Search (252 results, page 1 of 13)

0.16757932 = product of:
  0.33515865 = sum of:
    0.063929364 = product of:
      0.19178808 = sum of:
        0.19178808 = weight(_text_:3a in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19178808 = score(doc=2514,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.34124896 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.2712293 = weight(_text_:2f in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2712293 = score(doc=2514,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.34124896 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04025106 = queryNorm
        0.7948135 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

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/.

0.06611008 = product of:
  0.13222016 = sum of:
    0.119495414 = weight(_text_:trend in 3647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.119495414 = score(doc=3647,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24938065 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.195629 = idf(docFreq=244, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04025106 = queryNorm
        0.47916874 = fieldWeight in 3647, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.195629 = idf(docFreq=244, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3647)
    0.012724748 = product of:
      0.03817424 = sum of:
        0.03817424 = weight(_text_:22 in 3647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03817424 = score(doc=3647,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14095236 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3647, 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=3647)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The days of the traditional abstracting and indexing services are waning, as abstracts and bibliographic data become commodities. However, there are tremedous opportunities for those organizations willing to look beyond the status quo to the new possibilities enabled by the latest wave of advanced technologies. Those who own content need to focus on the delivery mechanisms and new markets that technology can provide. Features like automatic extraction of key concepts or names, collaborative filtering to help with trend analysis, and visualization techniques can take information past the retrieval stage and into the management area

Source

Database. 21(1998) no.4, S.18-22

0.059747707 = product of:
  0.23899083 = sum of:
    0.23899083 = weight(_text_:trend in 2092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.23899083 = score(doc=2092,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24938065 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.195629 = idf(docFreq=244, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04025106 = queryNorm
        0.9583375 = fieldWeight in 2092, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.195629 = idf(docFreq=244, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2092)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Kurzbericht über den Trend der Suchmaschinen, 'Portal'-Funktionen zu übernehmen

0.042248007 = product of:
  0.16899203 = sum of:
    0.16899203 = weight(_text_:trend in 3520) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16899203 = score(doc=3520,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.24938065 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.195629 = idf(docFreq=244, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04025106 = queryNorm
        0.67764693 = fieldWeight in 3520, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.195629 = idf(docFreq=244, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3520)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

One difference between a portal and a mere search engine is that portals are now the recipients of investments from major media interests, a trend which may have important ramifications for the Web publishing. Points to AOL as a successful portal, quotes a compilation of 10 favourite Web activities and examines the contents of a portal, typically a search engine or directory plus free e-mail but also news services. A significant trend is for portals to replicate themselves in different languages. Presents a list of the big portal players

0.039329793 = product of:
  0.07865959 = sum of:
    0.068283096 = weight(_text_:trend in 384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.068283096 = score(doc=384,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24938065 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.195629 = idf(docFreq=244, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04025106 = queryNorm
        0.2738107 = fieldWeight in 384, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.195629 = idf(docFreq=244, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=384)
    0.0103764925 = product of:
      0.031129478 = sum of:
        0.031129478 = weight(_text_:29 in 384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031129478 = score(doc=384,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14159065 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.21985546 = fieldWeight in 384, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=384)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

It is remarkable to observe that in the wake of the Muhammad cartoon controversy no one has picketed Google, threatened its employees, or destroyed any of its merchandise. After all, far more people reached the cartoons online than by any other means. Meanwhile almost every other major non-online media source that published the cartoons has faced similar threats of violence. In September 2005 Flemming Rose, the cultural editor of the conservative Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, set a controversy in motion by recruiting over 40 cartoonists to caricature the Prophet Muhammad in response to what he felt was a Danish trend of press self-censorship in covering Islamic issues. From these 40 cartoonists, only 12 cartoons emerged for publication in the 30 September 2005 issue. The initial result was, surprising in retrospect, negligible. The Danish newspaper, known colloquially as the >morning Fascist<, had failed in its attempt to stir up controversy. Three key subsequent events, among others, transformed this failure into controversy and then crisis: first, the republication of the 12 cartoons by a right-wing Norwegian newspaper, followed by February, by hundreds of other newspapers throughout the world; second, the parade of the vicious and misleading 43-page Akkari-Laban dossier of cartoons throughout the Muslim world; and third, the saturation of the Internet (reaching 16% of the world's population) with the Muhammad cartoons. The pandemonium that ensued should be familiar to all: nearly 140 dead; over Boo injured; a potential for more than 10.000 unemployed as a result of political embargoes; dozens of government buildings, Christian churches, and fast food restaurants torched and vandalized; troublesome reprints of the cartoons in major papers on every continent; and millions across the globe left shaken and upset. Some two years later, the riotous repercussions of the cartoons, while dampened, have yet to disappear. In the following pages, I use the Muhammad cartoon controversy as a springboard to think about three key features of our emerging search engine world: one, democracy offers a rich backdrop against which to cast the study of search engines (especially the observation that many of the problems of democracy are also those of search engines); two, the editors' role is in decline by disintermediation - they still shape content but users have new influence in directing distribution; and three, algorithms influence ethics. This chapter also serves as a starting point for thinking about search engine scholarship as well as for the problems and potential treasure chests of insight we may yet find in related studies of communication, journalism, and democracy. Finally, this chapter hopes to invite and provoke its readers to employ a fuller arsenal of tools and metaphors in the critical study of search engines.

