-
Sparck Jones, K.: ¬The role of artificial intelligence in information retrieval (1991)
0.05
0.046069764 = product of:
0.076782934 = sum of:
0.02131451 = weight(_text_:on in 4811) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02131451 = score(doc=4811,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 4811, 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=4811)
0.035925332 = weight(_text_:information in 4811) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035925332 = score(doc=4811,freq=14.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.41052482 = fieldWeight in 4811, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4811)
0.01954309 = product of:
0.03908618 = sum of:
0.03908618 = weight(_text_:technology in 4811) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03908618 = score(doc=4811,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.2632547 = fieldWeight in 4811, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4811)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- Presents a view of the scope of artificial intelligence (AI) in information retrieval (IR). Considers potential roles of AI and IR, evaluating AI from a realistic point od view and within a wide information management potential, not just because AI is itself insufficiently developed, but because many information management tasks are properly shallow information processing ones. There is nevertheless an important place for specific applications of AI or AI-derived technology when particular constraints can be placed on the information management tasks involved
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 42(1991) no.8, S.558-565
-
Kay, M.; Sparck Jones, K.: Automated language processing (1971)
0.03
0.026497273 = product of:
0.06624318 = sum of:
0.027156997 = weight(_text_:information in 250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027156997 = score(doc=250,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 250, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=250)
0.03908618 = product of:
0.07817236 = sum of:
0.07817236 = weight(_text_:technology in 250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07817236 = score(doc=250,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.5265094 = fieldWeight in 250, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=250)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 6(1971), S.141-166
-
Sparck Jones, K.: Automatic summarising : the state of the art (2007)
0.02
0.024496244 = product of:
0.040827073 = sum of:
0.015985882 = weight(_text_:on in 932) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015985882 = score(doc=932,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 932, 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=932)
0.0101838745 = weight(_text_:information in 932) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0101838745 = score(doc=932,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 932, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=932)
0.014657319 = product of:
0.029314637 = sum of:
0.029314637 = weight(_text_:technology in 932) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029314637 = score(doc=932,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 932, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=932)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- This paper reviews research on automatic summarising in the last decade. This work has grown, stimulated by technology and by evaluation programmes. The paper uses several frameworks to organise the review, for summarising itself, for the factors affecting summarising, for systems, and for evaluation. The review examines the evaluation strategies applied to summarising, the issues they raise, and the major programmes. It considers the input, purpose and output factors investigated in recent summarising research, and discusses the classes of strategy, extractive and non-extractive, that have been explored, illustrating the range of systems built. The conclusions drawn are that automatic summarisation has made valuable progress, with useful applications, better evaluation, and more task understanding. But summarising systems are still poorly motivated in relation to the factors affecting them, and evaluation needs taking much further to engage with the purposes summaries are intended to serve and the contexts in which they are used.
- Source
- Information processing and management. 43(2007) no.6, S.1449-1481
-
Sparck Jones, K.: Metareflections on TREC (2005)
0.02
0.020935806 = product of:
0.052339513 = sum of:
0.031971764 = weight(_text_:on in 5092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031971764 = score(doc=5092,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.29160398 = fieldWeight in 5092, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5092)
0.020367749 = weight(_text_:information in 5092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020367749 = score(doc=5092,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 5092, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5092)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- TREC: experiment and evaluation in information retrieval. Ed.: E.M. Voorhees, u. D.K. Harman
-
Lewis, D.D.; Sparck Jones, K.: Natural language processing for information retrieval (1997)
0.02
0.019738467 = product of:
0.049346168 = sum of:
0.03014327 = weight(_text_:on in 575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03014327 = score(doc=575,freq=4.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.27492687 = fieldWeight in 575, 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=575)
0.019202897 = weight(_text_:information in 575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019202897 = score(doc=575,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 575, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=575)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Imprint
- The Hague : International Federation for Information and Documentation (FID)
- Source
- From classification to 'knowledge organization': Dorking revisited or 'past is prelude'. A collection of reprints to commemorate the firty year span between the Dorking Conference (First International Study Conference on Classification Research 1957) and the Sixth International Study Conference on Classification Research (London 1997). Ed.: A. Gilchrist
-
Sparck Jones, K.: Revisiting classification for retrieval (2005)
0.02
0.01967263 = product of:
0.049181577 = sum of:
0.03730039 = weight(_text_:on in 4328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03730039 = score(doc=4328,freq=8.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.34020463 = fieldWeight in 4328, 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=4328)
0.011881187 = weight(_text_:information in 4328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011881187 = score(doc=4328,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 4328, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4328)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Purpose - This short note seeks to respond to Hjørland and Pederson's paper "A substantive theory of classification for information retrieval" which starts from Sparck Jones's, "Some thoughts on classification for retrieval", originally published in 1970. Design/methodology/approach - The note comments on the context in which the 1970 paper was written, and on Hjørland and Pedersen's views, emphasising the need for well-grounded classification theory and application. Findings - The note maintains that text-based, a posteriori, classification, as increasingly found in applications, is likely to be more useful, in general, than a priori classification. Originality/value - The note elaborates on points made in a well-received earlier paper.
