Search (273 results, page 1 of 14)

0.085731864 = product of:
  0.17146373 = sum of:
    0.10123099 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10123099 = score(doc=2134,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.8104139 = fieldWeight in 2134, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2134)
    0.015619429 = weight(_text_:of in 2134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015619429 = score(doc=2134,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 2134, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2134)
    0.01544937 = product of:
      0.03089874 = sum of:
        0.03089874 = weight(_text_:on in 2134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03089874 = score(doc=2134,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.34020463 = fieldWeight in 2134, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2134)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.039163947 = product of:
      0.078327894 = sum of:
        0.078327894 = weight(_text_:22 in 2134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.078327894 = score(doc=2134,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2134, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2134)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Date

30. 3.2001 13:32:22

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.07509575 = product of:
  0.120153196 = sum of:
    0.029222867 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029222867 = score(doc=1026,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 1026, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1026)
    0.042349376 = weight(_text_:use in 1026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042349376 = score(doc=1026,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.33491597 = fieldWeight in 1026, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1026)
    0.015619429 = weight(_text_:of in 1026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015619429 = score(doc=1026,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 1026, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1026)
    0.013379549 = product of:
      0.026759097 = sum of:
        0.026759097 = weight(_text_:on in 1026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026759097 = score(doc=1026,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.29462588 = fieldWeight in 1026, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1026)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.019581974 = product of:
      0.039163947 = sum of:
        0.039163947 = weight(_text_:22 in 1026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039163947 = score(doc=1026,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1026, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1026)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.625 = coord(5/8)

Abstract

We have created software applications that allow users to both author and use Semantic Web metadata. To create and use a layer of semantic content on top of the existing Web, we have (1) implemented a user interface that expedites the task of attributing metadata to resources on the Web, and (2) augmented a Web browser to leverage this semantic metadata to provide relevant information and tasks to the user. This project provides a framework for annotating and reorganizing existing files, pages, and sites on the Web that is similar to Vannevar Bushrsquos original concepts of trail blazing and associative indexing.

Source

Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 7th European Conference, proceedings / ECDL 2003, Trondheim, Norway, August 17-22, 2003

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.07317396 = product of:
  0.19513057 = sum of:
    0.047231287 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047231287 = score(doc=5690,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.37811437 = fieldWeight in 5690, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5690)
    0.0154592255 = weight(_text_:of in 5690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0154592255 = score(doc=5690,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23940048 = fieldWeight in 5690, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5690)
    0.13244006 = sum of:
      0.017656423 = weight(_text_:on in 5690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.017656423 = score(doc=5690,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.041294612 = queryNorm
          0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 5690, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5690)
      0.11478364 = weight(_text_:line in 5690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11478364 = score(doc=5690,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23157367 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
            0.041294612 = queryNorm
          0.4956679 = fieldWeight in 5690, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5690)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

Discusses some of the methods of subject access to on-line catalohues (OPACs) and argues that none are entirley satisfactory. Describes 2 methods for improving subject access: best match searching; and automatic query expansion application and discusses their feasibility. Mentions emerging application standards for information retrieval and concludes that existing standards are incompatible with most methods for improving standards

Source

OPACs and the user: Proc. of the 3rd Anglo-Nordic seminar, Apr. 90

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.06801399 = product of:
  0.13602798 = sum of:
    0.06534432 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06534432 = score(doc=430,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.5231199 = fieldWeight in 430, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=430)
    0.015619429 = weight(_text_:of in 430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015619429 = score(doc=430,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 430, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=430)
    0.010924355 = product of:
      0.02184871 = sum of:
        0.02184871 = weight(_text_:on in 430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02184871 = score(doc=430,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.24056101 = fieldWeight in 430, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=430)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.044139877 = product of:
      0.088279754 = sum of:
        0.088279754 = weight(_text_:computers in 430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.088279754 = score(doc=430,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21710795 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.40661687 = fieldWeight in 430, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=430)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

Explores interface design raised by the development and evaluation of Okapi, a highly interactive information retrieval system based on a probabilistic retrieval model with relevance feedback. It uses terms frequency weighting functions to display retrieved items in a best match ranked order; it can also find additional items similar to those marked as relevant by the searcher. Compares the effectiveness of automatic and interactive query expansion in different user interface environments. focuses on the nature of interaction in information retrieval and the interrelationship between functional visibility, the user's cognitive loading and the balance of control between user and system

