-
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)
0.02
0.019982103 = product of:
0.039964207 = sum of:
0.039964207 = sum of:
0.006318258 = weight(_text_:a in 4341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006318258 = score(doc=4341,freq=6.0), product of:
0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 4341, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4341)
0.033645947 = weight(_text_:22 in 4341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033645947 = score(doc=4341,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = 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
- Type
- a
-
Leininger, K.: Interindexer consistency in PsychINFO (2000)
0.02
0.019982103 = product of:
0.039964207 = sum of:
0.039964207 = sum of:
0.006318258 = weight(_text_:a in 2552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006318258 = score(doc=2552,freq=6.0), product of:
0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 2552, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2552)
0.033645947 = weight(_text_:22 in 2552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033645947 = score(doc=2552,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2552, 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=2552)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Reports results of a study to examine interindexer consistency (the degree to which indexers, when assigning terms to a chosen record, will choose the same terms to reflect that record) in the PsycINFO database using 60 records that were inadvertently processed twice between 1996 and 1998. Five aspects of interindexer consistency were analysed. Two methods were used to calculate interindexer consistency: one posited by Hooper (1965) and the other by Rollin (1981). Aspects analysed were: checktag consistency (66.24% using Hooper's calculation and 77.17% using Rollin's); major-to-all term consistency (49.31% and 62.59% respectively); overall indexing consistency (49.02% and 63.32%); classification code consistency (44.17% and 45.00%); and major-to-major term consistency (43.24% and 56.09%). The average consistency across all categories was 50.4% using Hooper's method and 60.83% using Rollin's. Although comparison with previous studies is difficult due to methodological variations in the overall study of indexing consistency and the specific characteristics of the database, results generally support previous findings when trends and similar studies are analysed.
- Date
- 9. 2.1997 18:44:22
- Type
- a
-
Sievert, M.E.; McKinin, E.J.: Why full-text misses some relevant documents : an analysis of documents not retrieved by CCML or MEDIS (1989)
0.02
0.019402392 = product of:
0.038804784 = sum of:
0.038804784 = sum of:
0.005158836 = weight(_text_:a in 3564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.005158836 = score(doc=3564,freq=4.0), product of:
0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 3564, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3564)
0.033645947 = weight(_text_:22 in 3564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033645947 = score(doc=3564,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = 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
-
Reichert, S.; Mayr, P.: Untersuchung von Relevanzeigenschaften in einem kontrollierten Eyetracking-Experiment (2012)
0.02
0.018646898 = product of:
0.037293795 = sum of:
0.037293795 = sum of:
0.003647848 = weight(_text_:a in 328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003647848 = score(doc=328,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 328, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=328)
0.033645947 = weight(_text_:22 in 328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033645947 = score(doc=328,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 328, 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=328)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2012 19:25:54
- Type
- a
-
Pal, S.; Mitra, M.; Kamps, J.: Evaluation effort, reliability and reusability in XML retrieval (2011)
0.02
0.018578956 = product of:
0.03715791 = sum of:
0.03715791 = sum of:
0.00911962 = weight(_text_:a in 4197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.00911962 = score(doc=4197,freq=18.0), product of:
0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.19109234 = fieldWeight in 4197, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4197)
0.028038291 = weight(_text_:22 in 4197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028038291 = score(doc=4197,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = 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)
- Abstract
- The Initiative for the Evaluation of XML retrieval (INEX) provides a TREC-like platform for evaluating content-oriented XML retrieval systems. Since 2007, INEX has been using a set of precision-recall based metrics for its ad hoc tasks. The authors investigate the reliability and robustness of these focused retrieval measures, and of the INEX pooling method. They explore four specific questions: How reliable are the metrics when assessments are incomplete, or when query sets are small? What is the minimum pool/query-set size that can be used to reliably evaluate systems? Can the INEX collections be used to fairly evaluate "new" systems that did not participate in the pooling process? And, for a fixed amount of assessment effort, would this effort be better spent in thoroughly judging a few queries, or in judging many queries relatively superficially? The authors' findings validate properties of precision-recall-based metrics observed in document retrieval settings. Early precision measures are found to be more error-prone and less stable under incomplete judgments and small topic-set sizes. They also find that system rankings remain largely unaffected even when assessment effort is substantially (but systematically) reduced, and confirm that the INEX collections remain usable when evaluating nonparticipating systems. Finally, they observe that for a fixed amount of effort, judging shallow pools for many queries is better than judging deep pools for a smaller set of queries. However, when judging only a random sample of a pool, it is better to completely judge fewer topics than to partially judge many topics. This result confirms the effectiveness of pooling methods.
