Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Smith, M.P."
  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalalgorithmen"
  1. Smith, M.P.; Pollitt, S.A.: ¬A comparison of ranking formulae and their ranks (1995) 0.00 
    0.0021674242 = product of:
  0.0043348484 = sum of:
    0.0043348484 = product of:
      0.008669697 = sum of:
        0.008669697 = weight(_text_:a in 5802) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008669697 = score(doc=5802,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.043477926 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037706986 = queryNorm
            0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 5802, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5802)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Reports a study to compare the ranking produced by several well known probabilistic formulae. Values for the variables used in these formulae (collection frequency for a query term, number of relevant documents retrieved, and number of relevant documents retrieved, and number of relevant documents indexed by the query term) were derived using a random number generator, the number of documents in the collection was fixed at 500.000. This produced ranked bands for each formula using document term characteristics rather than actual documents. These rankings were compared with one another using the Spearman Rho ranked correlation co-efficient to determine how closely the algorithms rank documents. There is little difference in the rankings produced by the Expected Mutual Information measure EMIM and the simpler F4.5 weighting scheme
    Type
    a
  2. Smith, M.; Smith, M.P.; Wade, S.J.: Applying genetic programming to the problem of term weight algorithms (1995) 0.00 
    0.0015666279 = product of:
  0.0031332558 = sum of:
    0.0031332558 = product of:
      0.0062665115 = sum of:
        0.0062665115 = weight(_text_:a in 5803) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0062665115 = score(doc=5803,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.043477926 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037706986 = queryNorm
            0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 5803, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5803)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Presents the results of an initial study on the application of Genetic Programming (GP) to the production of term weighting algorithms in relevance feedback systems within information retrieval systems. Compares Porter, wpq and GP algorithms with user rankings. Offers a backgroud to term weighting alsgorithms and Genetic Programming
    Type
    a

Authors