Search (210 results, page 1 of 11)

0.076250434 = product of:
  0.15250087 = sum of:
    0.15250087 = sum of:
      0.0819015 = weight(_text_:i in 5541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0819015 = score(doc=5541,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.41672117 = fieldWeight in 5541, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5541)
      0.07059936 = weight(_text_:22 in 5541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07059936 = score(doc=5541,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = 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)

Date

18. 1.1997 12:15:22

0.053375304 = product of:
  0.10675061 = sum of:
    0.10675061 = sum of:
      0.057331055 = weight(_text_:i in 2186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.057331055 = score(doc=2186,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.29170483 = fieldWeight in 2186, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2186)
      0.049419552 = weight(_text_:22 in 2186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049419552 = score(doc=2186,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2186, 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=2186)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

25.12.1998 19:22:51

0.047562465 = sum of:
  0.029912626 = product of:
    0.119650505 = sum of:
      0.119650505 = weight(_text_:authors in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.119650505 = score(doc=5288,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.23755142 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.50368255 = fieldWeight in 5288, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5288)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.01764984 = product of:
    0.03529968 = sum of:
      0.03529968 = weight(_text_:22 in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03529968 = score(doc=5288,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5288, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5288)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe a new method to improve the analysis of search engine results by considering the provider level as well as the domain level. This approach is tested by conducting a study using queries on the topic of insurance comparisons. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted an empirical study that analyses the results of search queries aimed at comparing insurance companies. The authors used a self-developed software system that automatically queries commercial search engines and automatically extracts the content of the returned result pages for further data analysis. The data analysis was carried out using the KNIME Analytics Platform. Findings Google's top search results are served by only a few providers that frequently appear in these results. The authors show that some providers operate several domains on the same topic and that these domains appear for the same queries in the result lists. Research limitations/implications The authors demonstrate the feasibility of this approach and draw conclusions for further investigations from the empirical study. However, the study is a limited use case based on a limited number of search queries. Originality/value The proposed method allows large-scale analysis of the composition of the top results from commercial search engines. It allows using valid empirical data to determine what users actually see on the search engine result pages.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.046606395 = product of:
  0.09321279 = sum of:
    0.09321279 = sum of:
      0.05791311 = weight(_text_:i in 2117) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05791311 = score(doc=2117,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.29466638 = fieldWeight in 2117, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2117)
      0.03529968 = weight(_text_:22 in 2117) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03529968 = score(doc=2117,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2117, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2117)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper presents an application of the model described in Part I to the evaluation of Web search engines by undergraduates. The study observed how 36 undergraduate used four major search engines to find information for their own individual problems and how they evaluated these engines based an actual interaction with the search engines. User evaluation was based an 16 performance measures representing five evaluation criteria: relevance, efficiency, utility, user satisfaction, and connectivity. Non-performance (user-related) measures were also applied. Each participant searched his/ her own topic an all four engines and provided satisfaction ratings for system features and interaction and reasons for satisfaction. Each also made relevance judgements of retrieved items in relation to his/her own information need and participated in post-search Interviews to provide reactions to the search results and overall performance. The study found significant differences in precision PR1 relative recall, user satisfaction with output display, time saving, value of search results, and overall performance among the four engines and also significant engine by discipline interactions an all these measures. In addition, the study found significant differences in user satisfaction with response time among four engines, and significant engine by discipline interaction in user satisfaction with search interface. None of the four search engines dominated in every aspect of the multidimensional evaluation. Content analysis of verbal data identified a number of user criteria and users evaluative comments based an these criteria. Results from both quantitative analysis and content analysis provide insight for system design and development, and useful feedback an strengths and weaknesses of search engines for system improvement

Date

24. 1.2004 18:27:22

Footnote

Teil I im selben Heft

0.04575026 = product of:
  0.09150052 = sum of:
    0.09150052 = sum of:
      0.049140904 = weight(_text_:i in 3246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049140904 = score(doc=3246,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.25003272 = fieldWeight in 3246, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3246)
      0.042359617 = weight(_text_:22 in 3246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042359617 = score(doc=3246,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3246, 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=3246)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.04355494 = sum of:
  0.025905097 = product of:
    0.10362039 = sum of:
      0.10362039 = weight(_text_:authors in 109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.10362039 = score(doc=109,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.23755142 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.43620193 = fieldWeight in 109, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=109)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.01764984 = product of:
    0.03529968 = sum of:
      0.03529968 = weight(_text_:22 in 109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03529968 = score(doc=109,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 109, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=109)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This chapter shows that the wider use of Web search engines, reconsidering the theoretical and methodological frameworks to grasp new information practices. Beginning with an overview of the recent challenges implied by the dynamic nature of the Web, this chapter then traces the information behavior related concepts in order to present the different approaches from the user perspective. The authors pay special attention to the concept of "information practice" and other related concepts such as "use", "activity", and "behavior" largely used in the literature but not always strictly defined. The authors provide an overview of user-oriented studies that are meaningful to understand the different contexts of use of electronic information access systems, focusing on five approaches: the system-oriented approaches, the theories of information seeking, the cognitive and psychological approaches, the management science approaches, and the marketing approaches. Future directions of work are then shaped, including social searching and the ethical, cultural, and political dimensions of Web search engines. The authors conclude considering the importance of Critical theory to better understand the role of Web Search engines in our modern society.

