Search (360 results, page 1 of 18)

  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  • × theme_ss:"Suchmaschinen"
  1. Smith, A.G.: Search features of digital libraries (2000) 0.11
    0.11199682 = product of:
      0.22399364 = sum of:
        0.025048172 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 940) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025048172 = score(doc=940,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 940, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=940)
        0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 940) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025667597 = score(doc=940,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.20298971 = fieldWeight in 940, 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=940)
        0.025046807 = weight(_text_:of in 940) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025046807 = score(doc=940,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.38787308 = fieldWeight in 940, product of:
              5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
                28.0 = termFreq=28.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=940)
        0.14823107 = sum of:
          0.026484637 = weight(_text_:on in 940) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.026484637 = score(doc=940,freq=8.0), product of:
              0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041294612 = queryNorm
              0.29160398 = fieldWeight in 940, product of:
                2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                  8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=940)
          0.12174644 = weight(_text_:line in 940) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.12174644 = score(doc=940,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.23157367 = queryWeight, product of:
                5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041294612 = queryNorm
              0.52573526 = fieldWeight in 940, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=940)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    Traditional on-line search services such as Dialog, DataStar and Lexis provide a wide range of search features (boolean and proximity operators, truncation, etc). This paper discusses the use of these features for effective searching, and argues that these features are required, regardless of advances in search engine technology. The literature on on-line searching is reviewed, identifying features that searchers find desirable for effective searching. A selective survey of current digital libraries available on the Web was undertaken, identifying which search features are present. The survey indicates that current digital libraries do not implement a wide range of search features. For instance: under half of the examples included controlled vocabulary, under half had proximity searching, only one enabled browsing of term indexes, and none of the digital libraries enable searchers to refine an initial search. Suggestions are made for enhancing the search effectiveness of digital libraries; for instance, by providing a full range of search operators, enabling browsing of search terms, enhancement of records with controlled vocabulary, enabling the refining of initial searches, etc.
    Content
    Enthält eine Zusammenstellung der Werkzeuge und Hilfsmittel des Information Retrieval
  2. Garcés, P.J.; Olivas, J.A.; Romero, F.P.: Concept-matching IR systems versus word-matching information retrieval systems : considering fuzzy interrelations for indexing Web pages (2006) 0.06
    0.06464895 = product of:
      0.10343832 = sum of:
        0.036153924 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036153924 = score(doc=5288,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.28943354 = fieldWeight in 5288, 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=5288)
        0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021389665 = score(doc=5288,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 5288, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5288)
        0.02087234 = weight(_text_:of in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02087234 = score(doc=5288,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.32322758 = fieldWeight in 5288, 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=5288)
        0.0110352645 = product of:
          0.022070529 = sum of:
            0.022070529 = weight(_text_:on in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022070529 = score(doc=5288,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.24300331 = fieldWeight in 5288, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5288)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.013987125 = product of:
          0.02797425 = sum of:
            0.02797425 = weight(_text_:22 in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02797425 = score(doc=5288,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5288, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5288)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.625 = coord(5/8)
    
    Abstract
    This article presents a semantic-based Web retrieval system that is capable of retrieving the Web pages that are conceptually related to the implicit concepts of the query. The concept of concept is managed from a fuzzy point of view by means of semantic areas. In this context, the proposed system improves most search engines that are based on matching words. The key of the system is to use a new version of the Fuzzy Interrelations and Synonymy-Based Concept Representation Model (FIS-CRM) to extract and represent the concepts contained in both the Web pages and the user query. This model, which was integrated into other tools such as the Fuzzy Interrelations and Synonymy based Searcher (FISS) metasearcher and the fz-mail system, considers the fuzzy synonymy and the fuzzy generality interrelations as a means of representing word interrelations (stored in a fuzzy synonymy dictionary and ontologies). The new version of the model, which is based on the study of the cooccurrences of synonyms, integrates a soft method for disambiguating word senses. This method also considers the context of the word to be disambiguated and the thematic ontologies and sets of synonyms stored in the dictionary.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 17:14:12
