
  5. Stock, M.; Stock, W.G.: Recherchieren im Internet (2004) 0.03 
    0.027402842 = product of:
  0.054805685 = sum of:
    0.054805685 = product of:
      0.10961137 = sum of:
        0.10961137 = weight(_text_:22 in 4686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10961137 = score(doc=4686,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4686, 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=4686)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    27.11.2005 18:04:22
  6. Mostafa, J.: Bessere Suchmaschinen für das Web (2006) 0.03 
    0.025484275 = product of:
  0.05096855 = sum of:
    0.05096855 = sum of:
      0.03726713 = weight(_text_:light in 4871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03726713 = score(doc=4871,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.1276175 = fieldWeight in 4871, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=4871)
      0.013701421 = weight(_text_:22 in 4871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.013701421 = score(doc=4871,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 4871, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=4871)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Vorsortiert und radförmig präsentiert Statt einfach nur die gewichtete Ergebnisliste zu präsentieren (die relativ leicht durch Spoofing manipuliert werden kann), versuchen einige Suchmaschinen, unter denjenigen Webseiten, die am ehesten der Anfrage entsprechen, Ähnlichkeiten und Unterschiede zu finden und die Ergebnisse in Gruppen unterteilt darzustellen. Diese Muster können Wörter sein, Synonyme oder sogar übergeordnete Themenbereiche, die nach speziellen Regeln ermittelt werden. Solche Systeme ordnen jeder gefundenen Linkgruppe einen charakteristischen Begriff zu. Der Anwender kann die Suche dann weiter verfeinern, indem er eine Untergruppe von Ergebnissen auswählt. So liefern etwa die Suchmaschinen »Northern Light« (der Pionier auf diesem Gebiet) und »Clusty« nach Gruppen (Clustern) geordnete Ergebnisse. »Mooter«, eine innovative Suchmaschine, die ebenfalls diese Gruppiertechnik verwendet, stellt die Gruppen zudem grafisch dar (siehe Grafik links unten). Das System ordnet die UntergruppenButtons radförmig um einen zentralen Button an, der sämtliche Ergebnisse enthält. Ein Klick auf die UntergruppenButtons erzeugt Listen relevanter Links und zeigt neue, damit zusammenhängende Gruppen. Mooter erinnert sich daran, welche Untergruppen gewählt wurden. Noch genauere Ergebnisse erhält der Nutzer, wenn er die Verfeinerungsoption wählt: Sie kombiniert bei früheren Suchen ausgewählte Gruppen mit der aktuellen Anfrage. Ein ähnliches System, das ebenfalls visuelle Effekte nutzt, ist »Kartoo«. Es handelt sich dabei um eine so genannte Meta-Suchmaschine: Sie gibt die Nutzeranfragen an andere Suchmaschinen weiter und präsentiert die gesammelten Ergebnisse in grafischer Form. Kartoo liefert eine Liste von Schlüsselbegriffen von den unterschiedlichen Webseiten und generiert daraus eine »Landkarte«. Auf ihr werden wichtige Seiten als kons (Symbole) dargestellt und Bezüge zwischen den Seiten mit Labeln und Pfaden versehen. Jedes Label lässt sich zur weiteren Verfeinerung der Suche nutzen. Einige neue Computertools erweitern die Suche dadurch, dass sie nicht nur das Web durchforsten, sondern auch die Festplatte des eigenen Rechners. Zurzeit braucht man dafür noch eigenständige Programme. Aber Google hat beispielsweise kürzlich seine »Desktop Search« angekündigt, die zwei Funktionen kombiniert: Der Anwender kann angeben, ob das Internet, die Festplatte oder beides zusammen durchsucht werden soll. Die nächste Version von Microsoft Windows (Codename »Longhorn«) soll mit ähnlichen Fähigkeiten ausgestattet werden: Longhorn soll die implizite Suche beherrschen, bei der Anwender ohne Eingabe spezifischer Anfragen relevante Informationen auffinden können. (Dabei werden Techniken angewandt, die in einem anderen Microsoft-Projekt namens »Stuff I've seen« - »Sachen, die ich gesehen habe« - entwickelt wurden.) Bei der impliziten Suche werden Schlüsselwörter aus der Textinformation gewonnen, die der Anwender in jüngster Zeit auf dem Rechner verarbeitet oder verändert hat - etwa E-Mails oder Word-Dokumente -, um damit auf der Festplatte gespeicherte Informationen wiederzufinden. Möglicherweise wird Microsoft diese Suchfunktion auch auf Webseiten ausdehnen. Außerdem sollen Anwender auf dem Bildschirm gezeigte Textinhalte leichter in Suchanfragen umsetzen können." ...