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 14:20:56
- Type
- a
-
Chu, H.: Factors affecting relevance judgment : a report from TREC Legal track (2011)
0.02
0.018578956 = product of:
0.03715791 = sum of:
0.03715791 = sum of:
0.00911962 = weight(_text_:a in 4540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.00911962 = score(doc=4540,freq=18.0), product of:
0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.19109234 = fieldWeight in 4540, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4540)
0.028038291 = weight(_text_:22 in 4540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028038291 = score(doc=4540,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = 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)
- Abstract
- Purpose - This study intends to identify factors that affect relevance judgment of retrieved information as part of the 2007 TREC Legal track interactive task. Design/methodology/approach - Data were gathered and analyzed from the participants of the 2007 TREC Legal track interactive task using a questionnaire which includes not only a list of 80 relevance factors identified in prior research, but also a space for expressing their thoughts on relevance judgment in the process. Findings - This study finds that topicality remains a primary criterion, out of various options, for determining relevance, while specificity of the search request, task, or retrieved results also helps greatly in relevance judgment. Research limitations/implications - Relevance research should focus on the topicality and specificity of what is being evaluated as well as conducted in real environments. Practical implications - If multiple relevance factors are presented to assessors, the total number in a list should be below ten to take account of the limited processing capacity of human beings' short-term memory. Otherwise, the assessors might either completely ignore or inadequately consider some of the relevance factors when making judgment decisions. Originality/value - This study presents a method for reducing the artificiality of relevance research design, an apparent limitation in many related studies. Specifically, relevance judgment was made in this research as part of the 2007 TREC Legal track interactive task rather than a study devised for the sake of it. The assessors also served as searchers so that their searching experience would facilitate their subsequent relevance judgments.
- Date
- 12. 7.2011 18:29:22
- Type
- a
-
Ravana, S.D.; Taheri, M.S.; Rajagopal, P.: Document-based approach to improve the accuracy of pairwise comparison in evaluating information retrieval systems (2015)
0.02
0.018318176 = product of:
0.036636353 = sum of:
0.036636353 = sum of:
0.00859806 = weight(_text_:a in 2587) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.00859806 = score(doc=2587,freq=16.0), product of:
0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.18016359 = fieldWeight in 2587, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2587)
0.028038291 = weight(_text_:22 in 2587) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028038291 = score(doc=2587,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2587, 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=2587)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Purpose The purpose of this paper is to propose a method to have more accurate results in comparing performance of the paired information retrieval (IR) systems with reference to the current method, which is based on the mean effectiveness scores of the systems across a set of identified topics/queries. Design/methodology/approach Based on the proposed approach, instead of the classic method of using a set of topic scores, the documents level scores are considered as the evaluation unit. These document scores are the defined document's weight, which play the role of the mean average precision (MAP) score of the systems as a significance test's statics. The experiments were conducted using the TREC 9 Web track collection. Findings The p-values generated through the two types of significance tests, namely the Student's t-test and Mann-Whitney show that by using the document level scores as an evaluation unit, the difference between IR systems is more significant compared with utilizing topic scores. Originality/value Utilizing a suitable test collection is a primary prerequisite for IR systems comparative evaluation. However, in addition to reusable test collections, having an accurate statistical testing is a necessity for these evaluations. The findings of this study will assist IR researchers to evaluate their retrieval systems and algorithms more accurately.
