-
Stock, W.G.: On relevance distributions (2006)
0.00
8.9620193E-4 = product of:
0.0017924039 = sum of:
0.0017924039 = product of:
0.0053772116 = sum of:
0.0053772116 = weight(_text_:a in 5116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0053772116 = score(doc=5116,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045758117 = queryNorm
0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 5116, 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=5116)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Type
- a
-
Vechtomova, O.; Karamuftuoglu, M.: Lexical cohesion and term proximity in document ranking (2008)
0.00
8.9620193E-4 = product of:
0.0017924039 = sum of:
0.0017924039 = product of:
0.0053772116 = sum of:
0.0053772116 = weight(_text_:a in 2101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0053772116 = score(doc=2101,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045758117 = queryNorm
0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 2101, 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=2101)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Type
- a
-
Elsweiler, D.; Kruschwitz, U.: Interaktives Information Retrieval (2023)
0.00
8.9620193E-4 = product of:
0.0017924039 = sum of:
0.0017924039 = product of:
0.0053772116 = sum of:
0.0053772116 = weight(_text_:a in 797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0053772116 = score(doc=797,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045758117 = queryNorm
0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 797, 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=797)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Type
- a
-
Crouch, C.J.; Crouch, D.B.; Chen, Q.; Holtz, S.J.: Improving the retrieval effectiveness of very short queries (2002)
0.00
7.9213816E-4 = product of:
0.0015842763 = sum of:
0.0015842763 = product of:
0.0047528287 = sum of:
0.0047528287 = weight(_text_:a in 2572) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0047528287 = score(doc=2572,freq=4.0), product of:
0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045758117 = queryNorm
0.090081796 = fieldWeight in 2572, 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=2572)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This paper describes an automatic approach designed to improve the retrieval effectiveness of very short queries such as those used in web searching. The method is based on the observation that stemming, which is designed to maximize recall, often results in depressed precision. Our approach is based on pseudo-feedback and attempts to increase the number of relevant documents in the pseudo-relevant set by reranking those documents based on the presence of unstemmed query terms in the document text. The original experiments underlying this work were carried out using Smart 11.0 and the lnc.ltc weighting scheme on three sets of documents from the TREC collection with corresponding TREC (title only) topics as queries. (The average length of these queries after stoplisting ranges from 2.4 to 4.5 terms.) Results, evaluated in terms of P@20 and non-interpolated average precision, showed clearly that pseudo-feedback (PF) based on this approach was effective in increasing the number of relevant documents in the top ranks. Subsequent experiments, performed on the same data sets using Smart 13.0 and the improved Lnu.ltu weighting scheme, indicate that these results hold up even over the much higher baseline provided by the new weights. Query drift analysis presents a more detailed picture of the improvements produced by this process.
- Type
- a
-
Jacucci, G.; Barral, O.; Daee, P.; Wenzel, M.; Serim, B.; Ruotsalo, T.; Pluchino, P.; Freeman, J.; Gamberini, L.; Kaski, S.; Blankertz, B.: Integrating neurophysiologic relevance feedback in intent modeling for information retrieval (2019)
0.00
7.9213816E-4 = product of:
0.0015842763 = sum of:
0.0015842763 = product of:
0.0047528287 = sum of:
0.0047528287 = weight(_text_:a in 5356) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0047528287 = score(doc=5356,freq=4.0), product of:
0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045758117 = queryNorm
0.090081796 = fieldWeight in 5356, 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=5356)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The use of implicit relevance feedback from neurophysiology could deliver effortless information retrieval. However, both computing neurophysiologic responses and retrieving documents are characterized by uncertainty because of noisy signals and incomplete or inconsistent representations of the data. We present the first-of-its-kind, fully integrated information retrieval system that makes use of online implicit relevance feedback generated from brain activity as measured through electroencephalography (EEG), and eye movements. The findings of the evaluation experiment (N = 16) show that we are able to compute online neurophysiology-based relevance feedback with performance significantly better than chance in complex data domains and realistic search tasks. We contribute by demonstrating how to integrate in interactive intent modeling this inherently noisy implicit relevance feedback combined with scarce explicit feedback. Although experimental measures of task performance did not allow us to demonstrate how the classification outcomes translated into search task performance, the experiment proved that our approach is able to generate relevance feedback from brain signals and eye movements in a realistic scenario, thus providing promising implications for future work in neuroadaptive information retrieval (IR).