    Date
    22. 1.2006 18:34:49
  7. Jörn, F.: Wie Google für uns nach der ominösen Gluonenkraft stöbert : Software-Krabbler machen sich vor der Anfrage auf die Suche - Das Netz ist etwa fünfhundertmal größer als alles Durchforschte (2001) 0.03 
    0.025484275 = product of:
  0.05096855 = sum of:
    0.05096855 = sum of:
      0.03726713 = weight(_text_:light in 3684) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03726713 = score(doc=3684,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.1276175 = fieldWeight in 3684, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3684)
      0.013701421 = weight(_text_:22 in 3684) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.013701421 = score(doc=3684,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 3684, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3684)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Da gibt es Spezialisten für alles, etwa Webbrain (www.webbrain.com), wo zur Sache gegangen werden kann bis hinunter zu Dürrenmatt, es gibt Sammlungen für Universitäten und Ausbildung (www.searchedu.com) und deutsche für Technik (www.fiz-technik.de), für Juristisches, Medizinisches und, von den Mormonen gesponsert, für Ahnenforschung (www.familysearch.com); Suche nach vermißten Kindern (www.fredi.org) ist genauso möglich wie nach Gratisgeschenken (www.kostenlos.de) oder in Bücherkatalogen samt Verkauf (www.amazon.de). Nur die deutsche Telefonbuchsuche wird immer schlechter. Es gibt Maschinen, die freies Fragen zulassen - und dann erstaunliche Ergebnisse bringen, etwa Northern Light (www.northernlight.com) auf die deutsch gestellte Frage: "Wie alt wurde Cäsar?" Wird dasselbe dagegen von Julius Cäsar" erfragt, ist man zwei Klicks später beim Ergebnis. Hier muß maschinelle Intelligenz noch üben. Erfahrungsgemäß denkt man sich besser selbst eine Reihe von Begriffen aus, die das zu findende Dokument enthalten könnte, und variiert, bis die Treffer näherkommen, so auch bei Xipolis (www.xipolis.net), das sich Wissensbibliothek nennt, Cäsars Geburtsjahr aber aus dem 24bändigen Brockhaus nur gegen Gebühr herausrücken will. Wissen.de gibt's frank und frei, und die berühmte Encyclopedia Britannica (www.Britannica.com) ist inzwischen auch schon offen! Kepnt man ein paar Worte des genauen Wortlauts, sagen wir, "zu Mantua in Banden", so setze man sie in Anführungszeichen und lasse nur nach dieser Folge suchen. Google hält durchsuchte Seiten (bis zu rund 100 Kilobyte) - sozusagen das ganze Netz, unvorstellbar! - in Kopie vor und kann selbst dann aus seinem Archiv dienen, wenn das Original schlecht oder nicht mehr erreichbar ist. Sie schnell anzUklicken hat den Zusatzvorteil, daß die Suchbegriffe farbig hervorgehoben werden. Und man sieht, wie die Seite vielleicht vor zwei Monaten beim letzten Google-Besuch ausgesehen hat. Insgesamt hat Google stets über hundert Indizes mit jeweils mehreren Terabyte Daten am Netz; Googles Legebatterie von über 8000 billigen Linux-PC-Servern grast in mehr a s einem Petabyte eigenem Speicher (1011 Byte). Dennoch: Die größte Sorge aller Netzfreunde ist das "unsichtbare Netz", das schätzungsweise fünfhundertmal umfangreicher ist als das mit Suchmaschinen Durchforschbare.
