Search (1757 results, page 2 of 88)

  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Roy, R.S.; Agarwal, S.; Ganguly, N.; Choudhury, M.: Syntactic complexity of Web search queries through the lenses of language models, networks and users (2016) 0.14
    0.13870476 = product of:
      0.18493968 = sum of:
        0.06504348 = weight(_text_:web in 3188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06504348 = score(doc=3188,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.40312994 = fieldWeight in 3188, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3188)
        0.08081709 = weight(_text_:search in 3188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08081709 = score(doc=3188,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.47031635 = fieldWeight in 3188, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3188)
        0.03907912 = product of:
          0.07815824 = sum of:
            0.07815824 = weight(_text_:engine in 3188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07815824 = score(doc=3188,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.29552078 = fieldWeight in 3188, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3188)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    Across the world, millions of users interact with search engines every day to satisfy their information needs. As the Web grows bigger over time, such information needs, manifested through user search queries, also become more complex. However, there has been no systematic study that quantifies the structural complexity of Web search queries. In this research, we make an attempt towards understanding and characterizing the syntactic complexity of search queries using a multi-pronged approach. We use traditional statistical language modeling techniques to quantify and compare the perplexity of queries with natural language (NL). We then use complex network analysis for a comparative analysis of the topological properties of queries issued by real Web users and those generated by statistical models. Finally, we conduct experiments to study whether search engine users are able to identify real queries, when presented along with model-generated ones. The three complementary studies show that the syntactic structure of Web queries is more complex than what n-grams can capture, but simpler than NL. Queries, thus, seem to represent an intermediate stage between syntactic and non-syntactic communication.
  2. Rieh, S.Y.; Kim, Y.-M.; Markey, K.: Amount of invested mental effort (AIME) in online searching (2012) 0.14
    0.13841115 = product of:
      0.1845482 = sum of:
        0.05817665 = weight(_text_:web in 2726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05817665 = score(doc=2726,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.36057037 = fieldWeight in 2726, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2726)
        0.08729243 = weight(_text_:search in 2726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08729243 = score(doc=2726,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.5079997 = fieldWeight in 2726, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2726)
        0.03907912 = product of:
          0.07815824 = sum of:
            0.07815824 = weight(_text_:engine in 2726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07815824 = score(doc=2726,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.29552078 = fieldWeight in 2726, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2726)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    This research investigates how people's perceptions of information retrieval (IR) systems, their perceptions of search tasks, and their perceptions of self-efficacy influence the amount of invested mental effort (AIME) they put into using two different IR systems: a Web search engine and a library system. It also explores the impact of mental effort on an end user's search experience. To assess AIME in online searching, two experiments were conducted using these methods: Experiment 1 relied on self-reports and Experiment 2 employed the dual-task technique. In both experiments, data were collected through search transaction logs, a pre-search background questionnaire, a post-search questionnaire and an interview. Important findings are these: (1) subjects invested greater mental effort searching a library system than searching the Web; (2) subjects put little effort into Web searching because of their high sense of self-efficacy in their searching ability and their perception of the easiness of the Web; (3) subjects did not recognize that putting mental effort into searching was something needed to improve the search results; and (4) data collected from multiple sources proved to be effective for assessing mental effort in online searching.
  3. Rajasurya, S.; Muralidharan, T.; Devi, S.; Swamynathan, S.: Semantic information retrieval using ontology in university domain (2012) 0.14
    0.13841115 = product of:
      0.1845482 = sum of:
        0.05817665 = weight(_text_:web in 2861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05817665 = score(doc=2861,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.36057037 = fieldWeight in 2861, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2861)
        0.08729243 = weight(_text_:search in 2861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08729243 = score(doc=2861,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.5079997 = fieldWeight in 2861, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2861)
        0.03907912 = product of:
          0.07815824 = sum of:
            0.07815824 = weight(_text_:engine in 2861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07815824 = score(doc=2861,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.29552078 = fieldWeight in 2861, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2861)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    Today's conventional search engines hardly do provide the essential content relevant to the user's search query. This is because the context and semantics of the request made by the user is not analyzed to the full extent. So here the need for a semantic web search arises. SWS is upcoming in the area of web search which combines Natural Language Processing and Artificial Intelligence. The objective of the work done here is to design, develop and implement a semantic search engine- SIEU(Semantic Information Extraction in University Domain) confined to the university domain. SIEU uses ontology as a knowledge base for the information retrieval process. It is not just a mere keyword search. It is one layer above what Google or any other search engines retrieve by analyzing just the keywords. Here the query is analyzed both syntactically and semantically. The developed system retrieves the web results more relevant to the user query through keyword expansion. The results obtained here will be accurate enough to satisfy the request made by the user. The level of accuracy will be enhanced since the query is analyzed semantically. The system will be of great use to the developers and researchers who work on web. The Google results are re-ranked and optimized for providing the relevant links. For ranking an algorithm has been applied which fetches more apt results for the user query.