Source

Interacting with computers. 10(1998) no.3, S.237-248

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.062973216 = product of:
  0.12594643 = sum of:
    0.03067762 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03067762 = score(doc=1270,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.24559249 = fieldWeight in 1270, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1270)
    0.022228792 = weight(_text_:use in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022228792 = score(doc=1270,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.17579426 = fieldWeight in 1270, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1270)
    0.02063242 = weight(_text_:of in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02063242 = score(doc=1270,freq=76.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.3195122 = fieldWeight in 1270, product of:
          8.717798 = tf(freq=76.0), with freq of:
            76.0 = termFreq=76.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1270)
    0.052407596 = sum of:
      0.009363732 = weight(_text_:on in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.009363732 = score(doc=1270,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.041294612 = queryNorm
          0.10309757 = fieldWeight in 1270, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1270)
      0.043043863 = weight(_text_:line in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.043043863 = score(doc=1270,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23157367 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
            0.041294612 = queryNorm
          0.18587546 = fieldWeight in 1270, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1270)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 54(2003) no.7, S.695-697 (R. Savolainen): "Donald O. Case has written an ambitious book to create an overall picture of the major approaches to information needs and seeking (INS) studies. The aim to write an extensive review is reflected in the list of references containing about 700 items. The high ambitions are explained an p. 14, where Case states that he is aiming at a multidisciplinary understanding of the concept of information seeking. In the Preface, the author characterizes his book as an introduction to the topic for students at the graduate level, as well as as a review and handbook for scholars engagged in information behavior research. In my view, Looking for Information is particularly welcome as an academic textbook because the field of INS studies suffers from the lack of monographs. Along with the continuous growth of the number of journal articles and conference papers, there is a genuine need for a book that picks up the numerous pieces and puts them together. The use of the study as a textbook is facilitated by clearly delineated sections an major themes and the wealth of concrete examples of information seeking in everyday contexts. The book is lucidly written and it is accessible to novice readers, too. At first glance, the idea of providing a comprehensive review of INS studies may seem a mission impossible because the current number of articles, papers, and other contributions in this field is nearing the 10,000 range (p. 224). Donald Case is not alone in the task of coming to grips with an increasing number of studies; similar problems have been faced by those writing INS-related chapters for the Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST). Case has solved the problem of "too many publications to be reviewed" by concentrating an the INS literature published during the last two decades. Secondly, studies an library use and information retrieval are discussed only to a limited extent. In addition, Case is highly selective as to studies focusing an the use of specific sources and channels such as WWW. These delineations are reasonable, even though they beg some questions. First, how should one draw the line between studies an information seeking and information retrieval? Case does not discuss this question in greater detail, although in recent years, the overlapping areas of information seeking and retrieval studies have been broadened, along with the growing importance of WWW in information seeking/retrieval. Secondly, how can one define the concept of information searching (or, more specifically, Internet or Web searching) in relation to information seeking and information retrieval? In the field of Web searching studies, there is an increasing number of contributions that are of direct relevance to information-seeking studies. Clearly, the advent of the Internet, particularly, the Web, has blurred the previous lines between INS and IR literature, making them less clear cut. The book consists of five main sections, and comprises 13 chapters. There is an Appendix serving the needs of an INS textbook (questions for discussion and application). The structure of the book is meticulously planned and, as a whole, it offers a sufficiently balanced contribution to theoretical, methodological, and empirical issues of INS. The title, Looking for Information: A Survey of Research an Information Seeking, Needs, and Behavior aptly describes the main substance of the book. . . . It is easy to agree with Case about the significance of the problem of specialization and fragmentation. This problem seems to be concomitant with the broadening field of INS research. In itself, Case's book can be interpreted as a struggle against this fragmentation. His book suggests that this struggle is not hopeless and that it is still possible to draw an overall picture of the evolving research field. The major pieces of the puzzle were found and the book will provide a useful overview of INS studies for many years."