-
Sparck Jones, K.: Reflections on TREC (1997)
0.02
0.018130941 = product of:
0.04532735 = sum of:
0.027688364 = weight(_text_:on in 580) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027688364 = score(doc=580,freq=6.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.25253648 = fieldWeight in 580, 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=580)
0.017638987 = weight(_text_:information in 580) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017638987 = score(doc=580,freq=6.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 580, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=580)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- This paper discusses the Text REtrieval Conferences (TREC) programme as a major enterprise in information retrieval research. It reviews its structure as an evaluation exercise, characterises the methods of indexing and retrieval being tested within its terms of the approaches to system performance factors these represent; analyses the test results for solid, overall conclusions that can be drawn from them; and, in the light of the particular features of the test data, assesses TREC both for generally applicable findings that emerge from it and for directions it offers for future research
- Footnote
- Wiederabdruck aus: Information processing and management 31(1995) no.3, S.192-314
- Imprint
- The Hague : International Federation for Information and Documentation (FID)
- Source
- From classification to 'knowledge organization': Dorking revisited or 'past is prelude'. A collection of reprints to commemorate the firty year span between the Dorking Conference (First International Study Conference on Classification Research 1957) and the Sixth International Study Conference on Classification Research (London 1997). Ed.: A. Gilchrist
-
Sparck Jones, K.; Rijsbergen, C.J. van: Progress in documentation : Information retrieval test collection (1976)
0.02
0.017673712 = product of:
0.04418428 = sum of:
0.03230309 = weight(_text_:on in 4161) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03230309 = score(doc=4161,freq=6.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.29462588 = fieldWeight in 4161, 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=4161)
0.011881187 = weight(_text_:information in 4161) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011881187 = score(doc=4161,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 4161, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4161)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Many retrieval experiments have been based on inadequate test collections, and current research is hampered by the lack of proper collections. This short review does not attempt a fully docuemted survey of all the collections used in the past decade: hopefully representative examples have been studied to throw light on the requriements test collections should meet, to show how past collections have been defective, and to suggest guidelines for a future "ideal" test collection. This specifications for this collection can be taken as an indirect comment on our present state of knowledge of major retrieval system variables, and experience in conducting experiments.