    Date
    22. 6.2005 9:52:00
  8. MacLeod, R.: Promoting a subject gateway : a case study from EEVL (Edinburgh Engineering Virtual Library) (2000) 0.02 
    0.02422092 = product of:
  0.04844184 = sum of:
    0.04844184 = product of:
      0.09688368 = sum of:
        0.09688368 = weight(_text_:22 in 4872) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09688368 = score(doc=4872,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 4872, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4872)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 6.2002 19:40:22
  9. Back, J.: ¬An evaluation of relevancy ranking techniques used by Internet search engines (2000) 0.02 
    0.023977486 = product of:
  0.047954973 = sum of:
    0.047954973 = product of:
      0.095909946 = sum of:
        0.095909946 = weight(_text_:22 in 3445) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.095909946 = score(doc=3445,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = 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
  10. Bawden, D.: Google and the universe of knowledge (2008) 0.02 
    0.023977486 = product of:
  0.047954973 = sum of:
    0.047954973 = product of:
      0.095909946 = sum of:
        0.095909946 = weight(_text_:22 in 844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.095909946 = score(doc=844,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 844, 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=844)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    7. 6.2008 16:22:20
  11. Radev, D.R.; Libner, K.; Fan, W.: Getting answers to natural language questions on the Web (2002) 0.02 
    0.023291955 = product of:
  0.04658391 = sum of:
    0.04658391 = product of:
      0.09316782 = sum of:
        0.09316782 = weight(_text_:light in 5204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09316782 = score(doc=5204,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.31904373 = fieldWeight in 5204, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5204)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Seven hundred natural language questions from TREC-8 and TREC-9 were sent by Radev, Libner, and Fan to each of nine web search engines. The top 40 sites returned by each system were stored for evaluation of their productivity of correct answers. Each question per engine was scored as the sum of the reciprocal ranks of identified correct answers. The large number of zero scores gave a positive skew violating the normality assumption for ANOVA, so values were transformed to zero for no hit and one for one or more hits. The non-zero values were then square-root transformed to remove the remaining positive skew. Interactions were observed between search engine and answer type (name, place, date, et cetera), search engine and number of proper nouns in the query, search engine and the need for time limitation, and search engine and total query words. All effects were significant. Shortest queries had the highest mean scores. One or more proper nouns present provides a significant advantage. Non-time dependent queries have an advantage. Place, name, person, and text description had mean scores between .85 and .9 with date at .81 and number at .59. There were significant differences in score by search engine. Search engines found at least one correct answer in between 87.7 and 75.45 of the cases. Google and Northern Light were just short of a 90% hit rate. No evidence indicated that a particular engine was better at answering any particular sort of question.
  12. Lempel, R.; Moran, S.: SALSA: the stochastic approach for link-structure analysis (2001) 0.02 
    0.023291955 = product of:
  0.04658391 = sum of:
    0.04658391 = product of:
      0.09316782 = sum of:
        0.09316782 = weight(_text_:light in 10) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09316782 = score(doc=10,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.31904373 = fieldWeight in 10, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=10)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Today, when searching for information on the WWW, one usually performs a query through a term-based search engine. These engines return, as the query's result, a list of Web pages whose contents matches the query. For broad-topic queries, such searches often result in a huge set of retrieved documents, many of which are irrelevant to the user. However, much information is contained in the link-structure of the WWW. Information such as which pages are linked to others can be used to augment search algorithms. In this context, Jon Kleinberg introduced the notion of two distinct types of Web pages: hubs and authorities. Kleinberg argued that hubs and authorities exhibit a mutually reinforcing relationship: a good hub will point to many authorities, and a good authority will be pointed at by many hubs. In light of this, he dervised an algoirthm aimed at finding authoritative pages. We present SALSA, a new stochastic approach for link-structure analysis, which examines random walks on graphs derived from the link-structure. We show that both SALSA and Kleinberg's Mutual Reinforcement approach employ the same metaalgorithm. We then prove that SALSA is quivalent to a weighted in degree analysis of the link-sturcutre of WWW subgraphs, making it computationally more efficient than the Mutual reinforcement approach. We compare that results of applying SALSA to the results derived through Kleinberg's approach. These comparisions reveal a topological Phenomenon called the TKC effectwhich, in certain cases, prevents the Mutual reinforcement approach from identifying meaningful authorities.