Date

20. 4.2012 13:22:37

0.041626796 = sum of:
  0.021151422 = product of:
    0.08460569 = sum of:
      0.08460569 = weight(_text_:authors in 100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08460569 = score(doc=100,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.23755142 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.35615736 = fieldWeight in 100, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=100)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.020475375 = product of:
    0.04095075 = sum of:
      0.04095075 = weight(_text_:i in 100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04095075 = score(doc=100,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.20836058 = fieldWeight in 100, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=100)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Over the last years, research and industry players have become increasingly interested in analyzing opinions and sentiments expressed on the social media web for product marketing and business intelligence. In order to adapt to this need search engines not only have to be able to retrieve lists of documents but to directly access, analyze, and interpret topics and opinions. This article covers an intermediate phase of the ongoing industrial research project 'DoXa' aiming at developing a semantic opinion and sentiment mining search engine for the French language. The DoXa search engine enables topic related opinion and sentiment extraction beyond positive and negative polarity using rich linguistic resources. Centering the work on two distinct business use cases, the authors analyze both unstructured Web 2.0 contents (e.g., blogs and forums) and structured questionnaire data sets. The focus is on discovering hidden patterns in the data. To this end, the authors present work in progress on opinion topic relation extraction and visual analytics, linguistic resource construction as well as the combination of OLAP technology with semantic search.

0.039127383 = sum of:
  0.017947575 = product of:
    0.0717903 = sum of:
      0.0717903 = weight(_text_:authors in 108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0717903 = score(doc=108,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23755142 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 108, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=108)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.021179808 = product of:
    0.042359617 = sum of:
      0.042359617 = weight(_text_:22 in 108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042359617 = score(doc=108,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 108, 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=108)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The explosion of the information available on the Internet has made traditional information retrieval systems, characterized by one size fits all approaches, less effective. Indeed, users are overwhelmed by the information delivered by such systems in response to their queries, particularly when the latter are ambiguous. In order to tackle this problem, the state-of-the-art reveals that there is a growing interest towards contextual information retrieval (CIR) which relies on various sources of evidence issued from the user's search background and environment, in order to improve the retrieval accuracy. This chapter focuses on mobile context, highlights challenges they present for IR, and gives an overview of CIR approaches applied in this environment. Then, the authors present an approach to personalize search results for mobile users by exploiting both cognitive and spatio-temporal contexts. The experimental evaluation undertaken in front of Yahoo search shows that the approach improves the quality of top search result lists and enhances search result precision.

Date

20. 4.2012 13:19:22

0.032049034 = product of:
  0.06409807 = sum of:
    0.06409807 = product of:
      0.12819614 = sum of:
        0.12819614 = weight(_text_:i in 94) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12819614 = score(doc=94,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = queryNorm
            0.65227187 = fieldWeight in 94, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=94)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

When I interned at Google last summer after getting my MSI degree, I worked on projects for the Book Search and Google Scholar teams. I didn't know it at the time, but in completing my research over the course of the summer, I would become the resident expert on how universities were approaching Google Scholar as a research tool and how they were implementing Scholar on their library websites. Now working at an academic library, I seized a recent opportunity to sit down with Anurag Acharya, Google Scholar's founding engineer, to delve a little deeper into how Scholar features are developed and prioritized, what Scholar's scope and aims are, and where the product is headed. -Tracey Hughes, GIS Coordinator, Social Sciences & Humanities Library, University of California San Diego

0.031035589 = product of:
  0.062071178 = sum of:
    0.062071178 = product of:
      0.24828471 = sum of:
        0.24828471 = weight(_text_:3a in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.24828471 = score(doc=2514,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.44177356 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fdelab.csd.auth.gr%2F~dimitris%2Fcourses%2Fir_spring06%2Fpage_rank_computing%2Fp527-li.pdf. Vgl. auch: http://www2002.org/CDROM/refereed/643/.