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einer Special Topic Section on Soft Approaches to Information Retrieval and Information Access on the Web
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.4, S.564-576
  3. Park, E.-K.; Ra, D.-Y.; Jang, M.-G.: Techniques for improving web retrieval effectiveness (2005) 0.06
    0.06175209 = product of:
      0.12350418 = sum of:
        0.06627123 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1060) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06627123 = score(doc=1060,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.5305404 = fieldWeight in 1060, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1060)
        0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 1060) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025667597 = score(doc=1060,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.20298971 = fieldWeight in 1060, 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=1060)
        0.022201622 = weight(_text_:of in 1060) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022201622 = score(doc=1060,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.34381276 = fieldWeight in 1060, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1060)
        0.009363732 = product of:
          0.018727465 = sum of:
            0.018727465 = weight(_text_:on in 1060) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018727465 = score(doc=1060,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.20619515 = fieldWeight in 1060, 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=1060)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    This paper talks about several schemes for improving retrieval effectiveness that can be used in the named page finding tasks of web information retrieval (Overview of the TREC-2002 web track. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh Text Retrieval Conference TREC-2002, NIST Special Publication #500-251, 2003). These methods were applied on top of the basic information retrieval model as additional mechanisms to upgrade the system. Use of the title of web pages was found to be effective. It was confirmed that anchor texts of incoming links was beneficial as suggested in other works. Sentence-query similarity is a new type of information proposed by us and was identified to be the best information to take advantage of. Stratifying and re-ranking the retrieval list based on the maximum count of index terms in common between a sentence and a query resulted in significant improvement of performance. To demonstrate these facts a large-scale web information retrieval system was developed and used for experimentation.
  4. Herrera-Viedma, E.; Pasi, G.: Soft approaches to information retrieval and information access on the Web : an introduction to the special topic section (2006) 0.06
    0.059858147 = product of:
      0.095773034 = sum of:
        0.040903494 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040903494 = score(doc=5285,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.32745665 = fieldWeight in 5285, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5285)
        0.01711173 = weight(_text_:use in 5285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01711173 = score(doc=5285,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.13532647 = fieldWeight in 5285, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5285)
        0.01669787 = weight(_text_:of in 5285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01669787 = score(doc=5285,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.25858206 = fieldWeight in 5285, product of:
              5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
                28.0 = termFreq=28.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5285)
        0.009870241 = product of:
          0.019740483 = sum of:
            0.019740483 = weight(_text_:on in 5285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.019740483 = score(doc=5285,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.21734878 = fieldWeight in 5285, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5285)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.0111897 = product of:
          0.0223794 = sum of:
            0.0223794 = weight(_text_:22 in 5285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0223794 = score(doc=5285,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5285, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5285)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.625 = coord(5/8)
    
    Abstract
    The World Wide Web is a popular and interactive medium used to collect, disseminate, and access an increasingly huge amount of information, which constitutes the mainstay of the so-called information and knowledge society. Because of its spectacular growth, related to both Web resources (pages, sites, and services) and number of users, the Web is nowadays the main information repository and provides some automatic systems for locating, accessing, and retrieving information. However, an open and crucial question remains: how to provide fast and effective retrieval of the information relevant to specific users' needs. This is a very hard and complex task, since it is pervaded with subjectivity, vagueness, and uncertainty. The expression soft computing refers to techniques and methodologies that work synergistically with the aim of providing flexible information processing tolerant of imprecision, vagueness, partial truth, and approximation. So, soft computing represents a good candidate to design effective systems for information access and retrieval on the Web. One of the most representative tools of soft computing is fuzzy set theory. This special topic section collects research articles witnessing some recent advances in improving the processes of information access and retrieval on the Web by using soft computing tools, and in particular, by using fuzzy sets and/or integrating them with other soft computing tools. In this introductory article, we first review the problem of Web retrieval and the concept of soft computing technology. We then briefly introduce the articles in this section and conclude by highlighting some future research directions that could benefit from the use of soft computing technologies.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 16:59:33
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einer Special Topic Section on Soft Approaches to Information Retrieval and Information Access on the Web
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.4, S.511-514
  5. Gardner, T.; Iannella, R.: Architecture and software solutions (2000) 0.06
    0.058399323 = product of:
      0.11679865 = sum of:
        0.033397563 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033397563 = score(doc=4867,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 4867, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4867)
        0.048399284 = weight(_text_:use in 4867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048399284 = score(doc=4867,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.3827611 = fieldWeight in 4867, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4867)
        0.012622404 = weight(_text_:of in 4867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012622404 = score(doc=4867,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.19546966 = fieldWeight in 4867, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4867)
        0.0223794 = product of:
          0.0447588 = sum of:
            0.0447588 = weight(_text_:22 in 4867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0447588 = score(doc=4867,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4867, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4867)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    The current subject gateways have evolved over time when the discipline of Internet resource discovery was in its infancy. This is reflected by the lack of well-established, light-weight, deployable, easy-to-use, standards for metadata and information retrieval. We provide an introduction to the architecture, standards and software solutions in use by subject gateways, and to the issues that must be addressed to support future subject gateways
    Date
    22. 6.2002 19:38:24
  6. Liu, Y.; Zhang, M.; Cen, R.; Ru, L.; Ma, S.: Data cleansing for Web information retrieval using query independent features (2007) 0.05
    0.05097526 = product of:
      0.10195052 = sum of:
        0.055226028 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055226028 = score(doc=607,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.442117 = fieldWeight in 607, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=607)
        0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021389665 = score(doc=607,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 607, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=607)
        0.015778005 = weight(_text_:of in 607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015778005 = score(doc=607,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 607, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=607)
        0.00955682 = product of:
          0.01911364 = sum of:
            0.01911364 = weight(_text_:on in 607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.01911364 = score(doc=607,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.21044704 = fieldWeight in 607, 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=607)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    Understanding what kinds of Web pages are the most useful for Web search engine users is a critical task in Web information retrieval (IR). Most previous works used hyperlink analysis algorithms to solve this problem. However, little research has been focused on query-independent Web data cleansing for Web IR. In this paper, we first provide analysis of the differences between retrieval target pages and ordinary ones based on more than 30 million Web pages obtained from both the Text Retrieval Conference (TREC) and a widely used Chinese search engine, SOGOU (www.sogou.com). We further propose a learning-based data cleansing algorithm for reducing Web pages that are unlikely to be useful for user requests. We found that there exists a large proportion of low-quality Web pages in both the English and the Chinese Web page corpus, and retrieval target pages can be identified using query-independent features and cleansing algorithms. The experimental results showed that our algorithm is effective in reducing a large portion of Web pages with a small loss in retrieval target pages. It makes it possible for Web IR tools to meet a large fraction of users' needs with only a small part of pages on the Web. These results may help Web search engines make better use of their limited storage and computation resources to improve search performance.
    Footnote
    Beitrag eines Themenschwerpunktes "Mining Web resources for enhancing information retrieval"
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.12, S.1884-1898
  7. Peereboom, M.: DutchESS : Dutch Electronic Subject Service - a Dutch national collaborative effort (2000) 0.05
    0.049198337 = product of:
      0.098396674 = sum of:
        0.047231287 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047231287 = score(doc=4869,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.37811437 = fieldWeight in 4869, 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=4869)
        0.019957775 = weight(_text_:of in 4869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019957775 = score(doc=4869,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.3090647 = fieldWeight in 4869, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4869)
        0.008828212 = product of:
          0.017656423 = sum of:
            0.017656423 = weight(_text_:on in 4869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017656423 = score(doc=4869,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 4869, 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=4869)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.0223794 = product of:
          0.0447588 = sum of:
            0.0447588 = weight(_text_:22 in 4869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0447588 = score(doc=4869,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4869, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4869)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    This article gives an overview of the design and organisation of DutchESS, a Dutch information subject gateway created as a national collaborative effort of the National Library and a number of academic libraries. The combined centralised and distributed model of DutchESS is discussed, as well as its selection policy, its metadata format, classification scheme and retrieval options. Also some options for future collaboration on an international level are explored
    Date
    22. 6.2002 19:39:23
    Theme
    Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
  8. Munson, K.I.: Internet search engines : understanding their design to improve information retrieval (2000) 0.05
    0.048978385 = product of:
      0.09795677 = sum of:
        0.033397563 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033397563 = score(doc=6105,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 6105, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6105)
        0.03422346 = weight(_text_:use in 6105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03422346 = score(doc=6105,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.27065295 = fieldWeight in 6105, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6105)
        0.017850775 = weight(_text_:of in 6105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017850775 = score(doc=6105,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 6105, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6105)
        0.012484977 = product of:
          0.024969954 = sum of:
            0.024969954 = weight(_text_:on in 6105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.024969954 = score(doc=6105,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.27492687 = fieldWeight in 6105, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6105)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    The relationship between the methods currently used for indexing the World Wide Web and the programs, languages, and protocols on which the World Wide Web is based is examined. Two methods for indexing the Web are described, directories being briefly discussed while search engines are considered in detail. The automated approach used to create these tools is examined with special emphasis on the parts of a document used in indexing. Shortcomings of the approach are described. Suggestions for effective use of Web search engines are given
    Source
    Journal of Internet cataloging. 2(2000) nos.3/4, S.47-60
  9. Wills, R.S.: Google's PageRank : the math behind the search engine (2006) 0.05
    0.048239887 = product of:
      0.1286397 = sum of:
        0.03422346 = weight(_text_:use in 5954) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03422346 = score(doc=5954,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.27065295 = fieldWeight in 5954, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5954)
        0.01728394 = weight(_text_:of in 5954) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01728394 = score(doc=5954,freq=30.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.26765788 = fieldWeight in 5954, 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=5954)
        0.0771323 = sum of:
          0.019740483 = weight(_text_:on in 5954) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.019740483 = score(doc=5954,freq=10.0), product of:
              0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041294612 = queryNorm
              0.21734878 = fieldWeight in 5954, product of:
                3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                  10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5954)
          0.05739182 = weight(_text_:line in 5954) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.05739182 = score(doc=5954,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.23157367 = queryWeight, product of:
                5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041294612 = queryNorm
              0.24783395 = fieldWeight in 5954, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5954)
      0.375 = coord(3/8)
    
    Abstract
    Approximately 91 million American adults use the Internet on a typical day The number-one Internet activity is reading and writing e-mail. Search engine use is next in line and continues to increase in popularity. In fact, survey findings indicate that nearly 60 million American adults use search engines on a given day. Even though there are many Internet search engines, Google, Yahoo!, and MSN receive over 81% of all search requests. Despite claims that the quality of search provided by Yahoo! and MSN now equals that of Google, Google continues to thrive as the search engine of choice, receiving over 46% of all search requests, nearly double the volume of Yahoo! and over four times that of MSN. I use Google's search engine on a daily basis and rarely request information from other search engines. One day, I decided to visit the homepages of Google. Yahoo!, and MSN to compare the quality of search results. Coffee was on my mind that day, so I entered the simple query "coffee" in the search box at each homepage. Table 1 shows the top ten (unsponsored) results returned by each search engine. Although ordered differently, two webpages, www.peets.com and www.coffeegeek.com, appear in all three top ten lists. In addition, each pairing of top ten lists has two additional results in common. Depending on the information I hoped to obtain about coffee by using the search engines, I could argue that any one of the three returned better results: however, I was not looking for a particular webpage, so all three listings of search results seemed of equal quality. Thus, I plan to continue using Google. My decision is indicative of the problem Yahoo!, MSN, and other search engine companies face in the quest to obtain a larger percentage of Internet search volume. Search engine users are loyal to one or a few search engines and are generally happy with search results. Thus, as long as Google continues to provide results deemed high in quality, Google likely will remain the top search engine. But what set Google apart from its competitors in the first place? The answer is PageRank. In this article I explain this simple mathematical algorithm that revolutionized Web search.
  10. Markey, K.: Twenty-five years of end-user searching : part 1: research findings (2007) 0.05
    0.047788814 = product of:
      0.09557763 = sum of:
        0.04174695 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04174695 = score(doc=5163,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 5163, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5163)
        0.030249555 = weight(_text_:use in 5163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030249555 = score(doc=5163,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23922569 = fieldWeight in 5163, 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=5163)
        0.015778005 = weight(_text_:of in 5163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015778005 = score(doc=5163,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 5163, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5163)
        0.007803111 = product of:
          0.015606222 = sum of:
            0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 5163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.015606222 = score(doc=5163,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 5163, 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=5163)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    This is the first part of a two-part article that reviews 25 years of published research findings on end-user searching in online information retrieval (IR) systems. In Part 1 (Markey, 2007), the author seeks to answer the following questions: What characterizes the queries that end users submit to online IR systems? What search features do people use? What features would enable them to improve on the retrievals they have in hand? What features are hardly ever used? What do end users do in response to the system's retrievals? Are end users satisfied with their online searches? Summarizing searches of online IR systems by the search features people use everyday makes information retrieval appear to be a very simplistic one-stop event. In Part 2, the author examines current models of the information retrieval process, demonstrating that information retrieval is much more complex and involves changes in cognition, feelings, and/or events during the information seeking process. She poses a host of new research questions that will further our understanding about end-user searching of online IR systems.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.8, S.1071-1081
  11. Markey, K.: Twenty-five years of end-user searching : part 2: future research directions (2007) 0.05
    0.047642168 = product of:
      0.095284335 = sum of:
        0.036153924 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036153924 = score(doc=443,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.28943354 = fieldWeight in 443, 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=443)
        0.030249555 = weight(_text_:use in 443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030249555 = score(doc=443,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23922569 = fieldWeight in 443, 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=443)
        0.019324033 = weight(_text_:of in 443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019324033 = score(doc=443,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 443, 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=443)
        0.00955682 = product of:
          0.01911364 = sum of:
            0.01911364 = weight(_text_:on in 443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.01911364 = score(doc=443,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.21044704 = fieldWeight in 443, 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=443)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    This is the second part of a two-part article that examines 25 years of published research findings on end-user searching of online information retrieval (IR) systems. In Part 1, it was learned that people enter a few short search statements into online IR systems. Their searches do not resemble the systematic approach of expert searchers who use the full range of IR-system functionality. Part 2 picks up the discussion of research findings about end-user searching in the context of current information retrieval models. These models demonstrate that information retrieval is a complex event, involving changes in cognition, feelings, and/or events during the information seeking process. The author challenges IR researchers to design new studies of end-user searching, collecting data not only on system-feature use, but on multiple search sessions and controlling for variables such as domain knowledge expertise and expert system knowledge. Because future IR systems designers are likely to improve the functionality of online IR systems in response to answers to the new research questions posed here, the author concludes with advice to these designers about retaining the simplicity of online IR system interfaces.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.8, S.1123-1130
  12. Joint, N.: Aspects of Google : bigger is better - or less is more? (2005) 0.04
    0.042973664 = product of:
      0.08594733 = sum of:
        0.035423465 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035423465 = score(doc=4734,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 4734, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4734)
        0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 4734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025667597 = score(doc=4734,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.20298971 = fieldWeight in 4734, 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=4734)
        0.013388081 = weight(_text_:of in 4734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013388081 = score(doc=4734,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 4734, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4734)
        0.011468184 = product of:
          0.022936368 = sum of:
            0.022936368 = weight(_text_:on in 4734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022936368 = score(doc=4734,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.25253648 = fieldWeight in 4734, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4734)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - To investigate recent enhancements to the internet search engine Google. Design/methodology/approach - An opinion piece based on practitioner experience and recent commentary on search engine innovations. Findings - That recent innovations in Google's functionality have yet to deliver what they promise, but that it is still early to say what can genuinely be achieved in these areas. Research limitations/implications - This is an expression of opinion about a service that will be radically improved and developed in the immediate future. Practical implications - Gives some useful insights and tips on how to use existing digital library tools to achieve information retrieval results along the lines of those aspired to by Google. Originality/value - An attempt to give clear, practice-based examples of how to apply recent digital information retrieval developments to contemporary library work.
  13. Garnsey, M.R.: What distance learners should know about information retrieval on the World Wide Web (2002) 0.04
    0.04283978 = product of:
      0.08567956 = sum of:
        0.025048172 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1626) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025048172 = score(doc=1626,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 1626, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1626)
        0.036299463 = weight(_text_:use in 1626) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036299463 = score(doc=1626,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.2870708 = fieldWeight in 1626, 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=1626)
        0.017710768 = weight(_text_:of in 1626) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017710768 = score(doc=1626,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.2742677 = fieldWeight in 1626, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1626)
        0.006621159 = product of:
          0.013242318 = sum of:
            0.013242318 = weight(_text_:on in 1626) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.013242318 = score(doc=1626,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 1626, 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=1626)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    The Internet can be a valuable tool allowing distance learners to access information not available locally. Search engines are the most common means of locating relevant information an the Internet, but to use them efficiently students should be taught the basics of searching and how to evaluate the results. This article briefly reviews how Search engines work, studies comparing Search engines, and criteria useful in evaluating the quality of returned Web pages. Research indicates there are statistical differences in the precision of Search engines, with AltaVista ranking high in several studies. When evaluating the quality of Web pages, standard criteria used in evaluating print resources is appropriate, as well as additional criteria which relate to the Web site itself. Giving distance learners training in how to use Search engines and how to evaluate the results will allow them to access relevant information efficiently while ensuring that it is of adequate quality.
    Footnote
    Part of an issue devoted to "Distance learning: information access and services for virtual users", publ. by Haworth Press
  14. Rowlands, I.; Nicholas, D.; Williams, P.; Huntington, P.; Fieldhouse, M.; Gunter, B.; Withey, R.; Jamali, H.R.; Dobrowolski, T.; Tenopir, C.: ¬The Google generation : the information behaviour of the researcher of the future (2008) 0.04
    0.04220935 = product of:
      0.0844187 = sum of:
        0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020873476 = score(doc=2017,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 2017, 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=2017)
        0.01850135 = weight(_text_:of in 2017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01850135 = score(doc=2017,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.28651062 = fieldWeight in 2017, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2017)
        0.013515383 = product of:
          0.027030766 = sum of:
            0.027030766 = weight(_text_:on in 2017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027030766 = score(doc=2017,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.29761705 = fieldWeight in 2017, product of:
                  3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                    12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2017)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.031528484 = product of:
          0.06305697 = sum of:
            0.06305697 = weight(_text_:computers in 2017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06305697 = score(doc=2017,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21710795 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.29044062 = fieldWeight in 2017, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2017)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - This article is an edited version of a report commissioned by the British Library and JISC to identify how the specialist researchers of the future (those born after 1993) are likely to access and interact with digital resources in five to ten years' time. The purpose is to investigate the impact of digital transition on the information behaviour of the Google Generation and to guide library and information services to anticipate and react to any new or emerging behaviours in the most effective way. Design/methodology/approach - The study was virtually longitudinal and is based on a number of extensive reviews of related literature, survey data mining and a deep log analysis of a British Library and a JISC web site intended for younger people. Findings - The study shows that much of the impact of ICTs on the young has been overestimated. The study claims that although young people demonstrate an apparent ease and familiarity with computers, they rely heavily on search engines, view rather than read and do not possess the critical and analytical skills to assess the information that they find on the web. Originality/value - The paper reports on a study that overturns the common assumption that the "Google generation" is the most web-literate.
    Footnote
    Vgl. auch: Rowlands, I.: Google generation: issues in information literacy. In: http://www.lucis.me.uk/retrieval%20issues.pdf.
  15. Brophy, J.; Bawden, D.: Is Google enough? : Comparison of an internet search engine with academic library resources (2005) 0.04
    0.04217343 = product of:
      0.08434686 = sum of:
        0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020873476 = score(doc=648,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 648, 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=648)
        0.030249555 = weight(_text_:use in 648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030249555 = score(doc=648,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23922569 = fieldWeight in 648, 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=648)
        0.023667008 = weight(_text_:of in 648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023667008 = score(doc=648,freq=36.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.36650562 = fieldWeight in 648, product of:
              6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
                36.0 = termFreq=36.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=648)
        0.00955682 = product of:
          0.01911364 = sum of:
            0.01911364 = weight(_text_:on in 648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.01911364 = score(doc=648,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.21044704 = fieldWeight in 648, 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=648)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of the study was to compare an internet search engine, Google, with appropriate library databases and systems, in order to assess the relative value, strengths and weaknesses of the two sorts of system. Design/methodology/approach - A case study approach was used, with detailed analysis and failure checking of results. The performance of the two systems was assessed in terms of coverage, unique records, precision, and quality and accessibility of results. A novel form of relevance assessment, based on the work of Saracevic and others was devised. Findings - Google is superior for coverage and accessibility. Library systems are superior for quality of results. Precision is similar for both systems. Good coverage requires use of both, as both have many unique items. Improving the skills of the searcher is likely to give better results from the library systems, but not from Google. Research limitations/implications - Only four case studies were included. These were limited to the kind of queries likely to be searched by university students. Library resources were limited to those in two UK academic libraries. Only the basic Google web search functionality was used, and only the top ten records examined. Practical implications - The results offer guidance for those providing support and training for use of these retrieval systems, and also provide evidence for debates on the "Google phenomenon". Originality/value - This is one of the few studies which provide evidence on the relative performance of internet search engines and library databases, and the only one to conduct such in-depth case studies. The method for the assessment of relevance is novel.
  16. White, R.W.; Jose, J.M.; Ruthven, I.: ¬A task-oriented study on the influencing effects of query-biased summarisation in web searching (2003) 0.04
    0.041463543 = product of:
      0.082927085 = sum of:
        0.029519552 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029519552 = score(doc=1081,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 1081, 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=1081)
        0.030249555 = weight(_text_:use in 1081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030249555 = score(doc=1081,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23922569 = fieldWeight in 1081, 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=1081)
        0.017640345 = weight(_text_:of in 1081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017640345 = score(doc=1081,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.27317715 = fieldWeight in 1081, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1081)
        0.0055176322 = product of:
          0.0110352645 = sum of:
            0.0110352645 = weight(_text_:on in 1081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0110352645 = score(doc=1081,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 1081, 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=1081)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    The aim of the work described in this paper is to evaluate the influencing effects of query-biased summaries in web searching. For this purpose, a summarisation system has been developed, and a summary tailored to the user's query is generated automatically for each document retrieved. The system aims to provide both a better means of assessing document relevance than titles or abstracts typical of many web search result lists. Through visiting each result page at retrieval-time, the system provides the user with an idea of the current page content and thus deals with the dynamic nature of the web. To examine the effectiveness of this approach, a task-oriented, comparative evaluation between four different web retrieval systems was performed; two that use query-biased summarisation, and two that use the standard ranked titles/abstracts approach. The results from the evaluation indicate that query-biased summarisation techniques appear to be more useful and effective in helping users gauge document relevance than the traditional ranked titles/abstracts approach. The same methodology was used to compare the effectiveness of two of the web's major search engines; AltaVista and Google.
  17. Ding, L.; Finin, T.; Joshi, A.; Peng, Y.; Cost, R.S.; Sachs, J.; Pan, R.; Reddivari, P.; Doshi, V.: Swoogle : a Semantic Web search and metadata engine (2004) 0.04
    0.041340277 = product of:
      0.08268055 = sum of:
        0.035423465 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035423465 = score(doc=4704,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 4704, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4704)
        0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 4704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025667597 = score(doc=4704,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.20298971 = 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)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4704)
        0.014968331 = weight(_text_:of in 4704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014968331 = score(doc=4704,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23179851 = 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)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4704)
        0.006621159 = product of:
          0.013242318 = sum of:
            0.013242318 = weight(_text_:on in 4704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.013242318 = score(doc=4704,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 4704, 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=4704)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    Swoogle is a crawler-based indexing and retrieval system for the Semantic Web, i.e., for Web documents in RDF or OWL. It extracts metadata for each discovered document, and computes relations between documents. Discovered documents are also indexed by an information retrieval system which can use either character N-Gram or URIrefs as keywords to find relevant documents and to compute the similarity among a set of documents. One of the interesting properties we compute is rank, a measure of the importance of a Semantic Web document.
    Source
    CIKM '04 Proceedings of the thirteenth ACM international conference on Information and knowledge management
  18. Spink, A.; Park, M.; Jansen, B.J.; Pedersen, J.: Elicitation and use of relevance feedback information (2006) 0.04
    0.04066919 = product of:
      0.08133838 = sum of:
        0.029519552 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029519552 = score(doc=967,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 967, 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=967)
        0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021389665 = score(doc=967,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 967, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=967)
        0.02087234 = weight(_text_:of in 967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02087234 = score(doc=967,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.32322758 = fieldWeight in 967, 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=967)
        0.00955682 = product of:
          0.01911364 = sum of:
            0.01911364 = weight(_text_:on in 967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.01911364 = score(doc=967,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.21044704 = fieldWeight in 967, 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=967)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    A user's single session with a Web search engine or information retrieval (IR) system may consist of seeking information on single or multiple topics, and switch between tasks or multitasking information behavior. Most Web search sessions consist of two queries of approximately two words. However, some Web search sessions consist of three or more queries. We present findings from two studies. First, a study of two-query search sessions on the AltaVista Web search engine, and second, a study of three or more query search sessions on the AltaVista Web search engine. We examine the degree of multitasking search and information task switching during these two sets of AltaVista Web search sessions. A sample of two-query and three or more query sessions were filtered from AltaVista transaction logs from 2002 and qualitatively analyzed. Sessions ranged in duration from less than a minute to a few hours. Findings include: (1) 81% of two-query sessions included multiple topics, (2) 91.3% of three or more query sessions included multiple topics, (3) there are a broad variety of topics in multitasking search sessions, and (4) three or more query sessions sometimes contained frequent topic changes. Multitasking is found to be a growing element in Web searching. This paper proposes an approach to interactive information retrieval (IR) contextually within a multitasking framework. The implications of our findings for Web design and further research are discussed.
  19. Hume, C.: Internet search engines and robots : what they are and how to use them (2000) 0.04
    0.040209953 = product of:
      0.080419905 = sum of:
        0.029222867 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029222867 = score(doc=6104,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 6104, 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=6104)
        0.029945528 = weight(_text_:use in 6104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029945528 = score(doc=6104,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23682132 = fieldWeight in 6104, 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=6104)
        0.013526822 = weight(_text_:of in 6104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013526822 = score(doc=6104,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.20947541 = fieldWeight in 6104, 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=6104)
        0.007724685 = product of:
          0.01544937 = sum of:
            0.01544937 = weight(_text_:on in 6104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.01544937 = score(doc=6104,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 6104, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6104)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    An overview of the Internet is provided. It describes what the Internet is, how and when it was started, and the four main functions it currently offers. It then focuses on the World Wide Web, and in particular robots and search engines. An overview is provided of both robots and search engines, with some examples and illustrations. It concludes with how to choose a search engine for a particular enquiry, gives some hints and tips for Internet searches, and emphasises that good retrieval is achieved not only by good search engines but also by responsible Web mastering which helps to disseminate effectively any Internet published material.
    Source
    Journal of Internet cataloging. 2(2000) nos.3/4, S.29-45
  20. Nait-Baha, L.; Jackiewicz, A.; Djioua, B.; Laublet, P.: Query reformulation for information retrieval on the Web using the point of view methodology : preliminary results (2001) 0.04
    0.03929047 = product of:
      0.07858094 = sum of:
        0.025048172 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025048172 = score(doc=249,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 249, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=249)
        0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025667597 = score(doc=249,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.20298971 = fieldWeight in 249, 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=249)
        0.016396983 = weight(_text_:of in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016396983 = score(doc=249,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.25392252 = fieldWeight in 249, 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=249)
        0.011468184 = product of:
          0.022936368 = sum of:
            0.022936368 = weight(_text_:on in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022936368 = score(doc=249,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.25253648 = fieldWeight in 249, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=249)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    The work we are presenting is devoted to the information collected on the WWW. By the term collected we mean the whole process of retrieving, extracting and presenting results to the user. This research is part of the RAP (Research, Analyze, Propose) project in which we propose to combine two methods: (i) query reformulation using linguistic markers according to a given point of view; and (ii) text semantic analysis by means of contextual exploration results (Descles, 1991). The general project architecture describing the interactions between the users, the RAP system and the WWW search engines is presented in Nait-Baha et al. (1998). We will focus this paper on showing how we use linguistic markers to reformulate the queries according to a given point of view

Languages

  • e 249
  • d 108
  • nl 2
  • sp 2
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 309
  • el 33
  • m 23
  • s 5
  • x 4
  • r 3
  • More… Less…

Subjects