  13. Jansen, B.J.; Spink, A.; Blakely, C.; Koshman, S.: Defining a session on Web search engines (2007) 0.02 
    0.023291955 = product of:
  0.04658391 = sum of:
    0.04658391 = product of:
      0.09316782 = sum of:
        0.09316782 = weight(_text_:light in 285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09316782 = score(doc=285,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.31904373 = fieldWeight in 285, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=285)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Detecting query reformulations within a session by a Web searcher is an important area of research for designing more helpful searching systems and targeting content to particular users. Methods explored by other researchers include both qualitative (i.e., the use of human judges to manually analyze query patterns on usually small samples) and nondeterministic algorithms, typically using large amounts of training data to predict query modification during sessions. In this article, we explore three alternative methods for detection of session boundaries. All three methods are computationally straightforward and therefore easily implemented for detection of session changes. We examine 2,465,145 interactions from 534,507 users of Dogpile.com on May 6, 2005. We compare session analysis using (a) Internet Protocol address and cookie; (b) Internet Protocol address, cookie, and a temporal limit on intrasession interactions; and (c) Internet Protocol address, cookie, and query reformulation patterns. Overall, our analysis shows that defining sessions by query reformulation along with Internet Protocol address and cookie provides the best measure, resulting in an 82% increase in the count of sessions. Regardless of the method used, the mean session length was fewer than three queries, and the mean session duration was less than 30 min. Searchers most often modified their query by changing query terms (nearly 23% of all query modifications) rather than adding or deleting terms. Implications are that for measuring searching traffic, unique sessions may be a better indicator than the common metric of unique visitors. This research also sheds light on the more complex aspects of Web searching involving query modifications and may lead to advances in searching tools.
  14. Price, A.: Five new Danish subject gateways under development (2000) 0.02 
    0.017126776 = product of:
  0.034253553 = sum of:
    0.034253553 = product of:
      0.068507105 = sum of:
        0.068507105 = weight(_text_:22 in 4878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.068507105 = score(doc=4878,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4878, 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=4878)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 6.2002 19:41:31
  15. Eggeling, T.; Kroschel, A.: Alles finden im Web (2000) 0.02 
    0.017126776 = product of:
  0.034253553 = sum of:
    0.034253553 = product of:
      0.068507105 = sum of:
        0.068507105 = weight(_text_:22 in 4884) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.068507105 = score(doc=4884,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4884, 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=4884)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    9. 7.2000 14:06:22
  16. Poulakos, I.: ¬"Die Leute suchen immer dasselbe" (2001) 0.02 
    0.017126776 = product of:
  0.034253553 = sum of:
    0.034253553 = product of:
      0.068507105 = sum of:
        0.068507105 = weight(_text_:22 in 5541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.068507105 = score(doc=5541,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5541, 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=5541)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    18. 1.1997 12:15:22
  17. Sauer, D.: Alles schneller finden (2001) 0.02 
    0.017126776 = product of:
  0.034253553 = sum of:
    0.034253553 = product of:
      0.068507105 = sum of:
        0.068507105 = weight(_text_:22 in 6835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.068507105 = score(doc=6835,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 6835, 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=6835)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    11.11.2001 17:25:22
  18. Breyer, K.: Kommerz statt Information (2002) 0.02 
    0.017126776 = product of:
  0.034253553 = sum of:
    0.034253553 = product of:
      0.068507105 = sum of:
        0.068507105 = weight(_text_:22 in 568) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.068507105 = score(doc=568,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 568, 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=568)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    9. 5.2002 21:21:22
  19. Peereboom, M.: DutchESS : Dutch Electronic Subject Service - a Dutch national collaborative effort (2000) 0.01 
    0.013701421 = product of:
  0.027402842 = sum of:
    0.027402842 = product of:
      0.054805685 = sum of:
        0.054805685 = weight(_text_:22 in 4869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054805685 = score(doc=4869,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4869, 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=4869)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 6.2002 19:39:23
  20. Campbell, D.: Australian subject gateways : political and strategic issues (2000) 0.01 
    0.013701421 = product of:
  0.027402842 = sum of:
    0.027402842 = product of:
      0.054805685 = sum of:
        0.054805685 = weight(_text_:22 in 4875) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054805685 = score(doc=4875,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4875, 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=4875)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 6.2002 19:41:16

Authors

Languages

  • d 58
  • e 33

Types

  • a 84
  • m 4
  • el 3
  • x 2
  • More… Less…

Themes