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.06142051 = product of:
  0.12284102 = sum of:
    0.05600942 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05600942 = score(doc=2229,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.44838852 = fieldWeight in 2229, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2229)
    0.036299463 = weight(_text_:use in 2229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036299463 = score(doc=2229,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2870708 = fieldWeight in 2229, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2229)
    0.021168415 = weight(_text_:of in 2229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021168415 = score(doc=2229,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 2229, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2229)
    0.009363732 = product of:
      0.018727465 = sum of:
        0.018727465 = weight(_text_:on in 2229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018727465 = score(doc=2229,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.20619515 = fieldWeight in 2229, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2229)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

Modern fact databses contain abundant data classified through several classifications. Typically, users msut consult these classifications in separate manuals or files, thus making their effective use difficult. Contemporary database systems do little support deductive use of classifications. In this study we show how deductive data management techniques can be applied to the utilization of data value classifications. Computation of transitive class relationships is of primary importance here. We define a representation of classifications which supports transitive computation and present an operation-oriented deductive query language tailored for classification-based deductive information retrieval. The operations of this language are on the same abstraction level as relational algebra operations and can be integrated with these to form a powerful and flexible query language for deductive information retrieval. We define the integration of these operations and demonstrate the usefulness of the language in terms of several sample queries

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 44(1993) no.10, S.557-578

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval

0.060197525 = product of:
  0.12039505 = sum of:
    0.06534432 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06534432 = score(doc=6958,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.5231199 = fieldWeight in 6958, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6958)
    0.022089208 = weight(_text_:of in 6958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022089208 = score(doc=6958,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.34207192 = fieldWeight in 6958, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6958)
    0.013379549 = product of:
      0.026759097 = sum of:
        0.026759097 = weight(_text_:on in 6958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026759097 = score(doc=6958,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.29462588 = fieldWeight in 6958, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6958)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.019581974 = product of:
      0.039163947 = sum of:
        0.039163947 = weight(_text_:22 in 6958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039163947 = score(doc=6958,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6958, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6958)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

Reports on the design of a GUI for the Okapi 'best match' retrieval system developed at the Centre for Interactive Systems Research, City University, UK, for online library catalogues. The X-Windows interface includes an interactive query expansion (IQE) facilty which involves the user in the selection of query terms to reformulate a search. Presents the design rationale, based on a game board metaphor, and describes the features of each of the stages of the search interaction. Reports on the early operational field trial and discusses relevant evaluation issues and objectives

Source

Information retrieval: new systems and current research. Proceedings of the 16th Research Colloquium of the British Computer Society Information Retrieval Specialist Group, Drymen, Scotland, 22-23 Mar 94. Ed.: R. Leon

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.057648495 = product of:
  0.11529699 = sum of:
    0.050615493 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050615493 = score(doc=4704,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.40520695 = fieldWeight in 4704, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4704)
    0.029945528 = weight(_text_:use in 4704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029945528 = score(doc=4704,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23682132 = fieldWeight in 4704, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4704)
    0.017463053 = weight(_text_:of in 4704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017463053 = score(doc=4704,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2704316 = fieldWeight in 4704, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4704)
    0.017272921 = product of:
      0.034545843 = sum of:
        0.034545843 = weight(_text_:on in 4704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034545843 = score(doc=4704,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.38036036 = fieldWeight in 4704, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4704)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

Focuses on the user and human-computer interaction (HCI) aspects of the research based on the Okapi text retrieval system. Describes 3 experiments using different approaches to query expansion, highlighting the relationship between the functionality of a system and different interface designs. These experiments involve both automatic and interactive query expansion, and both character based and GUI (graphical user interface) environments. The effectiveness of the search interaction for query expansion depends on resolving opposing interface and functional aspects, e.g. automatic vs. interactive query expansion, explicit vs. implicit use of a thesaurus, and document vs. query space

Footnote

Contribution to a thematic issue on Okapi and information retrieval research

Source

Journal of documentation. 53(1997) no.1, S.8-19

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.05606333 = product of:
  0.14950222 = sum of:
    0.033397563 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033397563 = score(doc=5701,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 5701, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5701)
    0.01728394 = weight(_text_:of in 5701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01728394 = score(doc=5701,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.26765788 = fieldWeight in 5701, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5701)
    0.098820716 = sum of:
      0.017656423 = weight(_text_:on in 5701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.017656423 = score(doc=5701,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.041294612 = queryNorm
          0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 5701, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5701)
      0.08116429 = weight(_text_:line in 5701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08116429 = score(doc=5701,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.23157367 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
            0.041294612 = queryNorm
          0.35049015 = fieldWeight in 5701, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5701)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

