Search (13 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  • × theme_ss:"Sprachretrieval"
  1. Kruschwitz, U.; AI-Bakour, H.: Users want more sophisticated search assistants : results of a task-based evaluation (2005) 0.00 
    0.0032752731 = product of:
  0.0065505463 = sum of:
    0.0065505463 = product of:
      0.013101093 = sum of:
        0.013101093 = weight(_text_:a in 4575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013101093 = score(doc=4575,freq=30.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.24669915 = fieldWeight in 4575, product of:
              5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
                30.0 = termFreq=30.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4575)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The Web provides a massive knowledge source, as do intranets and other electronic document collections. However, much of that knowledge is encoded implicitly and cannot be applied directly without processing into some more appropriate structures. Searching, browsing, question answering, for example, could all benefit from domain-specific knowledge contained in the documents, and in applications such as simple search we do not actually need very "deep" knowledge structures such as ontologies, but we can get a long way with a model of the domain that consists of term hierarchies. We combine domain knowledge automatically acquired by exploiting the documents' markup structure with knowledge extracted an the fly to assist a user with ad hoc search requests. Such a search system can suggest query modification options derived from the actual data and thus guide a user through the space of documents. This article gives a detailed account of a task-based evaluation that compares a search system that uses the outlined domain knowledge with a standard search system. We found that users do use the query modification suggestions proposed by the system. The main conclusion we can draw from this evaluation, however, is that users prefer a system that can suggest query modifications over a standard search engine, which simply presents a ranked list of documents. Most interestingly, we observe this user preference despite the fact that the baseline system even performs slightly better under certain criteria.
    Type
    a
  2. Pomerantz, J.: ¬A linguistic analysis of question taxonomies (2005) 0.00 
    0.0029000505 = product of:
  0.005800101 = sum of:
    0.005800101 = product of:
      0.011600202 = sum of:
        0.011600202 = weight(_text_:a in 3465) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011600202 = score(doc=3465,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.21843673 = fieldWeight in 3465, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3465)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Recent work in automatic question answering has called for question taxonomies as a critical component of the process of machine understanding of questions. There is a long tradition of classifying questions in library reference services, and digital reference services have a strong need for automation to support scalability. Digital reference and question answering systems have the potential to arrive at a highly fruitful symbiosis. To move towards this goal, an extensive review was conducted of bodies of literature from several fields that deal with questions, to identify question taxonomies that exist in these bodies of literature. In the course of this review, five question taxonomies were identified, at four levels of linguistic analysis.
    Type
    a
  3. Radev, D.; Fan, W.; Qu, H.; Wu, H.; Grewal, A.: Probabilistic question answering on the Web (2005) 0.00 
    0.0024857575 = product of:
  0.004971515 = sum of:
    0.004971515 = product of:
      0.00994303 = sum of:
        0.00994303 = weight(_text_:a in 3455) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00994303 = score(doc=3455,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 3455, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3455)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Web-based search engines such as Google and NorthernLight return documents that are relevant to a user query, not answers to user questions. We have developed an architecture that augments existing search engines so that they support natural language question answering. The process entails five steps: query modulation, document retrieval, passage extraction, phrase extraction, and answer ranking. In this article, we describe some probabilistic approaches to the last three of these stages. We show how our techniques apply to a number of existing search engines, and we also present results contrasting three different methods for question answering. Our algorithm, probabilistic phrase reranking (PPR), uses proximity and question type features and achieves a total reciprocal document rank of .20 an the TREC8 corpus. Our techniques have been implemented as a Web-accessible system, called NSIR.
    Type
    a
  4. Galitsky, B.: Can many agents answer questions better than one? (2005) 0.00 
    0.002269176 = product of:
  0.004538352 = sum of:
    0.004538352 = product of:
      0.009076704 = sum of:
        0.009076704 = weight(_text_:a in 3094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009076704 = score(doc=3094,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 3094, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3094)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The paper addresses the issue of how online natural language question answering, based on deep semantic analysis, may compete with currently popular keyword search, open domain information retrieval systems, covering a horizontal domain. We suggest the multiagent question answering approach, where each domain is represented by an agent which tries to answer questions taking into account its specific knowledge. The meta-agent controls the cooperation between question answering agents and chooses the most relevant answer(s). We argue that multiagent question answering is optimal in terms of access to business and financial knowledge, flexibility in query phrasing, and efficiency and usability of advice. The knowledge and advice encoded in the system are initially prepared by domain experts. We analyze the commercial application of multiagent question answering and the robustness of the meta-agent. The paper suggests that a multiagent architecture is optimal when a real world question answering domain combines a number of vertical ones to form a horizontal domain.
  5. Lin, J.; Katz, B.: Building a reusable test collection for question answering (2006) 0.00 
    0.002269176 = product of:
  0.004538352 = sum of:
    0.004538352 = product of:
      0.009076704 = sum of:
        0.009076704 = weight(_text_:a in 5045) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009076704 = score(doc=5045,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 5045, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5045)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    In contrast to traditional information retrieval systems, which return ranked lists of documents that users must manually browse through, a question answering system attempts to directly answer natural language questions posed by the user. Although such systems possess language-processing capabilities, they still rely on traditional document retrieval techniques to generate an initial candidate set of documents. In this article, the authors argue that document retrieval for question answering represents a task different from retrieving documents in response to more general retrospective information needs. Thus, to guide future system development, specialized question answering test collections must be constructed. They show that the current evaluation resources have major shortcomings; to remedy the situation, they have manually created a small, reusable question answering test collection for research purposes. In this article they describe their methodology for building this test collection and discuss issues they encountered regarding the notion of "answer correctness."
    Type
    a
  6. Voorhees, E.M.: Question answering in TREC (2005) 0.00 
    0.0020296127 = product of:
  0.0040592253 = sum of:
    0.0040592253 = product of:
      0.008118451 = sum of:
        0.008118451 = weight(_text_:a in 6487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008118451 = score(doc=6487,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 6487, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6487)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  7. Ferret, O.; Grau, B.; Hurault-Plantet, M.; Illouz, G.; Jacquemin, C.; Monceaux, L.; Robba, I.; Vilnat, A.: How NLP can improve question answering (2002) 0.00 
    0.001757696 = product of:
  0.003515392 = sum of:
    0.003515392 = product of:
      0.007030784 = sum of:
        0.007030784 = weight(_text_:a in 1850) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007030784 = score(doc=1850,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 1850, 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=1850)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Answering open-domain factual questions requires Natural Language processing for refining document selection and answer identification. With our system QALC, we have participated in the Question Answering track of the TREC8, TREC9 and TREC10 evaluations. QALC performs an analysis of documents relying an multiword term searches and their linguistic variation both to minimize the number of documents selected and to provide additional clues when comparing question and sentence representations. This comparison process also makes use of the results of a syntactic parsing of the questions and Named Entity recognition functionalities. Answer extraction relies an the application of syntactic patterns chosen according to the kind of information that is sought, and categorized depending an the syntactic form of the question. These patterns allow QALC to handle nicely linguistic variations at the answer level.
    Type
    a
  8. Schneider, R.: Question answering : das Retrieval der Zukunft? (2007) 0.00 
    0.001353075 = product of:
  0.00270615 = sum of:
    0.00270615 = product of:
      0.0054123 = sum of:
        0.0054123 = weight(_text_:a in 5953) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0054123 = score(doc=5953,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 5953, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5953)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  9. Nhongkai, S.N.; Bentz, H.-J.: Bilinguale Suche mittels Konzeptnetzen (2006) 0.00 
    0.001353075 = product of:
  0.00270615 = sum of:
    0.00270615 = product of:
      0.0054123 = sum of:
        0.0054123 = weight(_text_:a in 3914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0054123 = score(doc=3914,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 3914, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3914)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  10. Tartakovski, O.; Shramko, M.: Implementierung eines Werkzeugs zur Sprachidentifikation in mono- und multilingualen Texten (2006) 0.00 
    0.0011839407 = product of:
  0.0023678814 = sum of:
    0.0023678814 = product of:
      0.0047357627 = sum of:
        0.0047357627 = weight(_text_:a in 5978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0047357627 = score(doc=5978,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 5978, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5978)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  11. Jensen, N.: Evaluierung von mehrsprachigem Web-Retrieval : Experimente mit dem EuroGOV-Korpus im Rahmen des Cross Language Evaluation Forum (CLEF) (2006) 0.00 
    0.0010148063 = product of:
  0.0020296127 = sum of:
    0.0020296127 = product of:
      0.0040592253 = sum of:
        0.0040592253 = weight(_text_:a in 5964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0040592253 = score(doc=5964,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 5964, 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=5964)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  12. Strötgen, R.; Mandl, T.; Schneider, R.: Entwicklung und Evaluierung eines Question Answering Systems im Rahmen des Cross Language Evaluation Forum (CLEF) (2006) 0.00 
    0.0010148063 = product of:
  0.0020296127 = sum of:
    0.0020296127 = product of:
      0.0040592253 = sum of:
        0.0040592253 = weight(_text_:a in 5981) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0040592253 = score(doc=5981,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 5981, 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=5981)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  13. Rösener, C.: ¬Die Stecknadel im Heuhaufen : Natürlichsprachlicher Zugang zu Volltextdatenbanken (2005) 0.00 
    6.765375E-4 = product of:
  0.001353075 = sum of:
    0.001353075 = product of:
      0.00270615 = sum of:
        0.00270615 = weight(_text_:a in 548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00270615 = score(doc=548,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.050957955 = fieldWeight in 548, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=548)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    5: Interaktion 5.1 Frage-Antwort- bzw. Dialogsysteme: Forschungen und Projekte 5.2 Darstellung und Visualisierung von Wissen 5.3 Das Dialogsystem im Rahmen des LeWi-Projektes 5.4 Ergebnisdarstellung und Antwortpräsentation im LeWi-Kontext 6: Testumgebungen und -ergebnisse 7: Ergebnisse und Ausblick 7.1 Ausgangssituation 7.2 Schlussfolgerungen 7.3 Ausblick Anhang A Auszüge aus der Grob- bzw. Feinklassifikation des BMM Anhang B MPRO - Formale Beschreibung der wichtigsten Merkmale ... Anhang C Fragentypologie mit Beispielsätzen (Auszug) Anhang D Semantische Merkmale im morphologischen Lexikon (Auszug) Anhang E Regelbeispiele für die Fragentypzuweisung Anhang F Aufstellung der möglichen Suchen im LeWi-Dialogmodul (Auszug) Anhang G Vollständiger Dialogbaum zu Beginn des Projektes Anhang H Statuszustände zur Ermittlung der Folgefragen (Auszug)

Authors

Languages

Types

Themes

Subjects