-
Sparck Jones, K.; Endres-Niggemeyer, B.: Introduction: automatic summarizing (1995)
0.02
0.017488709 = product of:
0.04372177 = sum of:
0.03014327 = weight(_text_:on in 2931) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03014327 = score(doc=2931,freq=4.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.27492687 = fieldWeight in 2931, 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=2931)
0.013578499 = weight(_text_:information in 2931) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013578499 = score(doc=2931,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 2931, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2931)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Automatic summarizing is a research topic whose time has come. The papers illustrate some of the relevant work already under way. Places these papers in their wider context: why research and development on automatic summarizing is timely, what areas of work and ideas it should draw on, how future investigations and experiments can be effectively framed
- Source
- Information processing and management. 31(1995) no.5, S.625-630
-
Sparck Jones, K.: Synonymy and semantic classification (1986)
0.02
0.016560795 = product of:
0.041401986 = sum of:
0.016973123 = weight(_text_:information in 1304) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016973123 = score(doc=1304,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 1304, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1304)
0.024428863 = product of:
0.048857726 = sum of:
0.048857726 = weight(_text_:technology in 1304) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048857726 = score(doc=1304,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.32906836 = fieldWeight in 1304, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1304)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Series
- Edinburgh information technology series ; 1
-
Sparck Jones, K.: Reflections on TREC : TREC-2 (1995)
0.02
0.016206963 = product of:
0.040517405 = sum of:
0.02131451 = weight(_text_:on in 1916) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02131451 = score(doc=1916,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 1916, 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=1916)
0.019202897 = weight(_text_:information in 1916) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019202897 = score(doc=1916,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 1916, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1916)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Discusses the TREC programme as a major enterprise in information retrieval research. It reviews its structure as an evaluation exercise, characterises the methods of indexing and retrieval being tested within it in terms of the approaches to system performance factors these represent; analyses the test results for solid, overall conclusions that can be drawn from them; and, in the light of the particular features of the test data, assesses TREC both for generally applicable findings that emerge from it and for directions it offers for future research
- Source
- Information processing and management. 31(1995) no.3, S.291-314
-
Sparck Jones, K.: Some thoughts on classification for retrieval (2005)
0.01
0.010129352 = product of:
0.02532338 = sum of:
0.013321568 = weight(_text_:on in 4392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013321568 = score(doc=4392,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 4392, 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=4392)
0.012001811 = weight(_text_:information in 4392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012001811 = score(doc=4392,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 4392, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4392)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Purpose - This paper was originally published in 1970 (Journal of documentation. 26(1970), S.89-101), considered the suggestion that classifications for retrieval should be constructed automatically and raised some serious problems concerning the sorts of classification which were required, and the way in which formal classification theories should be exploited, given that a retrieval classification is required for a purpose. These difficulties had not been sufficiently considered, and the paper, therefore, aims to attempt an analysis of them, though no solutions of immediate application could be suggested. Design/methodology/approach - Starting with the illustrative proposition that a polythetic, multiple, unordered classification is required in automatic thesaurus construction, this is considered in the context of classification in general, where eight sorts of classification can be distinguished, each covering a range of class definitions and class-finding algorithms. Findings - Since there is generally no natural or best classification of a set of objects as such, the evaluation of alternative classifications requires either formal criteria of goodness of fit, or, if a classification is required for a purpose, a precise statement of that purpose. In any case a substantive theory of classification is needed, which does not exist; and, since sufficiently precise specifications of retrieval requirements are also lacking, the only currently available approach to automatic classification experiments for information retrieval is to do enough of them. Originality/value - Gives insights into the classification of material for information retrieval.
