Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Egghe, L."
  1. Egghe, L.: ¬A universal method of information retrieval evaluation : the "missing" link M and the universal IR surface (2004) 0.07 
    0.06539425 = product of:
  0.09809137 = sum of:
    0.080216765 = weight(_text_:f in 2558) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.080216765 = score(doc=2558,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.17528075 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04397646 = queryNorm
        0.45764732 = fieldWeight in 2558, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2558)
    0.017874608 = product of:
      0.035749216 = sum of:
        0.035749216 = weight(_text_:22 in 2558) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035749216 = score(doc=2558,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15399806 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04397646 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2558, 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=2558)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    The paper shows that the present evaluation methods in information retrieval (basically recall R and precision P and in some cases fallout F ) lack universal comparability in the sense that their values depend on the generality of the IR problem. A solution is given by using all "parts" of the database, including the non-relevant documents and also the not-retrieved documents. It turns out that the solution is given by introducing the measure M being the fraction of the not-retrieved documents that are relevant (hence the "miss" measure). We prove that - independent of the IR problem or of the IR action - the quadruple (P,R,F,M) belongs to a universal IR surface, being the same for all IR-activities. This universality is then exploited by defining a new measure for evaluation in IR allowing for unbiased comparisons of all IR results. We also show that only using one, two or even three measures from the set {P,R,F,M} necessary leads to evaluation measures that are non-universal and hence not capable of comparing different IR situations.
    Date
    14. 8.2004 19:17:22
  2. Egghe, L.: Existence theorem of the quadruple (P, R, F, M) : precision, recall, fallout and miss (2007) 0.03 
    0.034519795 = product of:
  0.10355938 = sum of:
    0.10355938 = weight(_text_:f in 2011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10355938 = score(doc=2011,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.17528075 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04397646 = queryNorm
        0.5908201 = fieldWeight in 2011, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2011)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    In an earlier paper [Egghe, L. (2004). A universal method of information retrieval evaluation: the "missing" link M and the universal IR surface. Information Processing and Management, 40, 21-30] we showed that, given an IR system, and if P denotes precision, R recall, F fallout and M miss (re-introduced in the paper mentioned above), we have the following relationship between P, R, F and M: P/(1-P)*(1-R)/R*F/(1-F)*(1-M)/M = 1. In this paper we prove the (more difficult) converse: given any four rational numbers in the interval ]0, 1[ satisfying the above equation, then there exists an IR system such that these four numbers (in any order) are the precision, recall, fallout and miss of this IR system. As a consequence we show that any three rational numbers in ]0, 1[ represent any three measures taken from precision, recall, fallout and miss of a certain IR system. We also show that this result is also true for two numbers instead of three.
  3. Egghe, L.: On the relation between the association strength and other similarity measures (2010) 0.02 
    0.020146582 = product of:
  0.060439747 = sum of:
    0.060439747 = product of:
      0.12087949 = sum of:
        0.12087949 = weight(_text_:van in 3598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12087949 = score(doc=3598,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24523866 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5765896 = idf(docFreq=454, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04397646 = queryNorm
            0.49290553 = fieldWeight in 3598, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.5765896 = idf(docFreq=454, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3598)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    A graph in van Eck and Waltman [JASIST, 60(8), 2009, p. 1644], representing the relation between the association strength and the cosine, is partially explained as a sheaf of parabolas, each parabola being the functional relation between these similarity measures on the trajectories x*y=a, a constant. Based on earlier obtained relations between cosine and other similarity measures (e.g., Jaccard index), we can prove new relations between the association strength and these other measures.
  4. Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.; Hooydonk, G. van: Methods for accrediting publications to authors or countries : consequences for evaluation studies (2000) 0.02 
    0.015109937 = product of:
  0.04532981 = sum of:
    0.04532981 = product of:
      0.09065962 = sum of:
        0.09065962 = weight(_text_:van in 4384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09065962 = score(doc=4384,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24523866 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5765896 = idf(docFreq=454, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04397646 = queryNorm
            0.36967915 = fieldWeight in 4384, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.5765896 = idf(docFreq=454, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4384)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  5. Egghe, L.; Guns, R.; Rousseau, R.; Leuven, K.U.: Erratum (2012) 0.01 
    0.009930339 = product of:
  0.029791014 = sum of:
    0.029791014 = product of:
      0.05958203 = sum of:
        0.05958203 = weight(_text_:22 in 4992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05958203 = score(doc=4992,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15399806 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04397646 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4992, 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=4992)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    14. 2.2012 12:53:22
  6. Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: Averaging and globalising quotients of informetric and scientometric data (1996) 0.01 
    0.0059582028 = product of:
  0.017874608 = sum of:
    0.017874608 = product of:
      0.035749216 = sum of:
        0.035749216 = weight(_text_:22 in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035749216 = score(doc=7659,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15399806 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04397646 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 7659, 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=7659)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.3, S.165-170

Authors

Years