  4. Sleem-Amer, M.; Bigorgne, I.; Brizard, S.; Santos, L.D.P.D.; Bouhairi, Y. El; Goujon, B.; Lorin, S.; Martineau, C.; Rigouste, L.; Varga, L.: Intelligent semantic search engines for opinion and sentiment mining (2012) 0.14
    0.13777182 = product of:
      0.18369575 = sum of:
        0.041137107 = weight(_text_:web in 100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041137107 = score(doc=100,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 100, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=100)
        0.08729243 = weight(_text_:search in 100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08729243 = score(doc=100,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.5079997 = fieldWeight in 100, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=100)
        0.05526622 = product of:
          0.11053244 = sum of:
            0.11053244 = weight(_text_:engine in 100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11053244 = score(doc=100,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.41792953 = fieldWeight in 100, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=100)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    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.
    Footnote
    Vgl.: http://www.igi-global.com/book/next-generation-search-engines/64426.
    Source
    Next generation search engines: advanced models for information retrieval. Eds.: C. Jouis, u.a
  5. Chau, M.; Wong, C.H.; Zhou, Y.; Qin, J.; Chen, H.: Evaluating the use of search engine development tools in IT education (2010) 0.14
    0.13694978 = product of:
      0.1825997 = sum of:
        0.041137107 = weight(_text_:web in 3325) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041137107 = score(doc=3325,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 3325, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3325)
        0.07377557 = weight(_text_:search in 3325) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07377557 = score(doc=3325,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.4293381 = fieldWeight in 3325, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3325)
        0.06768702 = product of:
          0.13537404 = sum of:
            0.13537404 = weight(_text_:engine in 3325) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.13537404 = score(doc=3325,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.51185703 = fieldWeight in 3325, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3325)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    It is important for education in computer science and information systems to keep up to date with the latest development in technology. With the rapid development of the Internet and the Web, many schools have included Internet-related technologies, such as Web search engines and e-commerce, as part of their curricula. Previous research has shown that it is effective to use search engine development tools to facilitate students' learning. However, the effectiveness of these tools in the classroom has not been evaluated. In this article, we review the design of three search engine development tools, SpidersRUs, Greenstone, and Alkaline, followed by an evaluation study that compared the three tools in the classroom. In the study, 33 students were divided into 13 groups and each group used the three tools to develop three independent search engines in a class project. Our evaluation results showed that SpidersRUs performed better than the two other tools in overall satisfaction and the level of knowledge gained in their learning experience when using the tools for a class project on Internet applications development.
  6. Lewandowski, D.; Drechsler, J.; Mach, S. von: Deriving query intents from web search engine queries (2012) 0.13
    0.13110825 = product of:
      0.174811 = sum of:
        0.041137107 = weight(_text_:web in 385) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041137107 = score(doc=385,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 385, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=385)
        0.06598687 = weight(_text_:search in 385) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06598687 = score(doc=385,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.3840117 = fieldWeight in 385, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=385)
        0.06768702 = product of:
          0.13537404 = sum of:
            0.13537404 = weight(_text_:engine in 385) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.13537404 = score(doc=385,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.51185703 = fieldWeight in 385, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=385)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    The purpose of this article is to test the reliability of query intents derived from queries, either by the user who entered the query or by another juror. We report the findings of three studies. First, we conducted a large-scale classification study (~50,000 queries) using a crowdsourcing approach. Next, we used clickthrough data from a search engine log and validated the judgments given by the jurors from the crowdsourcing study. Finally, we conducted an online survey on a commercial search engine's portal. Because we used the same queries for all three studies, we also were able to compare the results and the effectiveness of the different approaches. We found that neither the crowdsourcing approach, using jurors who classified queries originating from other users, nor the questionnaire approach, using searchers who were asked about their own query that they just entered into a Web search engine, led to satisfying results. This leads us to conclude that there was little understanding of the classification tasks, even though both groups of jurors were given detailed instructions. Although we used manual classification, our research also has important implications for automatic classification. We must question the success of approaches using automatic classification and comparing its performance to a baseline from human jurors.