-
Sparck Jones, K.: Some thoughts on classification for retrieval (1970)
0.01
0.0087232515 = product of:
0.021808129 = sum of:
0.013321568 = weight(_text_:on in 4327) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013321568 = score(doc=4327,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 4327, 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=4327)
0.0084865615 = weight(_text_:information in 4327) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0084865615 = score(doc=4327,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 4327, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4327)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- The suggestion that classifications for retrieval should be constructed automatically raises some serious problems concerning the sorts of classification which are required, and the way in which formal classification theories should be exploited, given that a retrieval classification is required for a purpose. These difficulties have not been sufficiently considered, and the paper therefore attempts an analysis of them, though no solution of immediate application can be suggested. Starting with the illustrative proposition that a polythetic, multiple, unordered classification is required in automatic thesaurus construction, this is considered in the context of classification in general, where eight sorts of classification can be distinguished, each covering a range of class definitions and class-finding algorithms. The problem which follows is that since there is generally no natural or best classification of a set of objects as such, the evaluation of alternative classifications requires either formal criteria of goodness of fit, or, if a classification is required for a purpose, a precises statement of that purpose. In any case a substantive theory of classification is needed, which does not exist; and since sufficiently precise specifications of retrieval requirements are also lacking, the only currently available approach to automatic classification experiments for information retrieval is to do enough of them
-
Sparck Jones, K.; Jackson, D.M.: ¬The use of automatically obtained keyword classification for information retrieval (1970)
0.01
0.007681159 = product of:
0.038405795 = sum of:
0.038405795 = weight(_text_:information in 5177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038405795 = score(doc=5177,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.43886948 = fieldWeight in 5177, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5177)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Source
- Information storage and retrieval. 5(1970), S.175-201
-
Sparck Jones, K.: Automatic keyword classification for information retrieval (1971)
0.01
0.0067892494 = product of:
0.033946246 = sum of:
0.033946246 = weight(_text_:information in 5176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033946246 = score(doc=5176,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.38790947 = fieldWeight in 5176, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=5176)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
-
Sparck Jones, K.: ¬A statistical interpretation of term specificity and its application in retrieval (2004)
0.01
0.006460618 = product of:
0.03230309 = sum of:
0.03230309 = weight(_text_:on in 4420) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03230309 = score(doc=4420,freq=6.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.29462588 = fieldWeight in 4420, 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=4420)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Abstract
- The exhaustivity of document descriptions and the specificity of index terms are usually regarded as independent. It is suggested that specificity should be interpreted statistically, as a function of term use rather than of term meaning. The effects on retrieval of variations in term specificity are examined, experiments with three test collections showing, in particular, that frequently-occurring terms are required for good overall performance. It is argued that terms should be weighted according to collection frequency, so that matches on less frequent, more specific, terms are of greater value than matches on frequent terms. Results for the test collections show that considerable improvements in performance are obtained with this very simple procedure.
-
Strzalkowski, T.; Sparck Jones, K.: NLP track at TREC-5 (1997)
0.01
0.0058629275 = product of:
0.029314637 = sum of:
0.029314637 = product of:
0.058629274 = sum of:
0.058629274 = weight(_text_:technology in 3098) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.058629274 = score(doc=3098,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.39488205 = fieldWeight in 3098, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3098)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Imprint
- Gaithersburgh, MD : National Institute of Standards and Technology
-
Sparck Jones, K.: Fashionable trends and feasible strategies in information management (1988)
0.01
0.0058205687 = product of:
0.029102843 = sum of:
0.029102843 = weight(_text_:information in 817) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029102843 = score(doc=817,freq=12.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.3325631 = fieldWeight in 817, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=817)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Abstract
- This article analyzes current trends in information management, considers the problems they involve, and suggests some strategies for tackling these problems. The current goal is integrated, personalized information systems, to be reached via artificial intelligence. The argument is that the extent to which this goal can be achieved is limited because these systems are intrinsically heterogeneous, are for access to information, and deal in linguistically expressed information; so the best strategy for building the systems that can be attained is via linguisticallay oriented knowledge and inference. Evaluating these systems also presents problems because each use is unique, but evaluation is much needed and large-sample strategies for performance study can be devised.
- Source
- Information processing and management. 24(1988), S.703-711
-
Sparck Jones, K.; Walker, S.; Robertson, S.E.: ¬A probabilistic model of information retrieval : development and comparative experiments - part 1 (2000)
0.01
0.005760869 = product of:
0.028804345 = sum of:
0.028804345 = weight(_text_:information in 4181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028804345 = score(doc=4181,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.3291521 = fieldWeight in 4181, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4181)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 36(2000) no.6, S.779-808
-
Sparck Jones, K.; Walker, S.; Robertson, S.E.: ¬A probabilistic model of information retrieval : development and comparative experiments - part 2 (2000)
0.01
0.005760869 = product of:
0.028804345 = sum of:
0.028804345 = weight(_text_:information in 4286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028804345 = score(doc=4286,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.3291521 = fieldWeight in 4286, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4286)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 36(2000) no.6, S.809-840