Date

13. 5.2007 10:29:29

0.034141548 = product of:
  0.13656619 = sum of:
    0.13656619 = weight(_text_:trend in 35) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13656619 = score(doc=35,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24938065 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.195629 = idf(docFreq=244, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04025106 = queryNorm
        0.5476214 = fieldWeight in 35, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.195629 = idf(docFreq=244, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=35)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Discusses the trend among online information providers towars 'dumbing down' their services for users who are looking for an occasional quick answer. Companies which focus their efforts towards maintaining a level of quality high enough to satisfy their serious user or information professional will come out on top in a hypercompetitive market. HotBot from from Inktomi Corp., which was demonstrated at the National Online Meeting in New York, now claims to cover more of the text of the Internet and WWW than any of the other search engines and appears to be committed to the professional searcher market

0.03305504 = product of:
  0.06611008 = sum of:
    0.059747707 = weight(_text_:trend in 5937) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059747707 = score(doc=5937,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24938065 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.195629 = idf(docFreq=244, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04025106 = queryNorm
        0.23958437 = fieldWeight in 5937, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.195629 = idf(docFreq=244, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5937)
    0.006362374 = product of:
      0.01908712 = sum of:
        0.01908712 = weight(_text_:22 in 5937) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01908712 = score(doc=5937,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14095236 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 5937, 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=5937)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Social phenomena happen, and the historians follow. So it goes with Google, the latest star shooting through the universe of trend-setting businesses. This company has even entered our popular lexicon: as many note, "Google" has moved beyond noun to verb, becoming an action which most tech-savvy citizens at the turn of the twenty-first century recognize and in fact do, on a daily basis. It's this wide societal impact that fascinated authors David Vise and Mark Malseed, who came to the book with well-established reputations in investigative reporting. Vise authored the bestselling The Bureau and the Mole, and Malseed contributed significantly to two Bob Woodward books, Bush at War and Plan of Attack. The kind of voluminous research and behind-the-scenes insight in which both writers specialize, and on which their earlier books rested, comes through in The Google Story. The strength of the book comes from its command of many small details, and its focus on the human side of the Google story, as opposed to the merely academic one. Some may prefer a dryer, more analytic approach to Google's impact on the Internet, like The Search or books that tilt more heavily towards bits and bytes on the spectrum between technology and business, like The Singularity is Near. Those wanting to understand the motivations and personal growth of founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin and CEO Eric Schmidt, however, will enjoy this book. Vise and Malseed interviewed over 150 people, including numerous Google employees, Wall Street analysts, Stanford professors, venture capitalists, even Larry Page's Cub Scout leader, and their comprehensiveness shows. As the narrative unfolds, readers learn how Google grew out of the intellectually fertile and not particularly directed friendship between Page and Brin; how the founders attempted to peddle early versions of their search technology to different Silicon Valley firms for $1 million; how Larry and Sergey celebrated their first investor's check with breakfast at Burger King; how the pair initially housed their company in a Palo Alto office, then eventually moved to a futuristic campus dubbed the "Googleplex"; how the company found its financial footing through keyword-targeted Web ads; how various products like Google News, Froogle, and others were cooked up by an inventive staff; how Brin and Page proved their mettle as tough businessmen through negotiations with AOL Europe and their controversial IPO process, among other instances; and how the company's vision for itself continues to grow, such as geographic expansion to China and cooperation with Craig Venter on the Human Genome Project. Like the company it profiles, The Google Story is a bit of a wild ride, and fun, too. Its first appendix lists 23 "tips" which readers can use to get more utility out of Google. The second contains the intelligence test which Google Research offers to prospective job applicants, and shows the sometimes zany methods of this most unusual business. Through it all, Vise and Malseed synthesize a variety of fascinating anecdotes and speculation about Google, and readers seeking a first draft of the history of the company will enjoy an easy read.

Date

3. 5.1997 8:44:22

0.030177148 = product of:
  0.12070859 = sum of:
    0.12070859 = weight(_text_:trend in 1226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12070859 = score(doc=1226,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.24938065 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.195629 = idf(docFreq=244, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04025106 = queryNorm
        0.48403352 = fieldWeight in 1226, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.195629 = idf(docFreq=244, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1226)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Zeitmaschinen gibt es schon länger, spätestens seit H. G. Wells, aber eine Zeitgeistmaschine existiert erst seit 1998: Google. Trend-Gurus und ihre Trend-Büros gehören demnächst der Vergangenheit an. Eine weitere Ironie des Netzes, das heute bereits verabschiedet, was doch für morgen bestimmt war. Google macht die ohnehin so anfechtbare Zunft der Seher tendenziell arbeitslos, weil die Suchmaschine der Suchmaschinen sich nicht auf Nostradamus oder Horoskop, Kassandra oder Kaffeesatz, sondern auf Suchanfragen verlässt. Was die Welt umtreibt, was mega-in oder mega-out ist, bildet sich in Googles Zeitgeistfeature ab. Das komplexe Wunder von Google ist der Vokal "o", der bekanntlich erstaunlich dehnbar ist, wenn die Welt auf der Suche nach sich selbst ist. Google führt sich auf ein Wortspiel mit dem mathematischen Begriff "googol" zurück, eine 1 mit 100 Nullen. Rechnet man Googles Partnerschaften mit Yahoo und anderen dazu, wird pro Tag ca. 150 Millionen mal gegoogelt - Tendenz selbstverständlich steigend. Nach Google-Mitgründer Larry Page besteht der Anspruch der perfekten Suchmaschine darin, dass sie genau versteht, was der Suchende will und ihn exakt bedient. Doch das ist nur die längst nicht erreichte Sonnenseite der blitzschnell generierten Suchantworten der digitalen Wissensgesellschaft. Die vielen Fragen der Wissbegierigen sind selbst Antworten - Antworten auf die Frage nach den Interessen, Wünschen und Begierden der Netzgesellschaft.

0.02414172 = product of:
  0.09656688 = sum of:
    0.09656688 = weight(_text_:trend in 6980) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09656688 = score(doc=6980,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.24938065 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.195629 = idf(docFreq=244, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04025106 = queryNorm
        0.38722682 = fieldWeight in 6980, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.195629 = idf(docFreq=244, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=6980)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In previous articles, we reported the state of Web searching in 1997 (Jansen, Spink, & Saracevic, 2000) and in 1999 (Spink, Wolfram, Jansen, & Saracevic, 2001). Such snapshot studies and statistics on Web use appear regularly (OCLC, 1999), but provide little information about Web searching trends. In this article, we compare and contrast results from our two previous studies of Excite queries' data sets, each containing over 1 million queries submitted by over 200,000 Excite users collected on 16 September 1997 and 20 December 1999. We examine how public Web searching changing during that 2-year time period. As Table 1 shows, the overall structure of Web queries in some areas did not change, while in others we see change from 1997 to 1999. Our comparison shows how Web searching changed incrementally and also dramatically. We see some moves toward greater simplicity, including shorter queries (i.e., fewer terms) and shorter sessions (i.e., fewer queries per user), with little modification (addition or deletion) of terms in subsequent queries. The trend toward shorter queries suggests that Web information content should target specific terms in order to reach Web users. Another trend was to view fewer pages of results per query. Most Excite users examined only one page of results per query, since an Excite results page contains ten ranked Web sites. Were users satisfied with the results and did not need to view more pages? It appears that the public continues to have a low tolerance of wading through retrieved sites. This decline in interactivity levels is a disturbing finding for the future of Web searching. Queries that included Boolean operators were in the minority, but the percentage increased between the two time periods. Most Boolean use involved the AND operator with many mistakes. The use of relevance feedback almost doubled from 1997 to 1999, but overall use was still small. An unusually large number of terms were used with low frequency, such as personal names, spelling errors, non-English words, and Web-specific terms, such as URLs. Web query vocabulary contains more words than found in large English texts in general. The public language of Web queries has its own and unique characteristics. How did Web searching topics change from 1997 to 1999? We classified a random sample of 2,414 queries from 1997 and 2,539 queries from 1999 into 11 categories (Table 2). From 1997 to 1999, Web searching shifted from entertainment, recreation and sex, and pornography, preferences to e-commerce-related topics under commerce, travel, employment, and economy. This shift coincided with changes in information distribution on the publicly indexed Web.

0.022059722 = product of:
  0.08823889 = sum of:
    0.08823889 = product of:
      0.13235833 = sum of:
        0.07782369 = weight(_text_:29 in 6835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07782369 = score(doc=6835,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14159065 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.5496386 = fieldWeight in 6835, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6835)
        0.054534633 = weight(_text_:22 in 6835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054534633 = score(doc=6835,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14095236 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = 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)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

1. 8.1997 14:03:29
11.11.2001 17:25:22

Source

Com!online. 2001, H.12, S.24-29

0.018260717 = product of:
  0.07304287 = sum of:
    0.07304287 = product of:
      0.1095643 = sum of:
        0.055029664 = weight(_text_:29 in 6566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055029664 = score(doc=6566,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14159065 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.38865322 = fieldWeight in 6566, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6566)
        0.054534633 = weight(_text_:22 in 6566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054534633 = score(doc=6566,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14095236 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 6566, 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=6566)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 2.1997 19:50:29

0.014608572 = product of:
  0.05843429 = sum of:
    0.05843429 = product of:
      0.08765143 = sum of:
        0.04402373 = weight(_text_:29 in 997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04402373 = score(doc=997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14159065 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 997, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=997)
        0.043627705 = weight(_text_:22 in 997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043627705 = score(doc=997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14095236 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 997, 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=997)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

29. 9.2002 18:49:22

0.014608572 = product of:
  0.05843429 = sum of:
    0.05843429 = product of:
      0.08765143 = sum of:
        0.04402373 = weight(_text_:29 in 1770) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04402373 = score(doc=1770,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14159065 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 1770, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1770)
        0.043627705 = weight(_text_:22 in 1770) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043627705 = score(doc=1770,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14095236 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1770, 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=1770)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

23.10.1996 17:26:29
22. 3.2008 14:04:11

0.01280308 = product of:
  0.05121232 = sum of:
    0.05121232 = weight(_text_:trend in 2865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05121232 = score(doc=2865,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24938065 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.195629 = idf(docFreq=244, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04025106 = queryNorm
        0.20535803 = fieldWeight in 2865, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.195629 = idf(docFreq=244, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2865)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Der Prototyp von TextRunner bietet noch eine eher karge Benutzerschnittstelle - er ist auch weniger für die Öffentlichkeit als Suchhilfe gedacht denn als Demonstrator, wie es gelingen kann, Informationen aus 500 Millionen Web-Seiten automatisch zu extrahieren. Oren Etzioni, Computerwissenschaftler und Leiter des Projekts, ist stolz auf das Ergebnis: "Was wir hier zeigen, ist die Fähigkeit einer Software, ein rudimentäres Textverständnis zu erzielen - und zwar in einem Maßstab und einer Ausdehnung, die es bislang noch nie gab." Die Fähigkeit, Inhalte und Bedeutungen schnell zu erkennen, entstammt einem Grundmodell von Wortbeziehungen in der englischen Sprache, das Etzioni und sein Team entwickelt haben. Es funktioniert bei nahezu jedem Thema. "Beispielsweise deckt das einfache Muster "Einheit 1, Verb, Einheit 2" den Satz "Edison erfand die Glühbirne" genauso ab wie "Microsoft kaufte Farecast" - und viele andere Satzmodelle auch." TextRunner nutze nun dieses Schablone, um automatisch aus Texten zu lernen, Sätze zu analysieren und solche Dreiergruppen mit hoher Genauigkeit zu erkennen. Die Software besitzt auch Elemente, um aus Anfragen in natürlicher Sprache einen Sinnzusammenhang abzuleiten. Daran arbeiten Etzioni und sein Team gerade. Findet das System dann beispielsweise eine Seite, auf der steht, dass Säugetiere Warmblüter sind und eine andere, auf der zu lesen ist, dass Hunde Säugetiere sind, kann es daraus schließen, dass Hunde vermutlich als Warmblüter herumlaufen. Der Ansatz ähnelt der Technik hinter dem semantischen Suchspezialisten Powerset, den Microsoft im vergangenen Jahr erworben hat. Kurz vor dem Aufkauf legte die Firma ein Werkzeug vor, das solche Fakten aus immerhin rund zwei Millionen Wikipedia-Seiten extrahieren konnte. TextRunner kann nun aber mit Wikipedia genauso umgehen wie mit jedem anderen Angebot, seien es nun Blog-Einträge, Produktkataloge oder Zeitungsartikel. Jon Kleinberg, IT-Forscher der Cornell University, der die University of Washington-Studie kennt, findet, dass das TextRunner-Projekt besonders bei der Skalierung einen großen Fortschritt bedeute. "Die Arbeit steht für einen wachsenden Trend hin zur Schaffung von Suchwerkzeugen, die Teilinformationen, die sie im Web finden, aktiv in einen größeren Zusammenhang bringen.""

0.012782501 = product of:
  0.051130004 = sum of:
    0.051130004 = product of:
      0.076695 = sum of:
        0.03852076 = weight(_text_:29 in 7453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03852076 = score(doc=7453,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14159065 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 7453, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7453)
        0.03817424 = weight(_text_:22 in 7453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03817424 = score(doc=7453,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14095236 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7453, 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=7453)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

1. 8.1996 22:08:06

Source

Computer networks and ISDN systems. 29(1997) no.8, S.1225-1235

0.012782501 = product of:
  0.051130004 = sum of:
    0.051130004 = product of:
      0.076695 = sum of:
        0.03852076 = weight(_text_:29 in 2670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03852076 = score(doc=2670,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14159065 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 2670, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2670)
        0.03817424 = weight(_text_:22 in 2670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03817424 = score(doc=2670,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14095236 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2670, 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=2670)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

1. 8.1996 22:08:06

Source

Computer networks and ISDN systems. 29(1997) no.8, S.1217-1224

0.012782501 = product of:
  0.051130004 = sum of:
    0.051130004 = product of:
      0.076695 = sum of:
        0.03852076 = weight(_text_:29 in 3238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03852076 = score(doc=3238,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14159065 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 3238, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3238)
        0.03817424 = weight(_text_:22 in 3238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03817424 = score(doc=3238,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14095236 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3238, 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=3238)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

6. 3.1997 16:22:15
5. 3.1999 19:29:26

0.010956429 = product of:
  0.043825716 = sum of:
    0.043825716 = product of:
      0.06573857 = sum of:
        0.033017796 = weight(_text_:29 in 2674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033017796 = score(doc=2674,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14159065 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 2674, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2674)
        0.03272078 = weight(_text_:22 in 2674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03272078 = score(doc=2674,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14095236 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2674, 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=2674)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

1. 8.1996 22:08:06

Source

Computer networks and ISDN systems. 29(1997) no.8, S.1257-1267

0.010956429 = product of:
  0.043825716 = sum of:
    0.043825716 = product of:
      0.06573857 = sum of:
        0.033017796 = weight(_text_:29 in 2678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033017796 = score(doc=2678,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14159065 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 2678, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2678)
        0.03272078 = weight(_text_:22 in 2678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03272078 = score(doc=2678,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14095236 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2678, 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=2678)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

1. 8.1996 22:08:06

Source

Computer networks and ISDN systems. 29(1997) no.8, S.1181-1191

0.0077123623 = product of:
  0.03084945 = sum of:
    0.03084945 = product of:
      0.09254835 = sum of:
        0.09254835 = weight(_text_:22 in 3227) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09254835 = score(doc=3227,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14095236 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04025106 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

7. 2.1996 22:38:41

Pages

22 S