  7. Li, X.; Schijvenaars, B.J.A.; Rijke, M.de: Investigating queries and search failures in academic search (2017) 0.13
    0.12979697 = product of:
      0.17306262 = sum of:
        0.023270661 = weight(_text_:web in 5033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023270661 = score(doc=5033,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.14422815 = fieldWeight in 5033, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5033)
        0.105578996 = weight(_text_:search in 5033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.105578996 = score(doc=5033,freq=32.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.6144187 = fieldWeight in 5033, product of:
              5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
                32.0 = termFreq=32.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5033)
        0.044212975 = product of:
          0.08842595 = sum of:
            0.08842595 = weight(_text_:engine in 5033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08842595 = score(doc=5033,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.3343436 = fieldWeight in 5033, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5033)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    Academic search concerns the retrieval and profiling of information objects in the domain of academic research. In this paper we reveal important observations of academic search queries, and provide an algorithmic solution to address a type of failure during search sessions: null queries. We start by providing a general characterization of academic search queries, by analyzing a large-scale transaction log of a leading academic search engine. Unlike previous small-scale analyses of academic search queries, we find important differences with query characteristics known from web search. E.g., in academic search there is a substantially bigger proportion of entity queries, and a heavier tail in query length distribution. We then focus on search failures and, in particular, on null queries that lead to an empty search engine result page, on null sessions that contain such null queries, and on users who are prone to issue null queries. In academic search approximately 1 in 10 queries is a null query, and 25% of the sessions contain a null query. They appear in different types of search sessions, and prevent users from achieving their search goal. To address the high rate of null queries in academic search, we consider the task of providing query suggestions. Specifically we focus on a highly frequent query type: non-boolean informational queries. To this end we need to overcome query sparsity and make effective use of session information. We find that using entities helps to surface more relevant query suggestions in the face of query sparsity. We also find that query suggestions should be conditioned on the type of session in which they are offered to be more effective. After casting the session classification problem as a multi-label classification problem, we generate session-conditional query suggestions based on predicted session type. We find that this session-conditional method leads to significant improvements over a generic query suggestion method. Personalization yields very little further improvements over session-conditional query suggestions.
  8. Thelwall, M.; Sud, P.: ¬A comparison of methods for collecting web citation data for academic organizations (2011) 0.13
    0.12791318 = product of:
      0.17055091 = sum of:
        0.029088326 = weight(_text_:web in 4626) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029088326 = score(doc=4626,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 4626, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4626)
        0.07377557 = weight(_text_:search in 4626) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07377557 = score(doc=4626,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.4293381 = fieldWeight in 4626, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4626)
        0.06768702 = product of:
          0.13537404 = sum of:
            0.13537404 = weight(_text_:engine in 4626) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.13537404 = score(doc=4626,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.51185703 = fieldWeight in 4626, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4626)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    The primary webometric method for estimating the online impact of an organization is to count links to its website. Link counts have been available from commercial search engines for over a decade but this was set to end by early 2012 and so a replacement is needed. This article compares link counts to two alternative methods: URL citations and organization title mentions. New variations of these methods are also introduced. The three methods are compared against each other using Yahoo!. Two of the three methods (URL citations and organization title mentions) are also compared against each other using Bing. Evidence from a case study of 131 UK universities and 49 US Library and Information Science (LIS) departments suggests that Bing's Hit Count Estimates (HCEs) for popular title searches are not useful for webometric research but that Yahoo!'s HCEs for all three types of search and Bing's URL citation HCEs seem to be consistent. For exact URL counts the results of all three methods in Yahoo! and both methods in Bing are also consistent. Four types of accuracy factors are also introduced and defined: search engine coverage, search engine retrieval variation, search engine retrieval anomalies, and query polysemy.