A user-centered investigation of interactive query expansion within the context of a relevance feedback system is presented in this article. Data were collected from 25 searches using the INSPEC database. The data collection mechanisms included questionnaires, transaction logs, and relevance evaluations. The results discuss issues that relate to query expansion, retrieval effectiveness, the correspondence of the on-line-to-off-line relevance judgments, and the selection of terms for query expansion by users (interactive query expansion). The main conclusions drawn from the results of the study are that: (1) one-third of the terms presented to users in a list of candidate terms for query expansion was identified by the users as potentially useful for query expansion. (2) These terms were mainly judged as either variant expressions (synonyms) or alternative (related) terms to the initial query terms. However, a substantial portion of the selected terms were identified as representing new ideas. (3) The relationships identified between the five best terms selected by the users for query expansion and the initial query terms were that: (a) 34% of the query expansion terms have no relationship or other type of correspondence with a query term; (b) 66% of the remaining query expansion terms have a relationship to the query terms. These relationships were: narrower term (46%), broader term (3%), related term (17%). (4) The results provide evidence for the effectiveness of interactive query expansion. The initial search produced on average three highly relevant documents; the query expansion search produced on average nine further highly relevant documents. The conclusions highlight the need for more research on: interactive query expansion, the comparative evaluation of automatic vs. interactive query expansion, the study of weighted Webbased or Web-accessible retrieval systems in operational environments, and for user studies in searching ranked retrieval systems in general

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(2000) no.11, S.989-1003

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.05385488 = product of:
  0.14361301 = sum of:
    0.036153924 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036153924 = score(doc=2588,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.28943354 = fieldWeight in 2588, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2588)
    0.02011309 = weight(_text_:of in 2588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02011309 = score(doc=2588,freq=26.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.31146988 = fieldWeight in 2588, product of:
          5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
            26.0 = termFreq=26.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2588)
    0.087345995 = sum of:
      0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 2588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.015606222 = score(doc=2588,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.041294612 = queryNorm
          0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 2588, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2588)
      0.07173977 = weight(_text_:line in 2588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07173977 = score(doc=2588,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23157367 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
            0.041294612 = queryNorm
          0.30979243 = fieldWeight in 2588, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2588)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

In human-computer interaction (HCI), a successful interaction sequence can take its own momentum and drift away from what the user has originally planned. However, this does not mean that planned actions play no important role in the overall performance. In this paper, the author tries to construct a line of argument to demonstrate that it is impossible to consider an action without an a priori plan, even according to the phenomenological position taken for granted by the situated action theory. Based on the phenomenological analysis of problematic situations and typification the author argues that, just like "situated-ness", "planned-ness" of an action should also be understood in the context of the situation. Successful plan can be developed and executed for familiar context. The first part of the paper treats information seeking behavior as a special type of social action and applies Alfred Schutz's phenomenology of sociology to understand the importance and necessity of plan. The second part reports results of a quasi-experiment focusing on plan deviation within an information seeking context. It was found that when the searcher's situation changed from problematic to non-problematic, the degree of plan deviation decreased significantly. These results support the argument proposed in the first part of the paper.

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Themenheft: "Issues of context in information retrieval (IR)"

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.053260405 = product of:
  0.10652081 = sum of:
    0.050096344 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 37) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050096344 = score(doc=37,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 37, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=37)
    0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 37) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025667597 = score(doc=37,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.20298971 = fieldWeight in 37, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=37)
    0.024135707 = weight(_text_:of in 37) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024135707 = score(doc=37,freq=26.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.37376386 = fieldWeight in 37, product of:
          5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
            26.0 = termFreq=26.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=37)
    0.006621159 = product of:
      0.013242318 = sum of:
        0.013242318 = weight(_text_:on in 37) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013242318 = score(doc=37,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 37, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=37)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

