Search (30 results, page 2 of 2)

0.00424829 = product of:
  0.01699316 = sum of:
    0.01699316 = weight(_text_:information in 2216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01699316 = score(doc=2216,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 2216, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2216)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Briefly reviews the history of laboratory testing of information retrieval systems, focusing on the idea of a general purpose test collection of documents, queries and relevance judgements. Gives an overview of the methods used in TREC (Text Retrieval Conference) which is concerned with an ideal test collection, and discusses the Okapi team's participation in TREC. Also discusses some of the issues surrounding the difficult problem of interactive evaluation in TREC. The reconciliation of the requirements of the laboratory context with the concerns of interactive retrieval has a long way to go

Footnote

Contribution to a thematic issue on Okapi and information retrieval research

0.0036413912 = product of:
  0.014565565 = sum of:
    0.014565565 = weight(_text_:information in 987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014565565 = score(doc=987,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 987, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=987)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Lexical cohesion is a property of text, achieved through lexical-semantic relations between words in text. Most information retrieval systems make use of lexical relations in text only to a limited extent. In this paper we empirically investigate whether the degree of lexical cohesion between the contexts of query terms' occurrences in a document is related to its relevance to the query. Lexical cohesion between distinct query terms in a document is estimated on the basis of the lexical-semantic relations (repetition, synonymy, hyponymy and sibling) that exist between there collocates - words that co-occur with them in the same windows of text. Experiments suggest significant differences between the lexical cohesion in relevant and non-relevant document sets exist. A document ranking method based on lexical cohesion shows some performance improvements.

Source

Information processing and management. 42(2006) no.5, S.1230-1247

0.0034331365 = product of:
  0.013732546 = sum of:
    0.013732546 = weight(_text_:information in 8159) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013732546 = score(doc=8159,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 8159, 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=8159)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The idea that there is some natural symmetry between queries and documents is explained. If symmetry can be assumed, then it lead to a conception of 'dual' models in information retrieval (given a model, we can construct a dual model in which the roles of documents and queries are reversed). But symmetry breaks down in various ways, which may invalidate this construction. If we can construct a dual, it is not obvious that it can be combined with the original

0.0030344925 = product of:
  0.01213797 = sum of:
    0.01213797 = weight(_text_:information in 4532) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01213797 = score(doc=4532,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 4532, 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=4532)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This technical note describes straightforward techniques for document indexing and retrieval that have been solidly established through extensive testing and are easy to apply. They are useful for many different types of text material, are viable for very large files, and have the advantage that they do not require special skills or training for searching, but are easy for end users. The document and text retrieval methods described here have a sound theoretical basis, are well established by extensive testing, and the ideas involved are now implemented in some commercial retrieval systems. Testing in the last few years has, in particular, shown that the methods presented here work very well with full texts, not only title and abstracts, and with large files of texts containing three quarters of a million documents. These tests, the TREC Tests (see Harman 1993 - 1997; IP&M 1995), have been rigorous comparative evaluations involving many different approaches to information retrieval. These techniques depend an the use of simple terms for indexing both request and document texts; an term weighting exploiting statistical information about term occurrences; an scoring for request-document matching, using these weights, to obtain a ranked search output; and an relevance feedback to modify request weights or term sets in iterative searching. The normal implementation is via an inverted file organisation using a term list with linked document identifiers, plus counting data, and pointers to the actual texts. The user's request can be a word list, phrases, sentences or extended text.

0.0030039945 = product of:
  0.012015978 = sum of:
    0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 6964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012015978 = score(doc=6964,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 6964, 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=6964)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Information processing and management. 31(1995) no.3, S.345-360

0.0030039945 = product of:
  0.012015978 = sum of:
    0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 5694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012015978 = score(doc=5694,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 5694, 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=5694)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Reports text information retrieval experiments performed as part of the 3 rd round of Text Retrieval Conferences (TREC) using the Okapi online catalogue system at City University, UK. The emphasis in TREC-3 was: further refinement of term weighting functions; an investigation of run time passage determination and searching; expansion of ad hoc queries by terms extracted from the top documents retrieved by a trial search; new methods for choosing query expansion terms after relevance feedback, now split into methods of ranking terms prior to selection and subsequent selection procedures; and the development of a user interface procedure within the new TREC interactive search framework

0.0030039945 = product of:
  0.012015978 = sum of:
    0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 4706) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012015978 = score(doc=4706,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 4706, 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=4706)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Contribution to a thematic issue on Okapi and information retrieval research

0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=651,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 651, 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=651)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - The generation of inverted indexes is one of the most computationally intensive activities for information retrieval systems: indexing large multi-gigabyte text databases can take many hours or even days to complete. We examine the generation of partitioned inverted files in order to speed up the process of indexing. Two types of index partitions are investigated: TermId and DocId. Design/methodology/approach - We use standard measures used in parallel computing such as speedup and efficiency to examine the computing results and also the space costs of our trial indexing experiments. Findings - The results from runs on both partitioning methods are compared and contrasted, concluding that DocId is the more efficient method. Practical implications - The practical implications are that the DocId partitioning method would in most circumstances be used for distributing inverted file data in a parallel computer, particularly if indexing speed is the primary consideration. Originality/value - The paper is of value to database administrators who manage large-scale text collections, and who need to use parallel computing to implement their text retrieval services.

0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 2733) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=2733,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2733, 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=2733)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Information processing and management. 48(2012) no.4, S.654-670

0.0021457102 = product of:
  0.008582841 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 819) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=819,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 819, 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=819)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - An issue that tends to be ignored in information retrieval is the issue of updating inverted files. This is largely because inverted files were devised to provide fast query service, and much work has been done with the emphasis strongly on queries. This paper aims to study the effect of using parallel methods for the update of inverted files in order to reduce costs, by looking at two types of partitioning for inverted files: document identifier and term identifier. Design/methodology/approach - Raw update service and update with query service are studied with these partitioning schemes using an incremental update strategy. The paper uses standard measures used in parallel computing such as speedup to examine the computing results and also the costs of reorganising indexes while servicing transactions. Findings - Empirical results show that for both transaction processing and index reorganisation the document identifier method is superior. However, there is evidence that the term identifier partitioning method could be useful in a concurrent transaction processing context. Practical implications - There is an increasing need to service updates, which is now becoming a requirement of inverted files (for dynamic collections such as the web), demonstrating that a shift in requirements of inverted file maintenance is needed from the past. Originality/value - The paper is of value to database administrators who manage large-scale and dynamic text collections, and who need to use parallel computing to implement their text retrieval services.