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
- Type
- a
-
King, D.W.: Blazing new trails : in celebration of an audacious career (2000)
0.02
0.01804052 = product of:
0.03608104 = sum of:
0.03608104 = sum of:
0.008042749 = weight(_text_:a in 1184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008042749 = score(doc=1184,freq=14.0), product of:
0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 1184, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1184)
0.028038291 = weight(_text_:22 in 1184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028038291 = score(doc=1184,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1184, 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=1184)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- I had the distinct pleasure of working with Pauline Atherton (Cochrane) during the 1960s, a period that can be considered the heyday of automated information system design and evaluation in the United States. I first met Pauline at the 1962 American Documentation Institute annual meeting in North Hollywood, Florida. My company, Westat Research Analysts, had recently been awarded a contract by the U.S. Patent Office to provide statistical support for the design of experiments with automated information retrieval systems. I was asked to attend the meeting to learn more about information retrieval systems and to begin informing others of U.S. Patent Office activities in this area. At one session, Pauline and I questioned a speaker about the research that he presented. Pauline's questions concerned the logic of their approach and mine, the statistical aspects. After the session, she came over to talk to me and we began a professional and personal friendship that continues to this day. During the 1960s, Pauline was involved in several important information-retrieval projects including a series of studies for the American Institute of Physics, a dissertation examining the relevance of retrieved documents, and development and evaluation of an online information-retrieval system. I had the opportunity to work with Pauline and her colleagues an four of those projects and will briefly describe her work in the 1960s.
- Date
- 22. 9.1997 19:16:05
- Type
- a
-
Petrelli, D.: On the role of user-centred evaluation in the advancement of interactive information retrieval (2008)
0.02
0.01804052 = product of:
0.03608104 = sum of:
0.03608104 = sum of:
0.008042749 = weight(_text_:a in 2026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008042749 = score(doc=2026,freq=14.0), product of:
0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 2026, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2026)
0.028038291 = weight(_text_:22 in 2026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028038291 = score(doc=2026,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2026, 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=2026)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This paper discusses the role of user-centred evaluations as an essential method for researching interactive information retrieval. It draws mainly on the work carried out during the Clarity Project where different user-centred evaluations were run during the lifecycle of a cross-language information retrieval system. The iterative testing was not only instrumental to the development of a usable system, but it enhanced our knowledge of the potential, impact, and actual use of cross-language information retrieval technology. Indeed the role of the user evaluation was dual: by testing a specific prototype it was possible to gain a micro-view and assess the effectiveness of each component of the complex system; by cumulating the result of all the evaluations (in total 43 people were involved) it was possible to build a macro-view of how cross-language retrieval would impact on users and their tasks. By showing the richness of results that can be acquired, this paper aims at stimulating researchers into considering user-centred evaluations as a flexible, adaptable and comprehensive technique for investigating non-traditional information access systems.
- Source
- Information processing and management. 44(2008) no.1, S.22-38
- Type
- a
-
Rajagopal, P.; Ravana, S.D.; Koh, Y.S.; Balakrishnan, V.: Evaluating the effectiveness of information retrieval systems using effort-based relevance judgment (2019)
0.02
0.017742215 = product of:
0.03548443 = sum of:
0.03548443 = sum of:
0.0074461387 = weight(_text_:a in 5287) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0074461387 = score(doc=5287,freq=12.0), product of:
0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 5287, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5287)
0.028038291 = weight(_text_:22 in 5287) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028038291 = score(doc=5287,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = 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)
- Abstract
- Purpose The effort in addition to relevance is a major factor for satisfaction and utility of the document to the actual user. The purpose of this paper is to propose a method in generating relevance judgments that incorporate effort without human judges' involvement. Then the study determines the variation in system rankings due to low effort relevance judgment in evaluating retrieval systems at different depth of evaluation. Design/methodology/approach Effort-based relevance judgments are generated using a proposed boxplot approach for simple document features, HTML features and readability features. The boxplot approach is a simple yet repeatable approach in classifying documents' effort while ensuring outlier scores do not skew the grading of the entire set of documents. Findings The retrieval systems evaluation using low effort relevance judgments has a stronger influence on shallow depth of evaluation compared to deeper depth. It is proved that difference in the system rankings is due to low effort documents and not the number of relevant documents. Originality/value Hence, it is crucial to evaluate retrieval systems at shallow depth using low effort relevance judgments.
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
- Type
- a
-
Belkin, N.J.: ¬An overview of results from Rutgers' investigations of interactive information retrieval (1998)
0.02
0.016168661 = product of:
0.032337323 = sum of:
0.032337323 = sum of:
0.00429903 = weight(_text_:a in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.00429903 = score(doc=2339,freq=4.0), product of:
0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.090081796 = fieldWeight in 2339, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2339)
0.028038291 = weight(_text_:22 in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028038291 = score(doc=2339,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = 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)
- Abstract
- Over the last 4 years, the Information Interaction Laboratory at Rutgers' School of communication, Information and Library Studies has performed a series of investigations concerned with various aspects of people's interactions with advanced information retrieval (IR) systems. We have benn especially concerned with understanding not just what people do, and why, and with what effect, but also with what they would like to do, and how they attempt to accomplish it, and with what difficulties. These investigations have led to some quite interesting conclusions about the nature and structure of people's interactions with information, about support for cooperative human-computer interaction in query reformulation, and about the value of visualization of search results for supporting various forms of interaction with information. In this discussion, I give an overview of the research program and its projects, present representative results from the projects, and discuss some implications of these results for support of subject searching in information retrieval systems
- Date
- 22. 9.1997 19:16:05
- Type
- a
-
Wildemuth, B.; Freund, L.; Toms, E.G.: Untangling search task complexity and difficulty in the context of interactive information retrieval studies (2014)
0.02
0.015539082 = product of:
0.031078164 = sum of:
0.031078164 = sum of:
0.003039873 = weight(_text_:a in 1786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003039873 = score(doc=1786,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.06369744 = fieldWeight in 1786, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1786)
0.028038291 = weight(_text_:22 in 1786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028038291 = score(doc=1786,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1786, 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=1786)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 6. 4.2015 19:31:22
- Type
- a
-
Larsen, B.; Ingwersen, P.; Lund, B.: Data fusion according to the principle of polyrepresentation (2009)
0.01
0.0136472145 = product of:
0.027294429 = sum of:
0.027294429 = sum of:
0.004863797 = weight(_text_:a in 2752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004863797 = score(doc=2752,freq=8.0), product of:
0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 2752, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2752)
0.022430632 = weight(_text_:22 in 2752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022430632 = score(doc=2752,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2752, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2752)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- We report data fusion experiments carried out on the four best-performing retrieval models from TREC 5. Three were conceptually/algorithmically very different from one another; one was algorithmically similar to one of the former. The objective of the test was to observe the performance of the 11 logical data fusion combinations compared to the performance of the four individual models and their intermediate fusions when following the principle of polyrepresentation. This principle is based on cognitive IR perspective (Ingwersen & Järvelin, 2005) and implies that each retrieval model is regarded as a representation of a unique interpretation of information retrieval (IR). It predicts that only fusions of very different, but equally good, IR models may outperform each constituent as well as their intermediate fusions. Two kinds of experiments were carried out. One tested restricted fusions, which entails that only the inner disjoint overlap documents between fused models are ranked. The second set of experiments was based on traditional data fusion methods. The experiments involved the 30 TREC 5 topics that contain more than 44 relevant documents. In all tests, the Borda and CombSUM scoring methods were used. Performance was measured by precision and recall, with document cutoff values (DCVs) at 100 and 15 documents, respectively. Results show that restricted fusions made of two, three, or four cognitively/algorithmically very different retrieval models perform significantly better than do the individual models at DCV100. At DCV15, however, the results of polyrepresentative fusion were less predictable. The traditional fusion method based on polyrepresentation principles demonstrates a clear picture of performance at both DCV levels and verifies the polyrepresentation predictions for data fusion in IR. Data fusion improves retrieval performance over their constituent IR models only if the models all are quite conceptually/algorithmically dissimilar and equally and well performing, in that order of importance.
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 18:48:28
- Type
- a
-
¬The Fifth Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-5) (1997)
0.01
0.011215316 = product of:
0.022430632 = sum of:
0.022430632 = product of:
0.044861265 = sum of:
0.044861265 = weight(_text_:22 in 3087) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044861265 = score(doc=3087,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3087, 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=3087)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Proceedings of the 5th TREC-confrerence held in Gaithersburgh, Maryland, Nov 20-22, 1996. Aim of the conference was discussion on retrieval techniques for large test collections. Different research groups used different techniques, such as automated thesauri, term weighting, natural language techniques, relevance feedback and advanced pattern matching, for information retrieval from the same large database. This procedure makes it possible to compare the results. The proceedings include papers, tables of the system results, and brief system descriptions including timing and storage information
-
Ellis, D.: Progress and problems in information retrieval (1996)
0.01
0.011215316 = product of:
0.022430632 = sum of:
0.022430632 = product of:
0.044861265 = sum of:
0.044861265 = weight(_text_:22 in 789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044861265 = score(doc=789,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 26. 7.2002 20:22:46
-
¬The Eleventh Text Retrieval Conference, TREC 2002 (2003)
0.01
0.011215316 = product of:
0.022430632 = sum of:
0.022430632 = product of:
0.044861265 = sum of:
0.044861265 = weight(_text_:22 in 4049) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044861265 = score(doc=4049,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4049, 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=4049)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Proceedings of the llth TREC-conference held in Gaithersburg, Maryland (USA), November 19-22, 2002. Aim of the conference was discussion an retrieval and related information-seeking tasks for large test collection. 93 research groups used different techniques, for information retrieval from the same large database. This procedure makes it possible to compare the results. The tasks are: Cross-language searching, filtering, interactive searching, searching for novelty, question answering, searching for video shots, and Web searching.
-
Bernstein, L.M.; Williamson, R.E.: Testing of a natural language retrieval system for a full text knowledge base (1984)
0.00
0.0036856506 = product of:
0.0073713013 = sum of:
0.0073713013 = product of:
0.014742603 = sum of:
0.014742603 = weight(_text_:a in 1803) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014742603 = score(doc=1803,freq=6.0), product of:
0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.3089162 = fieldWeight in 1803, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1803)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Type
- a
-
Rao, A.; Lu, A.; Meier, E.; Ahmed, S.; Pliske, D.: Query processing in TREC6 (2000)
0.00
0.0036856506 = product of:
0.0073713013 = sum of:
0.0073713013 = product of:
0.014742603 = sum of:
0.014742603 = weight(_text_:a in 6420) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014742603 = score(doc=6420,freq=6.0), product of:
0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.3089162 = fieldWeight in 6420, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6420)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Type
- a
-
Wolfram, D.; Dimitroff, A.: Hypertext vs. Boolean-based searching in a bibliographic database environment : a direct comparison of searcher performance (1998)
0.00
0.003647848 = product of:
0.007295696 = sum of:
0.007295696 = product of:
0.014591392 = sum of:
0.014591392 = weight(_text_:a in 6436) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014591392 = score(doc=6436,freq=8.0), product of:
0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.30574775 = fieldWeight in 6436, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6436)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Type
- a
-
Regazzi, J.J.: Evaluating indexing systems : a review after Cranfield (1980)
0.00
0.003439224 = product of:
0.006878448 = sum of:
0.006878448 = product of:
0.013756896 = sum of:
0.013756896 = weight(_text_:a in 1849) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013756896 = score(doc=1849,freq=4.0), product of:
0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.041389145 = queryNorm
0.28826174 = fieldWeight in 1849, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1849)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Type
- a