A means of automatically deriving a hierarchical organization of concepts from a set of documents without use of training data or standard clustering techniques is presented. Using a process that extracts salient words and phrases from the documents, these terms are organized hierarchically using a type of co-occurrence known as subsumption. The resulting structure is displayed as a series of hierarchical menus. When generated from a set of retrieved documents, a user browsing the menus gains an overview of their content in a manner distinct from existing techniques. The methods used to build the structure are simple and appear to be effective. The formation and presentation of the hierarchy is described along with a study of some of its properties, including a preliminary experiment, which indicates that users may find the hierarchy a more efficient means of locating relevant documents than the classic method of scanning a ranked document list

Series

The Kluwer international series on information retrieval; 7

Source

Advances in information retrieval: Recent research from the Center for Intelligent Information Retrieval. Ed.: W.B. Croft

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.052722443 = product of:
  0.105444886 = sum of:
    0.04338471 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04338471 = score(doc=2263,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.34732026 = fieldWeight in 2263, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2263)
    0.036299463 = weight(_text_:use in 2263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036299463 = score(doc=2263,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2870708 = fieldWeight in 2263, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2263)
    0.016396983 = weight(_text_:of in 2263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016396983 = score(doc=2263,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.25392252 = fieldWeight in 2263, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2263)
    0.009363732 = product of:
      0.018727465 = sum of:
        0.018727465 = weight(_text_:on in 2263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018727465 = score(doc=2263,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.20619515 = fieldWeight in 2263, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2263)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

In this article, the use of a new term extraction method for query expansion (QE) in text retrieval is investigated. The new method expands the initial query with a structured representation made of weighted word pairs (WWP) extracted from a set of training documents (relevance feedback). Standard text retrieval systems can handle a WWP structure through custom Boolean weighted models. We experimented with both the explicit and pseudorelevance feedback schemas and compared the proposed term extraction method with others in the literature, such as KLD and RM3. Evaluations have been conducted on a number of test collections (Text REtrivel Conference [TREC]-6, -7, -8, -9, and -10). Results demonstrated that the QE method based on this new structure outperforms the baseline.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.11, S.2223-2234

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.05175262 = product of:
  0.08280419 = sum of:
    0.025307747 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025307747 = score(doc=1633,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.20260347 = fieldWeight in 1633, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1633)
    0.021174688 = weight(_text_:use in 1633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021174688 = score(doc=1633,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.16745798 = fieldWeight in 1633, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1633)
    0.017894302 = weight(_text_:of in 1633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017894302 = score(doc=1633,freq=42.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2771099 = fieldWeight in 1633, product of:
          6.4807405 = tf(freq=42.0), with freq of:
            42.0 = termFreq=42.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1633)
    0.008636461 = product of:
      0.017272921 = sum of:
        0.017272921 = weight(_text_:on in 1633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017272921 = score(doc=1633,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.19018018 = fieldWeight in 1633, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1633)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.009790987 = product of:
      0.019581974 = sum of:
        0.019581974 = weight(_text_:22 in 1633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019581974 = score(doc=1633,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 1633, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1633)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.625 = coord(5/8)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to improve the conceptual-based search by incorporating structural ontological information such as concepts and relations. Generally, Semantic-based information retrieval aims to identify relevant information based on the meanings of the query terms or on the context of the terms and the performance of semantic information retrieval is carried out through standard measures-precision and recall. Higher precision leads to the (meaningful) relevant documents obtained and lower recall leads to the less coverage of the concepts. Design/methodology/approach - In this paper, the authors enhance the existing ontology-based indexing proposed by Kohler et al., by incorporating sibling information to the index. The index designed by Kohler et al., contains only super and sub-concepts from the ontology. In addition, in our approach, we focus on two tasks; query expansion and ranking of the expanded queries, to improve the efficiency of the ontology-based search. The aforementioned tasks make use of ontological concepts, and relations existing between those concepts so as to obtain semantically more relevant search results for a given query. Findings - The proposed ontology-based indexing technique is investigated by analysing the coverage of concepts that are being populated in the index. Here, we introduce a new measure called index enhancement measure, to estimate the coverage of ontological concepts being indexed. We have evaluated the ontology-based search for the tourism domain with the tourism documents and tourism-specific ontology. The comparison of search results based on the use of ontology "with and without query expansion" is examined to estimate the efficiency of the proposed query expansion task. The ranking is compared with the ORank system to evaluate the performance of our ontology-based search. From these analyses, the ontology-based search results shows better recall when compared to the other concept-based search systems. The mean average precision of the ontology-based search is found to be 0.79 and the recall is found to be 0.65, the ORank system has the mean average precision of 0.62 and the recall is found to be 0.51, while the concept-based search has the mean average precision of 0.56 and the recall is found to be 0.42. Practical implications - When the concept is not present in the domain-specific ontology, the concept cannot be indexed. When the given query term is not available in the ontology then the term-based results are retrieved. Originality/value - In addition to super and sub-concepts, we incorporate the concepts present in same level (siblings) to the ontological index. The structural information from the ontology is determined for the query expansion. The ranking of the documents depends on the type of the query (single concept query, multiple concept queries and concept with relation queries) and the ontological relations that exists in the query and the documents. With this ontological structural information, the search results showed us better coverage of concepts with respect to the query.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Source

