Search (39 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalstudien"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Schirrmeister, N.-P.; Keil, S.: Aufbau einer Infrastruktur für Information Retrieval-Evaluationen (2012) 0.01
    0.0053210123 = product of:
      0.02128405 = sum of:
        0.02128405 = weight(_text_:information in 3097) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02128405 = score(doc=3097,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.3469568 = fieldWeight in 3097, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3097)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Das Projekt "Aufbau einer Infrastruktur für Information Retrieval-Evaluationen" (AIIRE) bietet eine Softwareinfrastruktur zur Unterstützung von Information Retrieval-Evaluationen (IR-Evaluationen). Die Infrastruktur basiert auf einem Tool-Kit, das bei GESIS im Rahmen des DFG-Projekts IRM entwickelt wurde. Ziel ist es, ein System zu bieten, das zur Forschung und Lehre am Fachbereich Media für IR-Evaluationen genutzt werden kann. This paper describes some aspects of a project called "Aufbau einer Infrastruktur für Information Retrieval-Evaluationen" (AIIRE). Its goal is to build a software-infrastructure which supports the evaluation of information retrieval algorithms.
  2. Womser-Hacker, C.: Evaluierung im Information Retrieval (2013) 0.00
    0.0042066295 = product of:
      0.016826518 = sum of:
        0.016826518 = weight(_text_:information in 728) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016826518 = score(doc=728,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 728, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=728)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation. Handbuch zur Einführung in die Informationswissenschaft und -praxis. 6., völlig neu gefaßte Ausgabe. Hrsg. von R. Kuhlen, W. Semar u. D. Strauch. Begründet von Klaus Laisiepen, Ernst Lutterbeck, Karl-Heinrich Meyer-Uhlenried
  3. Behnert, C.; Lewandowski, D.: ¬A framework for designing retrieval effectiveness studies of library information systems using human relevance assessments (2017) 0.00
    0.0042066295 = product of:
      0.016826518 = sum of:
        0.016826518 = weight(_text_:information in 3700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016826518 = score(doc=3700,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 3700, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3700)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose This paper demonstrates how to apply traditional information retrieval evaluation methods based on standards from the Text REtrieval Conference (TREC) and web search evaluation to all types of modern library information systems including online public access catalogs, discovery systems, and digital libraries that provide web search features to gather information from heterogeneous sources. Design/methodology/approach We apply conventional procedures from information retrieval evaluation to the library information system context considering the specific characteristics of modern library materials. Findings We introduce a framework consisting of five parts: (1) search queries, (2) search results, (3) assessors, (4) testing, and (5) data analysis. We show how to deal with comparability problems resulting from diverse document types, e.g., electronic articles vs. printed monographs and what issues need to be considered for retrieval tests in the library context. Practical implications The framework can be used as a guideline for conducting retrieval effectiveness studies in the library context. Originality/value Although a considerable amount of research has been done on information retrieval evaluation, and standards for conducting retrieval effectiveness studies do exist, to our knowledge this is the first attempt to provide a systematic framework for evaluating the retrieval effectiveness of twenty-first-century library information systems. We demonstrate which issues must be considered and what decisions must be made by researchers prior to a retrieval test.
  4. Al-Maskari, A.; Sanderson, M.: ¬A review of factors influencing user satisfaction in information retrieval (2010) 0.00
    0.004164351 = product of:
      0.016657405 = sum of:
        0.016657405 = weight(_text_:information in 3447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016657405 = score(doc=3447,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 3447, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3447)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    The authors investigate factors influencing user satisfaction in information retrieval. It is evident from this study that user satisfaction is a subjective variable, which can be influenced by several factors such as system effectiveness, user effectiveness, user effort, and user characteristics and expectations. Therefore, information retrieval evaluators should consider all these factors in obtaining user satisfaction and in using it as a criterion of system effectiveness. Previous studies have conflicting conclusions on the relationship between user satisfaction and system effectiveness; this study has substantiated these findings and supports using user satisfaction as a criterion of system effectiveness.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.5, S.859-868
  5. Järvelin, K.: Evaluation (2011) 0.00
    0.004164351 = product of:
      0.016657405 = sum of:
        0.016657405 = weight(_text_:information in 548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016657405 = score(doc=548,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 548, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=548)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Interactive information seeking, behaviour and retrieval. Eds.: Ruthven, I. u. D. Kelly
  6. Mandl, T.: Evaluierung im Information Retrieval : die Hildesheimer Antwort auf aktuelle Herausforderungen der globalisierten Informationsgesellschaft (2010) 0.00
    0.004121639 = product of:
      0.016486555 = sum of:
        0.016486555 = weight(_text_:information in 4011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016486555 = score(doc=4011,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.2687516 = fieldWeight in 4011, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4011)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Die Forschung zur Evaluierung von Information Retrieval Systemen hat in den letzten Jahren neue Richtungen eingeschlagen und interessante Ergebnisse erzielt. Während früher primär die Überlegenheit einzelner Verfahren in heterogenen Anwendungsszenarien im Fokus stand, gerät zunehmend die Validität der Evaluierungsmethodik ins Zentrum der Aufmerksamkeit. Dieser Artikel fasst die aktuelle Forschung zu innovativen Evaluierungsmaßen und zur Zuverlässigkeit des so genannten Cranfield-Paradigmas zusammen.