- Type
- a
-
Srinivasan, P.: Intelligent information retrieval using rough set approximations (1989)
0.00
7.8417675E-4 = product of:
0.0015683535 = sum of:
0.0015683535 = product of:
0.0047050603 = sum of:
0.0047050603 = weight(_text_:a in 2526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0047050603 = score(doc=2526,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045758117 = queryNorm
0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 2526, 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=2526)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Type
- a
-
Brenner, E.H.: Beyond Boolean : new approaches in information retrieval; the quest for intuitive online search systems past, present & future (1995)
0.00
7.8417675E-4 = product of:
0.0015683535 = sum of:
0.0015683535 = product of:
0.0047050603 = sum of:
0.0047050603 = weight(_text_:a in 2547) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0047050603 = score(doc=2547,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045758117 = queryNorm
0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 2547, 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=2547)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Issue
- A collection of writings.
-
Losee, R.M.; Church Jr., L.: Are two document clusters better than one? : the cluster performance question for information retrieval (2005)
0.00
7.8417675E-4 = product of:
0.0015683535 = sum of:
0.0015683535 = product of:
0.0047050603 = sum of:
0.0047050603 = weight(_text_:a in 3270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0047050603 = score(doc=3270,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045758117 = queryNorm
0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 3270, 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=3270)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Type
- a
-
Abdelkareem, M.A.A.: In terms of publication index, what indicator is the best for researchers indexing, Google Scholar, Scopus, Clarivate or others? (2018)
0.00
7.8417675E-4 = product of:
0.0015683535 = sum of:
0.0015683535 = product of:
0.0047050603 = sum of:
0.0047050603 = weight(_text_:a in 4548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0047050603 = score(doc=4548,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045758117 = queryNorm
0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 4548, 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=4548)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- I believe that Google Scholar is the most popular academic indexing way for researchers and citations. However, some other indexing institutions may be more professional than Google Scholar but not as popular as Google Scholar. Other indexing websites like Scopus and Clarivate are providing more statistical figures for scholars, institutions or even journals. On account of publication citations, always Google Scholar shows higher citations for a paper than other indexing websites since Google Scholar consider most of the publication platforms so he can easily count the citations. While other databases just consider the citations come from those journals that are already indexed in their database
-
Bilal, D.: Ranking, relevance judgment, and precision of information retrieval on children's queries : evaluation of Google, Yahoo!, Bing, Yahoo! Kids, and ask Kids (2012)
0.00
7.7613373E-4 = product of:
0.0015522675 = sum of:
0.0015522675 = product of:
0.0046568024 = sum of:
0.0046568024 = weight(_text_:a in 393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0046568024 = score(doc=393,freq=6.0), product of:
0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045758117 = queryNorm
0.088261776 = fieldWeight in 393, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=393)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This study employed benchmarking and intellectual relevance judgment in evaluating Google, Yahoo!, Bing, Yahoo! Kids, and Ask Kids on 30 queries that children formulated to find information for specific tasks. Retrieved hits on given queries were benchmarked to Google's and Yahoo! Kids' top-five ranked hits retrieved. Relevancy of hits was judged on a graded scale; precision was calculated using the precision-at-ten metric (P@10). Yahoo! and Bing produced a similar percentage in hit overlap with Google (nearly 30%), but differed in the ranking of hits. Ask Kids retrieved 11% in hit overlap with Google versus 3% by Yahoo! Kids. The engines retrieved 26 hits across query clusters that overlapped with Yahoo! Kids' top-five ranked hits. Precision (P) that the engines produced across the queries was P = 0.48 for relevant hits, and P = 0.28 for partially relevant hits. Precision by Ask Kids was P = 0.44 for relevant hits versus P = 0.21 by Yahoo! Kids. Bing produced the highest total precision (TP) of relevant hits (TP = 0.86) across the queries, and Yahoo! Kids yielded the lowest (TP = 0.47). Average precision (AP) of relevant hits was AP = 0.56 by leading engines versus AP = 0.29 by small engines. In contrast, average precision of partially relevant hits was AP = 0.83 by small engines versus AP = 0.33 by leading engines. Average precision of relevant hits across the engines was highest on two-word queries and lowest on one-word queries. Google performed best on natural language queries; Bing did the same (P = 0.69) on two-word queries. The findings have implications for search engine ranking algorithms, relevance theory, search engine design, research design, and information literacy.
- Type
- a
-
Gauch, S.; Smith, J.B.: ¬An expert system for automatic query reformation (1993)
0.00
6.721515E-4 = product of:
0.001344303 = sum of:
0.001344303 = product of:
0.004032909 = sum of:
0.004032909 = weight(_text_:a in 3693) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004032909 = score(doc=3693,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045758117 = queryNorm
0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 3693, 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=3693)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Type
- a
-
Bodoff, D.; Wong, S.P.-S.: Documents and queries as random variables : history and implications (2006)
0.00
6.721515E-4 = product of:
0.001344303 = sum of:
0.001344303 = product of:
0.004032909 = sum of:
0.004032909 = weight(_text_:a in 193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004032909 = score(doc=193,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045758117 = queryNorm
0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 193, 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=193)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Type
- a
-
Thelwall, M.; Vaughan, L.: New versions of PageRank employing alternative Web document models (2004)
0.00
6.721515E-4 = product of:
0.001344303 = sum of:
0.001344303 = product of:
0.004032909 = sum of:
0.004032909 = weight(_text_:a in 674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004032909 = score(doc=674,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045758117 = queryNorm
0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 674, 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=674)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Type
- a
-
Information retrieval : data structures and algorithms (1992)
0.00
5.601262E-4 = product of:
0.0011202524 = sum of:
0.0011202524 = product of:
0.0033607571 = sum of:
0.0033607571 = weight(_text_:a in 3495) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0033607571 = score(doc=3495,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045758117 = queryNorm
0.06369744 = fieldWeight in 3495, 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=3495)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- An edited volume containing data structures and algorithms for information retrieval including a disk with examples written in C. for prgrammers and students interested in parsing text, automated indexing, its the first collection in book form of the basic data structures and algorithms that are critical to the storage and retrieval of documents. ------------------Enthält die Kapitel: FRAKES, W.B.: Introduction to information storage and retrieval systems; BAEZA-YATES, R.S.: Introduction to data structures and algorithms related to information retrieval; HARMAN, D. u.a.: Inverted files; FALOUTSOS, C.: Signature files; GONNET, G.H. u.a.: New indices for text: PAT trees and PAT arrays; FORD, D.A. u. S. CHRISTODOULAKIS: File organizations for optical disks; FOX, C.: Lexical analysis and stoplists; FRAKES, W.B.: Stemming algorithms; SRINIVASAN, P.: Thesaurus construction; BAEZA-YATES, R.A.: String searching algorithms; HARMAN, D.: Relevance feedback and other query modification techniques; WARTIK, S.: Boolean operators; WARTIK, S. u.a.: Hashing algorithms; HARMAN, D.: Ranking algorithms; FOX, E.: u.a.: Extended Boolean models; RASMUSSEN, E.: Clustering algorithms; HOLLAAR, L.: Special-purpose hardware for information retrieval; STANFILL, C.: Parallel information retrieval algorithms
-
Fuhr, N.: Theorie des Information Retrieval I : Modelle (2004)
0.00
5.601262E-4 = product of:
0.0011202524 = sum of:
0.0011202524 = product of:
0.0033607571 = sum of:
0.0033607571 = weight(_text_:a in 2912) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0033607571 = score(doc=2912,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045758117 = queryNorm
0.06369744 = fieldWeight in 2912, 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=2912)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Type
- a
-
Fuhr, N.: Modelle im Information Retrieval (2023)
0.00
5.601262E-4 = product of:
0.0011202524 = sum of:
0.0011202524 = product of:
0.0033607571 = sum of:
0.0033607571 = weight(_text_:a in 800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0033607571 = score(doc=800,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045758117 = queryNorm
0.06369744 = fieldWeight in 800, 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=800)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Type
- a
-
Berry, M.W.; Browne, M.: Understanding search engines : mathematical modeling and text retrieval (2005)
0.00
4.4810097E-4 = product of:
8.9620193E-4 = sum of:
8.9620193E-4 = product of:
0.0026886058 = sum of:
0.0026886058 = weight(_text_:a in 7) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0026886058 = score(doc=7,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045758117 = queryNorm
0.050957955 = fieldWeight in 7, 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=7)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The second edition of Understanding Search Engines: Mathematical Modeling and Text Retrieval follows the basic premise of the first edition by discussing many of the key design issues for building search engines and emphasizing the important role that applied mathematics can play in improving information retrieval. The authors discuss important data structures, algorithms, and software as well as user-centered issues such as interfaces, manual indexing, and document preparation. Significant changes bring the text up to date on current information retrieval methods: for example the addition of a new chapter on link-structure algorithms used in search engines such as Google. The chapter on user interface has been rewritten to specifically focus on search engine usability. In addition the authors have added new recommendations for further reading and expanded the bibliography, and have updated and streamlined the index to make it more reader friendly.
