-
Lespinasse, K.: TREC: une conference pour l'evaluation des systemes de recherche d'information (1997)
0.04
0.04254054 = product of:
0.08508108 = sum of:
0.08508108 = sum of:
0.028259892 = weight(_text_:2 in 744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028259892 = score(doc=744,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.2182831 = fieldWeight in 744, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=744)
0.056821186 = weight(_text_:22 in 744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056821186 = score(doc=744,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 744, 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=744)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
- Source
- Documentaliste. 34(1997) no.2, S.74-81
-
Dresel, R.; Hörnig, D.; Kaluza, H.; Peter, A.; Roßmann, A.; Sieber, W.: Evaluation deutscher Web-Suchwerkzeuge : Ein vergleichender Retrievaltest (2001)
0.04
0.04254054 = product of:
0.08508108 = sum of:
0.08508108 = sum of:
0.028259892 = weight(_text_:2 in 261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028259892 = score(doc=261,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.2182831 = fieldWeight in 261, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=261)
0.056821186 = weight(_text_:22 in 261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056821186 = score(doc=261,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 261, 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=261)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Die deutschen Suchmaschinen, Abacho, Acoon, Fireball und Lycos sowie die Web-Kataloge Web.de und Yahoo! werden einem Qualitätstest nach relativem Recall, Precision und Availability unterzogen. Die Methoden der Retrievaltests werden vorgestellt. Im Durchschnitt werden bei einem Cut-Off-Wert von 25 ein Recall von rund 22%, eine Precision von knapp 19% und eine Verfügbarkeit von 24% erreicht
- Footnote
- Vgl. auch den Bericht in: nfd 53(2002) H.2, S.71
-
Ellis, D.: Progress and problems in information retrieval (1996)
0.04
0.04254054 = product of:
0.08508108 = sum of:
0.08508108 = sum of:
0.028259892 = weight(_text_:2 in 789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028259892 = score(doc=789,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.2182831 = fieldWeight in 789, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=789)
0.056821186 = weight(_text_:22 in 789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056821186 = score(doc=789,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 789, 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=789)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 26. 7.2002 20:22:46
- Footnote
- Rez. in: Managing information 3(1996) no.10, S.49 (D. Bawden); Program 32(1998) no.2, S.190-192 (C. Revie)
-
Iivonen, M.: Consistency in the selection of search concepts and search terms (1995)
0.04
0.039663285 = product of:
0.07932657 = sum of:
0.07932657 = sum of:
0.036710676 = weight(_text_:2 in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036710676 = score(doc=1757,freq=6.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.28355807 = fieldWeight in 1757, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1757)
0.04261589 = weight(_text_:22 in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04261589 = score(doc=1757,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1757, 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=1757)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Considers intersearcher and intrasearcher consistency in the selection of search terms. Based on an empirical study where 22 searchers from 4 different types of search environments analyzed altogether 12 search requests of 4 different types in 2 separate test situations between which 2 months elapsed. Statistically very significant differences in consistency were found according to the types of search environments and search requests. Consistency was also considered according to the extent of the scope of search concept. At level I search terms were compared character by character. At level II different search terms were accepted as the same search concept with a rather simple evaluation of linguistic expressions. At level III, in addition to level II, the hierarchical approach of the search request was also controlled. At level IV different search terms were accepted as the same search concept with a broad interpretation of the search concept. Both intersearcher and intrasearcher consistency grew most immediately after a rather simple evaluation of linguistic impressions
- Source
- Information processing and management. 31(1995) no.2, S.173-190
-
Smithson, S.: Information retrieval evaluation in practice : a case study approach (1994)
0.04
0.03722297 = product of:
0.07444594 = sum of:
0.07444594 = sum of:
0.024727406 = weight(_text_:2 in 7302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024727406 = score(doc=7302,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.19099772 = fieldWeight in 7302, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7302)
0.049718536 = weight(_text_:22 in 7302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049718536 = score(doc=7302,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7302, 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=7302)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The evaluation of information retrieval systems is an important yet difficult operation. This paper describes an exploratory evaluation study that takes an interpretive approach to evaluation. The longitudinal study examines evaluation through the information-seeking behaviour of 22 case studies of 'real' users. The eclectic approach to data collection produced behavioral data that is compared with relevance judgements and satisfaction ratings. The study demonstrates considerable variations among the cases, among different evaluation measures within the same case, and among the same measures at different stages within a single case. It is argued that those involved in evaluation should be aware of the difficulties, and base any evaluation on a good understanding of the cases in question
- Source
- Information processing and management. 30(1994) no.2, S.205-221
-
Losee, R.M.: Determining information retrieval and filtering performance without experimentation (1995)
0.04
0.03722297 = product of:
0.07444594 = sum of:
0.07444594 = sum of:
0.024727406 = weight(_text_:2 in 3368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024727406 = score(doc=3368,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.19099772 = fieldWeight in 3368, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3368)