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 61(2010) H.6/7, S.341-348
  7. Dang, E.K.F.; Luk, R.W.P.; Allan, J.: ¬A context-dependent relevance model (2016) 0.00
    0.0036430482 = product of:
      0.014572193 = sum of:
        0.014572193 = weight(_text_:information in 2778) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014572193 = score(doc=2778,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.23754507 = fieldWeight in 2778, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2778)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Numerous past studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of the relevance model (RM) for information retrieval (IR). This approach enables relevance or pseudo-relevance feedback to be incorporated within the language modeling framework of IR. In the traditional RM, the feedback information is used to improve the estimate of the query language model. In this article, we introduce an extension of RM in the setting of relevance feedback. Our method provides an additional way to incorporate feedback via the improvement of the document language models. Specifically, we make use of the context information of known relevant and nonrelevant documents to obtain weighted counts of query terms for estimating the document language models. The context information is based on the words (unigrams or bigrams) appearing within a text window centered on query terms. Experiments on several Text REtrieval Conference (TREC) collections show that our context-dependent relevance model can improve retrieval performance over the baseline RM. Together with previous studies within the BM25 framework, our current study demonstrates that the effectiveness of our method for using context information in IR is quite general and not limited to any specific retrieval model.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.3, S.582-593
  8. Tamine, L.; Chouquet, C.; Palmer, T.: Analysis of biomedical and health queries : lessons learned from TREC and CLEF evaluation benchmarks (2015) 0.00
    0.0029745363 = product of:
      0.011898145 = sum of:
        0.011898145 = weight(_text_:information in 2341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011898145 = score(doc=2341,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 2341, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2341)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    A large body of research work examined, from both the query side and the user behavior side, the characteristics of medical- and health-related searches. One of the core issues in medical information retrieval (IR) is diversity of tasks that lead to diversity of categories of information needs and queries. From the evaluation perspective, another related and challenging issue is the limited availability of appropriate test collections allowing the experimental validation of medically task oriented IR techniques and systems. In this paper, we explore the peculiarities of TREC and CLEF medically oriented tasks and queries through the analysis of the differences and the similarities between queries across tasks, with respect to length, specificity, and clarity features and then study their effect on retrieval performance. We show that, even for expert oriented queries, language specificity level varies significantly across tasks as well as search difficulty. Additional findings highlight that query clarity factors are task dependent and that query terms specificity based on domain-specific terminology resources is not significantly linked to term rareness in the document collection. The lessons learned from our study could serve as starting points for the design of future task-based medical information retrieval frameworks.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.12, S.2626-2642
  9. Angelini, M.; Fazzini, V.; Ferro, N.; Santucci, G.; Silvello, G.: CLAIRE: A combinatorial visual analytics system for information retrieval evaluation (2018) 0.00
    0.0029745363 = product of:
      0.011898145 = sum of:
        0.011898145 = weight(_text_:information in 5049) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011898145 = score(doc=5049,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 5049, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5049)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Information Retrieval (IR) develops complex systems, constituted of several components, which aim at returning and optimally ranking the most relevant documents in response to user queries. In this context, experimental evaluation plays a central role, since it allows for measuring IR systems effectiveness, increasing the understanding of their functioning, and better directing the efforts for improving them. Current evaluation methodologies are limited by two major factors: (i) IR systems are evaluated as "black boxes", since it is not possible to decompose the contributions of the different components, e.g., stop lists, stemmers, and IR models; (ii) given that it is not possible to predict the effectiveness of an IR system, both academia and industry need to explore huge numbers of systems, originated by large combinatorial compositions of their components, to understand how they perform and how these components interact together. We propose a Combinatorial visuaL Analytics system for Information Retrieval Evaluation (CLAIRE) which allows for exploring and making sense of the performances of a large amount of IR systems, in order to quickly and intuitively grasp which system configurations are preferred, what are the contributions of the different components and how these components interact together. The CLAIRE system is then validated against use cases based on several test collections using a wide set of systems, generated by a combinatorial composition of several off-the-shelf components, representing the most common denominator almost always present in English IR systems. In particular, we validate the findings enabled by CLAIRE with respect to consolidated deep statistical analyses and we show that the CLAIRE system allows the generation of new insights, which were not detectable with traditional approaches.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 54(2018) no.6, S.1077-1100