Aslib journal of information management. 66(2014) no.6, S.678-696

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.050663535 = product of:
  0.10132707 = sum of:
    0.041327372 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041327372 = score(doc=2687,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 2687, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2687)
    0.029945528 = weight(_text_:use in 2687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029945528 = score(doc=2687,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23682132 = fieldWeight in 2687, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2687)
    0.019129815 = weight(_text_:of in 2687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019129815 = score(doc=2687,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 2687, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2687)
    0.010924355 = product of:
      0.02184871 = sum of:
        0.02184871 = weight(_text_:on in 2687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02184871 = score(doc=2687,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.24056101 = fieldWeight in 2687, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2687)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

This paper proposes a novel query expansion method to improve accuracy of text retrieval systems. Our method makes use of a minimal relevance feedback to expand the initial query with a structured representation composed of weighted pairs of words. Such a structure is obtained from the relevance feedback through a method for pairs of words selection based on the Probabilistic Topic Model. We compared our method with other baseline query expansion schemes and methods. Evaluations performed on TREC-8 demonstrated the effectiveness of the proposed method with respect to the baseline.

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.04899833 = product of:
  0.09799666 = sum of:
    0.041327372 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5295) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041327372 = score(doc=5295,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 5295, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5295)
    0.013526822 = weight(_text_:of in 5295) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013526822 = score(doc=5295,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.20947541 = fieldWeight in 5295, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5295)
    0.01544937 = product of:
      0.03089874 = sum of:
        0.03089874 = weight(_text_:on in 5295) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03089874 = score(doc=5295,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.34020463 = fieldWeight in 5295, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5295)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.027693095 = product of:
      0.05538619 = sum of:
        0.05538619 = weight(_text_:22 in 5295) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05538619 = score(doc=5295,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 5295, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5295)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

A new search paradigm, in which the primary user activity is the guided exploration of a complex information space rather than the retrieval of items based on precise specifications, is proposed. The author claims that this paradigm is the norm in most practical applications, and that solutions based on traditional search methods are not effective in this context. He then presents a solution based on dynamic taxonomies, a knowledge management model that effectively guides users to reach their goal while giving them total freedom in exploring the information base. Applications, benefits, and current research are discussed.

Date

22. 7.2006 17:56:22

Footnote

Beitrag in einer Special Section "Perspectives on Search User Interfaces: Best Practices and Future Visions"

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.6, S.792-796

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.048353486 = product of:
  0.09670697 = sum of:
    0.029222867 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029222867 = score(doc=4615,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 4615, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4615)
    0.029945528 = weight(_text_:use in 4615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029945528 = score(doc=4615,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23682132 = fieldWeight in 4615, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4615)
    0.022089208 = weight(_text_:of in 4615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022089208 = score(doc=4615,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.34207192 = fieldWeight in 4615, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4615)
    0.01544937 = product of:
      0.03089874 = sum of:
        0.03089874 = weight(_text_:on in 4615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03089874 = score(doc=4615,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.34020463 = fieldWeight in 4615, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4615)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

This paper investigates the semantics of topical, associative see-also relationships in schedule and table entries of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system. Based on the see-also relationships in a random sample of 100 classes containing one or more of these relationships, a semi-structured inventory of sources of see-also relationships is generated, of which the most important are lexical similarity, complementarity, facet difference, and relational configuration difference. The premise that see-also relationships based on lexical similarity may be language-specific is briefly examined. The paper concludes with recommendations on the continued use of see-also relationships in the DDC.