0.049718536 = weight(_text_:22 in 3368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049718536 = score(doc=3368,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3368, 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=3368)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The performance of an information retrieval or text and media filtering system may be determined through analytic methods as well as by traditional simulation or experimental methods. These analytic methods can provide precise statements about expected performance. They can thus determine which of 2 similarly performing systems is superior. For both a single query terms and for a multiple query term retrieval model, a model for comparing the performance of different probabilistic retrieval methods is developed. This method may be used in computing the average search length for a query, given only knowledge of database parameter values. Describes predictive models for inverse document frequency, binary independence, and relevance feedback based retrieval and filtering. Simulation illustrate how the single term model performs and sample performance predictions are given for single term and multiple term problems
- Date
- 22. 2.1996 13:14:10
-
Wood, F.; Ford, N.; Miller, D.; Sobczyk, G.; Duffin, R.: Information skills, searching behaviour and cognitive styles for student-centred learning : a computer-assisted learning approach (1996)
0.04
0.036295015 = product of:
0.07259003 = sum of:
0.07259003 = sum of:
0.029974142 = weight(_text_:2 in 4341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029974142 = score(doc=4341,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.2315242 = fieldWeight in 4341, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4341)
0.04261589 = weight(_text_:22 in 4341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04261589 = score(doc=4341,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4341, 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=4341)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Undergraduates were tested to establish how they searched databases, the effectiveness of their searches and their satisfaction with them. The students' cognitive and learning styles were determined by the Lancaster Approaches to Studying Inventory and Riding's Cognitive Styles Analysis tests. There were significant differences in the searching behaviour and the effectiveness of the searches carried out by students with different learning and cognitive styles. Computer-assisted learning (CAL) packages were developed for three departments. The effectiveness of the packages were evaluated. Significant differences were found in the ways students with different learning styles used the packages. Based on the experience gained, guidelines for the teaching of information skills and the production and use of packages were prepared. About 2/3 of the searches had serious weaknesses, indicating a need for effective training. It appears that choice of searching strategies, search effectiveness and use of CAL packages are all affected by the cognitive and learning styles of the searcher. Therefore, students should be made aware of their own styles and, if appropriate, how to adopt more effective strategies
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.2, S.79-92
-
Sievert, M.E.; McKinin, E.J.: Why full-text misses some relevant documents : an analysis of documents not retrieved by CCML or MEDIS (1989)
0.03
0.031905405 = product of:
0.06381081 = sum of:
0.06381081 = sum of:
0.021194918 = weight(_text_:2 in 3564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021194918 = score(doc=3564,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.16371232 = fieldWeight in 3564, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3564)
0.04261589 = weight(_text_:22 in 3564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04261589 = score(doc=3564,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3564, 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=3564)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Searches conducted as part of the MEDLINE/Full-Text Research Project revealed that the full-text data bases of clinical medical journal articles (CCML (Comprehensive Core Medical Library) from BRS Information Technologies, and MEDIS from Mead Data Central) did not retrieve all the relevant citations. An analysis of the data indicated that 204 relevant citations were retrieved only by MEDLINE. A comparison of the strategies used on the full-text data bases with the text of the articles of these 204 citations revealed that 2 reasons contributed to these failure. The searcher often constructed a restrictive strategy which resulted in the loss of relevant documents; and as in other kinds of retrieval, the problems of natural language caused the loss of relevant documents.
- Date
- 9. 1.1996 10:22:31
-
Crestani, F.; Rijsbergen, C.J. van: Information retrieval by imaging (1996)
0.03
0.031905405 = product of:
0.06381081 = sum of:
0.06381081 = sum of:
0.021194918 = weight(_text_:2 in 6967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021194918 = score(doc=6967,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.16371232 = fieldWeight in 6967, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6967)
0.04261589 = weight(_text_:22 in 6967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04261589 = score(doc=6967,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 6967, 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=6967)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Explains briefly what constitutes the imaging process and explains how imaging can be used in information retrieval. Proposes an approach based on the concept of: 'a term is a possible world'; which enables the exploitation of term to term relationships which are estimated using an information theoretic measure. Reports results of an evaluation exercise to compare the performance of imaging retrieval, using possible world semantics, with a benchmark and using the Cranfield 2 document collection to measure precision and recall. Initially, the performance imaging retrieval was seen to be better but statistical analysis proved that the difference was not significant. The problem with imaging retrieval lies in the amount of computations needed to be performed at run time and a later experiement investigated the possibility of reducing this amount. Notes lines of further investigation
- Source
- Information retrieval: new systems and current research. Proceedings of the 16th Research Colloquium of the British Computer Society Information Retrieval Specialist Group, Drymen, Scotland, 22-23 Mar 94. Ed.: R. Leon
-
Belkin, N.J.: ¬An overview of results from Rutgers' investigations of interactive information retrieval (1998)
0.03
0.026587836 = product of:
0.053175673 = sum of:
0.053175673 = sum of:
0.017662432 = weight(_text_:2 in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017662432 = score(doc=2339,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.13642694 = fieldWeight in 2339, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2339)
0.03551324 = weight(_text_:22 in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03551324 = score(doc=2339,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2339, 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=2339)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 9.1997 19:16:05
- Source
- Visualizing subject access for 21st century information resources: Papers presented at the 1997 Clinic on Library Applications of Data Processing, 2-4 Mar 1997, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Ed.: P.A. Cochrane et al
-
Pal, S.; Mitra, M.; Kamps, J.: Evaluation effort, reliability and reusability in XML retrieval (2011)
0.03
0.026587836 = product of:
0.053175673 = sum of:
0.053175673 = sum of:
0.017662432 = weight(_text_:2 in 4197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017662432 = score(doc=4197,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.13642694 = fieldWeight in 4197, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4197)
0.03551324 = weight(_text_:22 in 4197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03551324 = score(doc=4197,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4197, 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=4197)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 14:20:56
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.2, S.375-394
-
Chu, H.: Factors affecting relevance judgment : a report from TREC Legal track (2011)
0.03
0.026587836 = product of:
0.053175673 = sum of:
0.053175673 = sum of:
0.017662432 = weight(_text_:2 in 4540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017662432 = score(doc=4540,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.13642694 = fieldWeight in 4540, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4540)
0.03551324 = weight(_text_:22 in 4540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03551324 = score(doc=4540,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4540, 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=4540)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 12. 7.2011 18:29:22
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 67(2011) no.2, S.264-278
-
Rajagopal, P.; Ravana, S.D.; Koh, Y.S.; Balakrishnan, V.: Evaluating the effectiveness of information retrieval systems using effort-based relevance judgment (2019)
0.03
0.026587836 = product of:
0.053175673 = sum of:
0.053175673 = sum of:
0.017662432 = weight(_text_:2 in 5287) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017662432 = score(doc=5287,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.13642694 = fieldWeight in 5287, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5287)
0.03551324 = weight(_text_:22 in 5287) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03551324 = score(doc=5287,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5287, 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=5287)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
- Source
- Aslib journal of information management. 71(2019) no.1, S.2-17
-
Fuhr, N.; Niewelt, B.: ¬Ein Retrievaltest mit automatisch indexierten Dokumenten (1984)
0.02
0.024859268 = product of:
0.049718536 = sum of:
0.049718536 = product of:
0.09943707 = sum of:
0.09943707 = weight(_text_:22 in 262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09943707 = score(doc=262,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 262, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=262)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 20.10.2000 12:22:23
-
Tomaiuolo, N.G.; Parker, J.: Maximizing relevant retrieval : keyword and natural language searching (1998)
0.02
0.024859268 = product of:
0.049718536 = sum of:
0.049718536 = product of:
0.09943707 = sum of:
0.09943707 = weight(_text_:22 in 6418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09943707 = score(doc=6418,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6418, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6418)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Online. 22(1998) no.6, S.57-58
-
Voorhees, E.M.; Harman, D.: Overview of the Sixth Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-6) (2000)
0.02
0.024859268 = product of:
0.049718536 = sum of:
0.049718536 = product of:
0.09943707 = sum of:
0.09943707 = weight(_text_:22 in 6438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09943707 = score(doc=6438,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6438, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6438)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 11. 8.2001 16:22:19
-
Dalrymple, P.W.: Retrieval by reformulation in two library catalogs : toward a cognitive model of searching behavior (1990)
0.02
0.024859268 = product of:
0.049718536 = sum of:
0.049718536 = product of:
0.09943707 = sum of:
0.09943707 = weight(_text_:22 in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09943707 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 18:43:54
-
Allan, J.; Callan, J.P.; Croft, W.B.; Ballesteros, L.; Broglio, J.; Xu, J.; Shu, H.: INQUERY at TREC-5 (1997)
0.02
0.01775662 = product of:
0.03551324 = sum of:
0.03551324 = product of:
0.07102648 = sum of:
0.07102648 = weight(_text_:22 in 3103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07102648 = score(doc=3103,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3103, 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=3103)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 27. 2.1999 20:55:22
-
Ng, K.B.; Loewenstern, D.; Basu, C.; Hirsh, H.; Kantor, P.B.: Data fusion of machine-learning methods for the TREC5 routing tak (and other work) (1997)
0.02
0.01775662 = product of:
0.03551324 = sum of:
0.03551324 = product of:
0.07102648 = sum of:
0.07102648 = weight(_text_:22 in 3107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07102648 = score(doc=3107,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3107, 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=3107)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 27. 2.1999 20:59:22
-
Saracevic, T.: On a method for studying the structure and nature of requests in information retrieval (1983)
0.02
0.01775662 = product of:
0.03551324 = sum of:
0.03551324 = product of:
0.07102648 = sum of:
0.07102648 = weight(_text_:22 in 2417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07102648 = score(doc=2417,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2417, 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=2417)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Pages
- S.22-25