  9. Vidinli, I.B.; Ozcan, R.: New query suggestion framework and algorithms : a case study for an educational search engine (2016) 0.13
    0.12735078 = product of:
      0.16980103 = sum of:
        0.03490599 = weight(_text_:web in 3185) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03490599 = score(doc=3185,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 3185, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3185)
        0.068575576 = weight(_text_:search in 3185) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.068575576 = score(doc=3185,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.39907667 = fieldWeight in 3185, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3185)
        0.06631946 = product of:
          0.13263892 = sum of:
            0.13263892 = weight(_text_:engine in 3185) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.13263892 = score(doc=3185,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.5015154 = fieldWeight in 3185, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3185)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    Query suggestion is generally an integrated part of web search engines. In this study, we first redefine and reduce the query suggestion problem as "comparison of queries". We then propose a general modular framework for query suggestion algorithm development. We also develop new query suggestion algorithms which are used in our proposed framework, exploiting query, session and user features. As a case study, we use query logs of a real educational search engine that targets K-12 students in Turkey. We also exploit educational features (course, grade) in our query suggestion algorithms. We test our framework and algorithms over a set of queries by an experiment and demonstrate a 66-90% statistically significant increase in relevance of query suggestions compared to a baseline method.
  10. Kucukyilmaz, T.; Cambazoglu, B.B.; Aykanat, C.; Baeza-Yates, R.: ¬A machine learning approach for result caching in web search engines (2017) 0.13
    0.12735078 = product of:
      0.16980103 = sum of:
        0.03490599 = weight(_text_:web in 5100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03490599 = score(doc=5100,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 5100, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5100)
        0.068575576 = weight(_text_:search in 5100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.068575576 = score(doc=5100,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.39907667 = fieldWeight in 5100, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5100)
        0.06631946 = product of:
          0.13263892 = sum of:
            0.13263892 = weight(_text_:engine in 5100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.13263892 = score(doc=5100,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.5015154 = fieldWeight in 5100, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5100)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    A commonly used technique for improving search engine performance is result caching. In result caching, precomputed results (e.g., URLs and snippets of best matching pages) of certain queries are stored in a fast-access storage. The future occurrences of a query whose results are already stored in the cache can be directly served by the result cache, eliminating the need to process the query using costly computing resources. Although other performance metrics are possible, the main performance metric for evaluating the success of a result cache is hit rate. In this work, we present a machine learning approach to improve the hit rate of a result cache by facilitating a large number of features extracted from search engine query logs. We then apply the proposed machine learning approach to static, dynamic, and static-dynamic caching. Compared to the previous methods in the literature, the proposed approach improves the hit rate of the result cache up to 0.66%, which corresponds to 9.60% of the potential room for improvement.
  11. Zhao, Y.; Ma, F.; Xia, X.: Evaluating the coverage of entities in knowledge graphs behind general web search engines : Poster (2017) 0.13
    0.12563148 = product of:
      0.16750865 = sum of:
        0.041137107 = weight(_text_:web in 3854) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041137107 = score(doc=3854,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 3854, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3854)
        0.08729243 = weight(_text_:search in 3854) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08729243 = score(doc=3854,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.5079997 = fieldWeight in 3854, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3854)
        0.03907912 = product of:
          0.07815824 = sum of:
            0.07815824 = weight(_text_:engine in 3854) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07815824 = score(doc=3854,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.29552078 = fieldWeight in 3854, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3854)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    Web search engines, such as Google and Bing, are constantly employing results from knowledge organization and various visualization features to improve their search services. Knowledge graph, a large repository of structured knowledge represented by formal languages such as RDF (Resource Description Framework), is used to support entity search feature of Google and Bing (Demartini, 2016). When a user searchs for an entity, such as a person, an organization, or a place in Google or Bing, it is likely that a knowledge cardwill be presented on the right side bar of the search engine result pages (SERPs). For example, when a user searches the entity Benedict Cumberbatch on Google, the knowledge card will show the basic structured information about this person, including his date of birth, height, spouse, parents, and his movies, etc. The knowledge card, which is used to present the result of entity search, is generated from knowledge graphs. Therefore, the quality of knowledge graphs is essential to the performance of entity search. However, studies on the quality of knowledge graphs from the angle of entity coverage are scant in the literature. This study aims to investigate the coverage of entities of knowledge graphs behind Google and Bing.
  12. Lewandowski, D.: ¬The retrieval effectiveness of search engines on navigational queries (2011) 0.13
    0.1253608 = product of:
      0.16714774 = sum of:
        0.029088326 = weight(_text_:web in 4537) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029088326 = score(doc=4537,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 4537, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4537)
        0.09898031 = weight(_text_:search in 4537) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09898031 = score(doc=4537,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.5760175 = fieldWeight in 4537, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4537)
        0.03907912 = product of:
          0.07815824 = sum of:
            0.07815824 = weight(_text_:engine in 4537) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07815824 = score(doc=4537,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.29552078 = fieldWeight in 4537, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4537)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to test major web search engines on their performance on navigational queries, i.e. searches for homepages. Design/methodology/approach - In total, 100 user queries are posed to six search engines (Google, Yahoo!, MSN, Ask, Seekport, and Exalead). Users described the desired pages, and the results position of these was recorded. Measured success and mean reciprocal rank are calculated. Findings - The performance of the major search engines Google, Yahoo!, and MSN was found to be the best, with around 90 per cent of queries answered correctly. Ask and Exalead performed worse but received good scores as well. Research limitations/implications - All queries were in German, and the German-language interfaces of the search engines were used. Therefore, the results are only valid for German queries. Practical implications - When designing a search engine to compete with the major search engines, care should be taken on the performance on navigational queries. Users can be influenced easily in their quality ratings of search engines based on this performance. Originality/value - This study systematically compares the major search engines on navigational queries and compares the findings with studies on the retrieval effectiveness of the engines on informational queries.
  13. Allocca, C.; Aquin, M.d'; Motta, E.: Impact of using relationships between ontologies to enhance the ontology search results (2012) 0.12
    0.12242785 = product of:
      0.16323714 = sum of:
        0.050382458 = weight(_text_:web in 264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050382458 = score(doc=264,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 264, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=264)
        0.07377557 = weight(_text_:search in 264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07377557 = score(doc=264,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.4293381 = fieldWeight in 264, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=264)
        0.03907912 = product of:
          0.07815824 = sum of:
            0.07815824 = weight(_text_:engine in 264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07815824 = score(doc=264,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.29552078 = fieldWeight in 264, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=264)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    Using semantic web search engines, such as Watson, Swoogle or Sindice, to find ontologies is a complex exploratory activity. It generally requires formulating multiple queries, browsing pages of results, and assessing the returned ontologies against each other to obtain a relevant and adequate subset of ontologies for the intended use. Our hypothesis is that at least some of the difficulties related to searching ontologies stem from the lack of structure in the search results, where ontologies that are implicitly related to each other are presented as disconnected and shown on different result pages. In earlier publications we presented a software framework, Kannel, which is able to automatically detect and make explicit relationships between ontologies in large ontology repositories. In this paper, we present a study that compares the use of the Watson ontology search engine with an extension,Watson+Kannel, which provides information regarding the various relationships occurring between the result ontologies. We evaluate Watson+Kannel by demonstrating through various indicators that explicit relationships between ontologies improve users' efficiency in ontology search, thus validating our hypothesis.
    Source
    9th Extended Semantic Web Conference (ESWC), 2012-05-27/2012-05-31 in Hersonissos, Crete, Greece. Eds.: Elena Simperl et al
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  14. Souza, J.; Carvalho, A.; Cristo, M.; Moura, E.; Calado, P.; Chirita, P.-A.; Nejdl, W.: Using site-level connections to estimate link confidence (2012) 0.12
    0.12242785 = product of:
      0.16323714 = sum of:
        0.050382458 = weight(_text_:web in 498) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050382458 = score(doc=498,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 498, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=498)
        0.07377557 = weight(_text_:search in 498) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07377557 = score(doc=498,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.4293381 = fieldWeight in 498, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=498)
        0.03907912 = product of:
          0.07815824 = sum of:
            0.07815824 = weight(_text_:engine in 498) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07815824 = score(doc=498,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.29552078 = fieldWeight in 498, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=498)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    Search engines are essential tools for web users today. They rely on a large number of features to compute the rank of search results for each given query. The estimated reputation of pages is among the effective features available for search engine designers, probably being adopted by most current commercial search engines. Page reputation is estimated by analyzing the linkage relationships between pages. This information is used by link analysis algorithms as a query-independent feature, to be taken into account when computing the rank of the results. Unfortunately, several types of links found on the web may damage the estimated page reputation and thus cause a negative effect on the quality of search results. This work studies alternatives to reduce the negative impact of such noisy links. More specifically, the authors propose and evaluate new methods that deal with noisy links, considering scenarios where the reputation of pages is computed using the PageRank algorithm. They show, through experiments with real web content, that their methods achieve significant improvements when compared to previous solutions proposed in the literature.
  15. Chaudiron, S.; Ihadjadene, M.: Studying Web search engines from a user perspective : key concepts and main approaches (2012) 0.12
    0.12195486 = product of:
      0.16260648 = sum of:
        0.06504348 = weight(_text_:web in 109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06504348 = score(doc=109,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.40312994 = fieldWeight in 109, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=109)
        0.08081709 = weight(_text_:search in 109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08081709 = score(doc=109,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.47031635 = fieldWeight in 109, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=109)
        0.01674591 = product of:
          0.03349182 = sum of:
            0.03349182 = weight(_text_:22 in 109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03349182 = score(doc=109,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = 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)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    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
    Footnote
    Vgl.: http://www.igi-global.com/book/next-generation-search-engines/64435.
    Source
    Next generation search engines: advanced models for information retrieval. Eds.: C. Jouis, u.a
  16. Kruschwitz, U.; Lungley, D.; Albakour, M-D.; Song, D.: Deriving query suggestions for site search (2013) 0.12
    0.120774984 = product of:
      0.16103332 = sum of:
        0.041137107 = weight(_text_:web in 1085) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041137107 = score(doc=1085,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 1085, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1085)
        0.08081709 = weight(_text_:search in 1085) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08081709 = score(doc=1085,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.47031635 = fieldWeight in 1085, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1085)
        0.03907912 = product of:
          0.07815824 = sum of:
            0.07815824 = weight(_text_:engine in 1085) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07815824 = score(doc=1085,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.29552078 = fieldWeight in 1085, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1085)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    Modern search engines have been moving away from simplistic interfaces that aimed at satisfying a user's need with a single-shot query. Interactive features are now integral parts of web search engines. However, generating good query modification suggestions remains a challenging issue. Query log analysis is one of the major strands of work in this direction. Although much research has been performed on query logs collected on the web as a whole, query log analysis to enhance search on smaller and more focused collections has attracted less attention, despite its increasing practical importance. In this article, we report on a systematic study of different query modification methods applied to a substantial query log collected on a local website that already uses an interactive search engine. We conducted experiments in which we asked users to assess the relevance of potential query modification suggestions that have been constructed using a range of log analysis methods and different baseline approaches. The experimental results demonstrate the usefulness of log analysis to extract query modification suggestions. Furthermore, our experiments demonstrate that a more fine-grained approach than grouping search requests into sessions allows for extraction of better refinement terms from query log files.
  17. Mäkelä, E.; Hyvönen, E.; Saarela, S.; Vilfanen, K.: Application of ontology techniques to view-based semantic serach and browsing (2012) 0.12
    0.12073888 = product of:
      0.16098517 = sum of:
        0.03490599 = weight(_text_:web in 3264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03490599 = score(doc=3264,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 3264, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3264)
        0.07918424 = weight(_text_:search in 3264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07918424 = score(doc=3264,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.460814 = fieldWeight in 3264, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3264)
        0.04689494 = product of:
          0.09378988 = sum of:
            0.09378988 = weight(_text_:engine in 3264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09378988 = score(doc=3264,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.35462496 = fieldWeight in 3264, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3264)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    We scho how the beenfits of the view-based search method, developed within the information retrieval community, can be extended with ontology-based search, developed within the Semantic Web community, and with semantic recommendations. As a proof of the concept, we have implemented an ontology-and view-based search engine and recommendations system Ontogaotr for RDF(S) repositories. Ontogator is innovative in two ways. Firstly, the RDFS.based ontologies used for annotating metadata are used in the user interface to facilitate view-based information retrieval. The views provide the user with an overview of the repositorys contents and a vocabulary for expressing search queries. Secondlyy, a semantic browsing function is provided by a recommender system. This system enriches instance level metadata by ontologies and provides the user with links to semantically related relevant resources. The semantic linkage is specified in terms of logical rules. To illustrate and discuss the ideas, a deployed application of Ontogator to a photo repository of the Helsinki University Museum is presented.
  18. Sanchiza, M.; Chinb, J.; Chevaliera, A.; Fuc, W.T.; Amadieua, F.; Hed, J.: Searching for information on the web : impact of cognitive aging, prior domain knowledge and complexity of the search problems (2017) 0.12
    0.12073888 = product of:
      0.16098517 = sum of:
        0.03490599 = weight(_text_:web in 3294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03490599 = score(doc=3294,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 3294, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3294)
        0.07918424 = weight(_text_:search in 3294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07918424 = score(doc=3294,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.460814 = fieldWeight in 3294, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3294)
        0.04689494 = product of:
          0.09378988 = sum of:
            0.09378988 = weight(_text_:engine in 3294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09378988 = score(doc=3294,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.35462496 = fieldWeight in 3294, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3294)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    This study focuses on the impact of age, prior domain knowledge and cognitive abilities on performance, query production and navigation strategies during information searching. Twenty older adults and nineteen young adults had to answer 12 information search problems of varying nature within two domain knowledge: health and manga. In each domain, participants had to perform two simple fact-finding problems (keywords provided and answer directly accessible on the search engine results page), two difficult fact-finding problems (keywords had to be inferred) and two open-ended information search problems (multiple answers possible and navigation necessary). Results showed that prior domain knowledge helped older adults improve navigation (i.e. reduced the number of webpages visited and thus decreased the feeling of disorientation), query production and reformulation (i.e. they formulated semantically more specific queries, and they inferred a greater number of new keywords).
  19. Huvila, I.: Affective capitalism of knowing and the society of search engine (2016) 0.12
    0.120702334 = product of:
      0.24140467 = sum of:
        0.068575576 = weight(_text_:search in 3246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.068575576 = score(doc=3246,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.39907667 = fieldWeight in 3246, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3246)
        0.17282909 = sum of:
          0.13263892 = weight(_text_:engine in 3246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.13263892 = score(doc=3246,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                0.049439456 = queryNorm
              0.5015154 = fieldWeight in 3246, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3246)
          0.04019018 = weight(_text_:22 in 3246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04019018 = score(doc=3246,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.049439456 = 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(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose The purpose of this paper is to discuss the affective premises and economics of the influence of search engines on knowing and informing in the contemporary society. Design/methodology/approach A conceptual discussion of the affective premises and framings of the capitalist economics of knowing is presented. Findings The main proposition of this text is that the exploitation of affects is entwined in the competing market and emancipatory discourses and counter-discourses both as intentional interventions, and perhaps even more significantly, as unintentional influences that shape the ways of knowing in the peripheries of the regime that shape cultural constellations of their own. Affective capitalism bounds and frames our ways of knowing in ways that are difficult to anticipate and read even from the context of the regime itself. Originality/value In the relatively extensive discussion on the role of affects in the contemporary capitalism, influence of affects on knowing and their relation to search engine use has received little explicit attention so far.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  20. Jiang, J.-D.; Jiang, J.-Y.; Cheng, P.-J.: Cocluster hypothesis and ranking consistency for relevance ranking in web search (2019) 0.12
    0.11859758 = product of:
      0.15813011 = sum of:
        0.029088326 = weight(_text_:web in 5247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029088326 = score(doc=5247,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 5247, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5247)
        0.07377557 = weight(_text_:search in 5247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07377557 = score(doc=5247,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.4293381 = fieldWeight in 5247, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5247)
        0.05526622 = product of:
          0.11053244 = sum of:
            0.11053244 = weight(_text_:engine in 5247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11053244 = score(doc=5247,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.41792953 = fieldWeight in 5247, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5247)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    Conventional approaches to relevance ranking typically optimize ranking models by each query separately. The traditional cluster hypothesis also does not consider the dependency between related queries. The goal of this paper is to leverage similar search intents to perform ranking consistency so that the search performance can be improved accordingly. Different from the previous supervised approach, which learns relevance by click-through data, we propose a novel cocluster hypothesis to bridge the gap between relevance ranking and ranking consistency. A nearest-neighbors test is also designed to measure the extent to which the cocluster hypothesis holds. Based on the hypothesis, we further propose a two-stage unsupervised approach, in which two ranking heuristics and a cost function are developed to optimize the combination of consistency and uniqueness (or inconsistency). Extensive experiments have been conducted on a real and large-scale search engine log. The experimental results not only verify the applicability of the proposed cocluster hypothesis but also show that our approach is effective in boosting the retrieval performance of the commercial search engine and reaches a comparable performance to the supervised approach.

Languages

  • e 1450
  • d 296
  • f 2
  • i 2
  • a 1
  • el 1
  • es 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • el 130
  • b 4
  • s 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Classifications