Content

Papers from the Third North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization, June 16-17, Toronto, Canada.

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.048154086 = product of:
  0.09630817 = sum of:
    0.056589838 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056589838 = score(doc=1164,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.45303512 = fieldWeight in 1164, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1164)
    0.014972764 = weight(_text_:use in 1164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014972764 = score(doc=1164,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.11841066 = fieldWeight in 1164, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1164)
    0.017020877 = weight(_text_:of in 1164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017020877 = score(doc=1164,freq=38.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2635841 = fieldWeight in 1164, product of:
          6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
            38.0 = termFreq=38.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1164)
    0.007724685 = product of:
      0.01544937 = sum of:
        0.01544937 = weight(_text_:on in 1164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01544937 = score(doc=1164,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 1164, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1164)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

The explosive growth of the Internet and other sources of networked information have made automatic mediation of access to networked information sources an increasingly important problem. Much of this information is expressed as electronic text, and it is becoming practical to automatically convert some printed documents and recorded speech to electronic text as well. Thus, automated systems capable of detecting useful documents are finding widespread application. With even a small number of languages it can be inconvenient to issue the same query repeatedly in every language, so users who are able to read more than one language will likely prefer a multilingual text retrieval system over a collection of monolingual systems. And since reading ability in a language does not always imply fluent writing ability in that language, such users will likely find cross-language text retrieval particularly useful for languages in which they are less confident of their ability to express their information needs effectively. The use of such systems can be also be beneficial if the user is able to read only a single language. For example, when only a small portion of the document collection will ever be examined by the user, performing retrieval before translation can be significantly more economical than performing translation before retrieval. So when the application is sufficiently important to justify the time and effort required for translation, those costs can be minimized if an effective cross-language text retrieval system is available. Even when translation is not available, there are circumstances in which cross-language text retrieval could be useful to a monolingual user. For example, a researcher might find a paper published in an unfamiliar language useful if that paper contains references to works by the same author that are in the researcher's native language.
Multilingual text retrieval can be defined as selection of useful documents from collections that may contain several languages (English, French, Chinese, etc.). This formulation allows for the possibility that individual documents might contain more than one language, a common occurrence in some applications. Both cross-language and within-language retrieval are included in this formulation, but it is the cross-language aspect of the problem which distinguishes multilingual text retrieval from its well studied monolingual counterpart. At the SIGIR 96 workshop on "Cross-Linguistic Information Retrieval" the participants discussed the proliferation of terminology being used to describe the field and settled on "Cross-Language" as the best single description of the salient aspect of the problem. "Multilingual" was felt to be too broad, since that term has also been used to describe systems able to perform within-language retrieval in more than one language but that lack any cross-language capability. "Cross-lingual" and "cross-linguistic" were felt to be equally good descriptions of the field, but "crosslanguage" was selected as the preferred term in the interest of standardization. Unfortunately, at about the same time the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) introduced "translingual" as their preferred term, so we are still some distance from reaching consensus on this matter.
I will not attempt to draw a sharp distinction between retrieval and filtering in this survey. Although my own work on adaptive cross-language text filtering has led me to make this distinction fairly carefully in other presentations (c.f., (Oard 1997b)), such an proach does little to help understand the fundamental techniques which have been applied or the results that have been obtained in this case. Since it is still common to view filtering (detection of useful documents in dynamic document streams) as a kind of retrieval, will simply adopt that perspective here.

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.046883076 = product of:
  0.09376615 = sum of:
    0.029519552 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029519552 = score(doc=2197,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 2197, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2197)
    0.04277933 = weight(_text_:use in 2197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04277933 = score(doc=2197,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.3383162 = fieldWeight in 2197, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2197)
    0.013664153 = weight(_text_:of in 2197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013664153 = score(doc=2197,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.21160212 = fieldWeight in 2197, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2197)
    0.007803111 = product of:
      0.015606222 = sum of:
        0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 2197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015606222 = score(doc=2197,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 2197, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2197)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

We investigate facets of online health information that are preferred, easy-to-use and useful in accessing online consumer health information from a user's perspective. In this study, the existing classification structure of 20 top ranked consumer health information websites in South Korea were analyzed, and nine facets that are used in organizing health information in those websites were identified. Based on the identified facets, an online survey, which asked participants' preferences for as well as perceived ease-of-use and usefulness of each facet in accessing online health information, was conducted. The analysis of the survey results showed that among the nine facets, the "diseases & conditions" and "body part" facets were most preferred, and perceived as easy-to-use and useful in accessing online health information. In contrast, "age," "gender," and "alternative medicine" facets were perceived as relatively less preferred, easy-to-use and useful. This research study has direct implications for organization and design of health information websites in that it suggests facets to include and avoid in organizing and providing access points to online health information.