0.029952776 = product of:
  0.05990555 = sum of:
    0.05990555 = product of:
      0.1198111 = sum of:
        0.1198111 = weight(_text_:22 in 3227) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1198111 = score(doc=3227,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = queryNorm
            0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 3227, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3227)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

7. 2.1996 22:38:41

Pages

22 S

0.029952776 = product of:
  0.05990555 = sum of:
    0.05990555 = product of:
      0.1198111 = sum of:
        0.1198111 = weight(_text_:22 in 4007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1198111 = score(doc=4007,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = queryNorm
            0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 4007, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4007)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 8.1999 20:22:06

0.029952776 = product of:
  0.05990555 = sum of:
    0.05990555 = product of:
      0.1198111 = sum of:
        0.1198111 = weight(_text_:22 in 4009) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1198111 = score(doc=4009,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = queryNorm
            0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 4009, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4009)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 8.1999 21:22:59

0.028956555 = product of:
  0.05791311 = sum of:
    0.05791311 = product of:
      0.11582622 = sum of:
        0.11582622 = weight(_text_:i in 4799) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11582622 = score(doc=4799,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = queryNorm
            0.58933276 = fieldWeight in 4799, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4799)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.028665528 = product of:
  0.057331055 = sum of:
    0.057331055 = product of:
      0.11466211 = sum of:
        0.11466211 = weight(_text_:i in 7016) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11466211 = score(doc=7016,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = queryNorm
            0.58340967 = fieldWeight in 7016, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7016)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Editor

Travis, I.

0.028239746 = product of:
  0.05647949 = sum of:
    0.05647949 = product of:
      0.11295898 = sum of:
        0.11295898 = weight(_text_:22 in 4686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11295898 = score(doc=4686,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = 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

0.026687652 = product of:
  0.053375304 = sum of:
    0.053375304 = sum of:
      0.028665528 = weight(_text_:i in 2752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.028665528 = score(doc=2752,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.14585242 = fieldWeight in 2752, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2752)
      0.024709776 = weight(_text_:22 in 2752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024709776 = score(doc=2752,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 2752, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2752)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Inhalt: Acknowledgments; Abstract; Zusammenfassung; Contents; List of Figures; List of Tables; List of Acronyms; Chapter 1 Introduction ; 1.1 Research Questions; 1.2 Thesis Outline; Part I Fundamentals ; Chapter 2 Information Retrieval for Young Users ; 2.1 Basics of Information Retrieval; 2.1.1 Architecture of an IR System; 2.1.2 Relevance Ranking; 2.1.3 Search User Interfaces; 2.1.4 Targeted Search Engines; 2.2 Aspects of Child Development Relevant for Information Retrieval Tasks; 2.2.1 Human Cognitive Development; 2.2.2 Information Processing Theory; 2.2.3 Psychosocial Development 2.3 User Studies and Evaluation2.3.1 Methods in User Studies; 2.3.2 Types of Evaluation; 2.3.3 Evaluation with Children; 2.4 Discussion; Chapter 3 State of the Art ; 3.1 Children's Information-Seeking Behaviour; 3.1.1 Querying Behaviour; 3.1.2 Search Strategy; 3.1.3 Navigation Style; 3.1.4 User Interface; 3.1.5 Relevance Judgement; 3.2 Existing Algorithms and User Interface Concepts for Children; 3.2.1 Query; 3.2.2 Content; 3.2.3 Ranking; 3.2.4 Search Result Visualisation; 3.3 Existing Information Retrieval Systems for Children; 3.3.1 Digital Book Libraries; 3.3.2 Web Search Engines 3.4 Summary and DiscussionPart II Studying Open Issues ; Chapter 4 Usability of Existing Search Engines for Young Users ; 4.1 Assessment Criteria; 4.1.1 Criteria for Matching the Motor Skills; 4.1.2 Criteria for Matching the Cognitive Skills; 4.2 Results; 4.2.1 Conformance with Motor Skills; 4.2.2 Conformance with the Cognitive Skills; 4.2.3 Presentation of Search Results; 4.2.4 Browsing versus Searching; 4.2.5 Navigational Style; 4.3 Summary and Discussion; Chapter 5 Large-scale Analysis of Children's Queries and Search Interactions; 5.1 Dataset; 5.2 Results; 5.3 Summary and Discussion Chapter 6 Differences in Usability and Perception of Targeted Web Search Engines between Children and Adults 6.1 Related Work; 6.2 User Study; 6.3 Study Results; 6.4 Summary and Discussion; Part III Tackling the Challenges ; Chapter 7 Search User Interface Design for Children ; 7.1 Conceptual Challenges and Possible Solutions; 7.2 Knowledge Journey Design; 7.3 Evaluation; 7.3.1 Study Design; 7.3.2 Study Results; 7.4 Voice-Controlled Search: Initial Study; 7.4.1 User Study; 7.5 Summary and Discussion; Chapter 8 Addressing User Diversity ; 8.1 Evolving Search User Interface 8.1.1 Mapping Function8.1.2 Evolving Skills; 8.1.3 Detection of User Abilities; 8.1.4 Design Concepts; 8.2 Adaptation of a Search User Interface towards User Needs; 8.2.1 Design & Implementation; 8.2.2 Search Input; 8.2.3 Result Output; 8.2.4 General Properties; 8.2.5 Configuration and Further Details; 8.3 Evaluation; 8.3.1 Study Design; 8.3.2 Study Results; 8.3.3 Preferred UI Settings; 8.3.4 User satisfaction; 8.4 Knowledge Journey Exhibit; 8.4.1 Hardware; 8.4.2 Frontend; 8.4.3 Backend; 8.5 Summary and Discussion; Chapter 9 Supporting Visual Searchers in Processing Search Results 9.1 Related Work

Date

1. 2.2016 18:25:22

0.026347723 = sum of:
  0.008973788 = product of:
    0.03589515 = sum of:
      0.03589515 = weight(_text_:authors in 6) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03589515 = score(doc=6,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23755142 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.15110476 = fieldWeight in 6, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=6)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.017373934 = product of:
    0.03474787 = sum of:
      0.03474787 = weight(_text_:i in 6) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03474787 = score(doc=6,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.17679983 = fieldWeight in 6, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=6)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Why doesn't your home page appear on the first page of search results, even when you query your own name? How do other Web pages always appear at the top? What creates these powerful rankings? And how? The first book ever about the science of Web page rankings, "Google's PageRank and Beyond" supplies the answers to these and other questions and more. The book serves two very different audiences: the curious science reader and the technical computational reader. The chapters build in mathematical sophistication, so that the first five are accessible to the general academic reader. While other chapters are much more mathematical in nature, each one contains something for both audiences. For example, the authors include entertaining asides such as how search engines make money and how the Great Firewall of China influences research. The book includes an extensive background chapter designed to help readers learn more about the mathematics of search engines, and it contains several MATLAB codes and links to sample Web data sets. The philosophy throughout is to encourage readers to experiment with the ideas and algorithms in the text. Any business seriously interested in improving its rankings in the major search engines can benefit from the clear examples, sample code, and list of resources provided. It includes: many illustrative examples and entertaining asides; MATLAB code; accessible and informal style; and complete and self-contained section for mathematics review.

Content

Inhalt: Chapter 1. Introduction to Web Search Engines: 1.1 A Short History of Information Retrieval - 1.2 An Overview of Traditional Information Retrieval - 1.3 Web Information Retrieval Chapter 2. Crawling, Indexing, and Query Processing: 2.1 Crawling - 2.2 The Content Index - 2.3 Query Processing Chapter 3. Ranking Webpages by Popularity: 3.1 The Scene in 1998 - 3.2 Two Theses - 3.3 Query-Independence Chapter 4. The Mathematics of Google's PageRank: 4.1 The Original Summation Formula for PageRank - 4.2 Matrix Representation of the Summation Equations - 4.3 Problems with the Iterative Process - 4.4 A Little Markov Chain Theory - 4.5 Early Adjustments to the Basic Model - 4.6 Computation of the PageRank Vector - 4.7 Theorem and Proof for Spectrum of the Google Matrix Chapter 5. Parameters in the PageRank Model: 5.1 The a Factor - 5.2 The Hyperlink Matrix H - 5.3 The Teleportation Matrix E Chapter 6. The Sensitivity of PageRank; 6.1 Sensitivity with respect to alpha - 6.2 Sensitivity with respect to H - 6.3 Sensitivity with respect to vT - 6.4 Other Analyses of Sensitivity - 6.5 Sensitivity Theorems and Proofs Chapter 7. The PageRank Problem as a Linear System: 7.1 Properties of (I - alphaS) - 7.2 Properties of (I - alphaH) - 7.3 Proof of the PageRank Sparse Linear System Chapter 8. Issues in Large-Scale Implementation of PageRank: 8.1 Storage Issues - 8.2 Convergence Criterion - 8.3 Accuracy - 8.4 Dangling Nodes - 8.5 Back Button Modeling

0.024960645 = product of:
  0.04992129 = sum of:
    0.04992129 = product of:
      0.09984258 = sum of:
        0.09984258 = weight(_text_:22 in 4872) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09984258 = score(doc=4872,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = 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

0.024709776 = product of:
  0.049419552 = sum of:
    0.049419552 = product of:
      0.098839104 = sum of:
        0.098839104 = weight(_text_:22 in 3175) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.098839104 = score(doc=3175,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3175, 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=3175)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Computers in libraries. 19(1999) no.5, S.22-28