Search (1 results, page 1 of 1)

0.029242966 = product of:
  0.058485933 = sum of:
    0.058485933 = sum of:
      0.027599512 = weight(_text_:r in 5697) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.027599512 = score(doc=5697,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15092614 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045593463 = queryNorm
          0.18286766 = fieldWeight in 5697, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5697)
      0.030886423 = weight(_text_:22 in 5697) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.030886423 = score(doc=5697,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15966053 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045593463 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5697, 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=5697)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The performance of 8 ranking algorithms was evaluated with respect to their effectiveness in ranking terms for query expansion. The evaluation was conducted within an investigation of interactive query expansion and relevance feedback in a real operational environment. Focuses on the identification of algorithms that most effectively take cognizance of user preferences. user choices (i.e. the terms selected by the searchers for the query expansion search) provided the yardstick for the evaluation of the 8 ranking algorithms. This methodology introduces a user oriented approach in evaluating ranking algorithms for query expansion in contrast to the standard, system oriented approaches. Similarities in the performance of the 8 algorithms and the ways these algorithms rank terms were the main focus of this evaluation. The findings demonstrate that the r-lohi, wpq, enim, and porter algorithms have similar performance in bringing good terms to the top of a ranked list of terms for query expansion. However, further evaluation of the algorithms in different (e.g. full text) environments is needed before these results can be generalized beyond the context of the present study

Date

22. 2.1996 13:14:10