Theme

Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.046396725 = product of:
  0.09279345 = sum of:
    0.036153924 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036153924 = score(doc=2589,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.28943354 = fieldWeight in 2589, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2589)
    0.030249555 = weight(_text_:use in 2589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030249555 = score(doc=2589,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23922569 = fieldWeight in 2589, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2589)
    0.02087234 = weight(_text_:of in 2589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02087234 = score(doc=2589,freq=28.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.32322758 = fieldWeight in 2589, product of:
          5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
            28.0 = termFreq=28.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2589)
    0.0055176322 = product of:
      0.0110352645 = sum of:
        0.0110352645 = weight(_text_:on in 2589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0110352645 = score(doc=2589,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 2589, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2589)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

The emergence of general audience digital libraries (GADLs) defines a context that represents a hybrid of both "traditional" IR, using primarily bibliographic resources provided by database vendors, and "popular" IR, exemplified by public search systems available on the World Wide Web. Findings of a study investigating end-user searching and response to a GADL are reported. Data collected from a Web-based end-user survey and data logs of resource usage for a Web-based GADL were analyzed for user characteristics, patterns of access and use, and user feedback. Cross-tabulations using respondent demographics revealed several key differences in how the system was used and valued by users of different age groups. Older users valued the service more than younger users and engaged in different searching and viewing behaviors. The GADL more closely resembles traditional retrieval systems in terms of content and purpose of use, but is more similar to popular IR systems in terms of user behavior and accessibility. A model that defines the dual context of the GADL environment is derived from the data analysis and existing IR models in general and other specific contexts. The authors demonstrate the distinguishing characteristics of this IR context, and discuss implications for the development and evaluation of future GADLs to accommodate a variety of user needs and expectations.

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Themenheft: "Issues of context in information retrieval (IR)"

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.04626683 = product of:
  0.09253366 = sum of:
    0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020873476 = score(doc=4331,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 4331, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4331)
    0.04277933 = weight(_text_:use in 4331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04277933 = score(doc=4331,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.3383162 = fieldWeight in 4331, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4331)
    0.019324033 = weight(_text_:of in 4331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019324033 = score(doc=4331,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 4331, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4331)
    0.00955682 = product of:
      0.01911364 = sum of:
        0.01911364 = weight(_text_:on in 4331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01911364 = score(doc=4331,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.21044704 = fieldWeight in 4331, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4331)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper seeks to report an investigation into the ways in which end-users perceive a thesaurus-enhanced search interface, in particular thesaurus and search interface usability. Design/methodology/approach - Thirty academic users, split between staff and postgraduate students, carrying out real search requests were observed during this study. Users were asked to comment on a range of thesaurus and interface characteristics including: ease of use, ease of learning, ease of browsing and navigation, problems and difficulties encountered while interacting with the system, and the effect of browsing on search term selection. Findings - The results suggest that interface usability is a factor affecting thesaurus browsing/navigation and other information-searching behaviours. Academic staff viewed the function of a thesaurus as being useful for narrowing down a search and providing alternative search terms, while postgraduates stressed the role of the thesaurus for broadening searches and providing new terms. Originality/value - The paper provides an insight into the ways in which end-users make use of and interact with a thesaurus-enhanced search interface. This area is new since previous research has particularly focused on how professional searchers and librarians make use of thesauri and thesaurus-enhanced search interfaces. The research reported here suggests that end-users with varying levels of domain knowledge are able to use thesauri that are integrated into search interfaces. It also provides design implications for search interface developers as well as information professionals who are involved in teaching online searching.

Source

Journal of documentation. 61(2005) no.5, S.640-656

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval