Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

0.00334869 = product of:
  0.00669738 = sum of:
    0.00669738 = product of:
      0.01339476 = sum of:
        0.01339476 = weight(_text_:a in 5293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01339476 = score(doc=5293,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.25222903 = fieldWeight in 5293, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5293)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Proposes a method of organizing documents based on the concepts of aggregation and hierarchies and a graphical user interface to provide a more intuitive form of Boolean query. The design is based on mapping the nodes of the aggregation hierarchy to Boolean intersection operations, mapping the nodes of the generalization hierarchy Boolean intersection operations (?), and providing a concrete, graphical, manipulable representation of both these node types. A working prototype interface was constructed and evaluated experimentally using 16 subjects against a classical command-line Boolean query interface. The graphical interface produced less than one-tenth of the errors of the textual interface, on average. Significant differences in time spent specifying queries were not found. Makes observations and comments to provide guidance for designers

Type

a

0.0028703054 = product of:
  0.005740611 = sum of:
    0.005740611 = product of:
      0.011481222 = sum of:
        0.011481222 = weight(_text_:a in 6715) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011481222 = score(doc=6715,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 6715, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6715)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper discusses visualization of legal information using a tool for temporal information called LifeLines. The direct and indirect histories of cases can become very complex. We explored ways that LifeLines could aid in viewing the links between the original case and the direct and indirect histories. The Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation and Hewlett Packard Company case is used to illustrate the prototype. For example, if users want to find out how the rulings or statutes changed throughout this case, they could retrieve this information within a single display. Using the timeline, users could also choose at which point in time they would like to begin viewing the case. LifeLines support various views of a case's history. For instance, users can view the trial history of a case, the references involved in a case, and citations made to a case. The paper describes improvements to LifeLines that could help in providing a more

Type

a

0.00270615 = product of:
  0.0054123 = sum of:
    0.0054123 = product of:
      0.0108246 = sum of:
        0.0108246 = weight(_text_:a in 1258) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0108246 = score(doc=1258,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 1258, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1258)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Current user interfaces for textual database searching leave much to be desired: individually, they are often confusing, and as a group, they are seriously inconsistent. We propose a four- phase framework for user-interface design: the framework provides common structure and terminology for searching while preserving the distinct features of individual collections and search mechanisms. Users will benefit from faster learning, increased comprehension, and better control, leading to more effective searches and higher satisfaction.

Type

a

0.0026473717 = product of:
  0.0052947435 = sum of:
    0.0052947435 = product of:
      0.010589487 = sum of:
        0.010589487 = weight(_text_:a in 2758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010589487 = score(doc=2758,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 2758, 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=2758)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Hypertext systems provide an appealing mechanism for informally browsing databases by traversing selectable links. However, in many fact finding situations string searching is an effective complement to browsing. Describes the application of the signature file method to achieve rapid and convenient strung search in small personal computer hypertext environments. The method has been implemented to a prototype, as well as in a commercial product. Presents performance data for search times and storage space from a commercial hypertext database and discusses user interface issues. Experience with the string search interface indicates that it was used successfully by novice users

Type

a

0.0016913437 = product of:
  0.0033826875 = sum of:
    0.0033826875 = product of:
      0.006765375 = sum of:
        0.006765375 = weight(_text_:a in 6677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006765375 = score(doc=6677,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 6677, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6677)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The purpose of this exploratory study is to develop research methods to compare the effectiveness of two video browsing interface designs, or surrogates-one static (storyboard) and one dynamic (slide show)-on two distinct information seeking tasks (gist determination and object recognition). Although video data is multimodal, potentially consisting of images, speech, sound, and text, the surrogates tested depend on image data only and use key frames or stills extracted from source video. A test system was developed to determine the effects of different key frame displays on user performance in specified information seeking tasks. The independent variables were interface display and task type. The dependent variables were task accuracy and subjective satisfaction. Covariates included spatial visual ability and time-to-completion. The study used a repeated block factorial 2x2 design; each of 20 participants interacted with all four interface-task combinations. No statistically significant results for task accuracy were found. Statistically significant differences were found, however, for user satisfaction with the display types: users assessed the static display to be "easier" to use than the dynamic display for both task types, even though there were no performance differences. This methodological approach provides a useful way to learn about the relationship between surrogate types and user tasks during video browsing

Type

a