  10. Leiva-Mederos, A.; Senso, J.A.; Hidalgo-Delgado, Y.; Hipola, P.: Working framework of semantic interoperability for CRIS with heterogeneous data sources (2017) 0.00
    0.0026605062 = product of:
      0.010642025 = sum of:
        0.010642025 = weight(_text_:information in 3706) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010642025 = score(doc=3706,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.1734784 = fieldWeight in 3706, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3706)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose Information from Current Research Information Systems (CRIS) is stored in different formats, in platforms that are not compatible, or even in independent networks. It would be helpful to have a well-defined methodology to allow for management data processing from a single site, so as to take advantage of the capacity to link disperse data found in different systems, platforms, sources and/or formats. Based on functionalities and materials of the VLIR project, the purpose of this paper is to present a model that provides for interoperability by means of semantic alignment techniques and metadata crosswalks, and facilitates the fusion of information stored in diverse sources. Design/methodology/approach After reviewing the state of the art regarding the diverse mechanisms for achieving semantic interoperability, the paper analyzes the following: the specific coverage of the data sets (type of data, thematic coverage and geographic coverage); the technical specifications needed to retrieve and analyze a distribution of the data set (format, protocol, etc.); the conditions of re-utilization (copyright and licenses); and the "dimensions" included in the data set as well as the semantics of these dimensions (the syntax and the taxonomies of reference). The semantic interoperability framework here presented implements semantic alignment and metadata crosswalk to convert information from three different systems (ABCD, Moodle and DSpace) to integrate all the databases in a single RDF file. Findings The paper also includes an evaluation based on the comparison - by means of calculations of recall and precision - of the proposed model and identical consultations made on Open Archives Initiative and SQL, in order to estimate its efficiency. The results have been satisfactory enough, due to the fact that the semantic interoperability facilitates the exact retrieval of information. Originality/value The proposed model enhances management of the syntactic and semantic interoperability of the CRIS system designed. In a real setting of use it achieves very positive results.
  11. Kelly, D.; Sugimoto, C.R.: ¬A systematic review of interactive information retrieval evaluation studies, 1967-2006 (2013) 0.00
    0.0025760243 = product of:
      0.010304097 = sum of:
        0.010304097 = weight(_text_:information in 684) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010304097 = score(doc=684,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 684, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=684)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    With the increasing number and diversity of search tools available, interest in the evaluation of search systems, particularly from a user perspective, has grown among researchers. More researchers are designing and evaluating interactive information retrieval (IIR) systems and beginning to innovate in evaluation methods. Maturation of a research specialty relies on the ability to replicate research, provide standards for measurement and analysis, and understand past endeavors. This article presents a historical overview of 40 years of IIR evaluation studies using the method of systematic review. A total of 2,791 journal and conference units were manually examined and 127 articles were selected for analysis in this study, based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. These articles were systematically coded using features such as author, publication date, sources and references, and properties of the research method used in the articles, such as number of subjects, tasks, corpora, and measures. Results include data describing the growth of IIR studies over time, the most frequently occurring and cited authors and sources, and the most common types of corpora and measures used. An additional product of this research is a bibliography of IIR evaluation research that can be used by students, teachers, and those new to the area. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first historical, systematic characterization of the IIR evaluation literature, including the documentation of methods and measures used by researchers in this specialty.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.4, S.745-770
  12. Ravana, S.D.; Taheri, M.S.; Rajagopal, P.: Document-based approach to improve the accuracy of pairwise comparison in evaluating information retrieval systems (2015) 0.00
    0.0025760243 = product of:
      0.010304097 = sum of:
        0.010304097 = weight(_text_:information in 2587) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010304097 = score(doc=2587,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 2587, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2587)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose The purpose of this paper is to propose a method to have more accurate results in comparing performance of the paired information retrieval (IR) systems with reference to the current method, which is based on the mean effectiveness scores of the systems across a set of identified topics/queries. Design/methodology/approach Based on the proposed approach, instead of the classic method of using a set of topic scores, the documents level scores are considered as the evaluation unit. These document scores are the defined document's weight, which play the role of the mean average precision (MAP) score of the systems as a significance test's statics. The experiments were conducted using the TREC 9 Web track collection. Findings The p-values generated through the two types of significance tests, namely the Student's t-test and Mann-Whitney show that by using the document level scores as an evaluation unit, the difference between IR systems is more significant compared with utilizing topic scores. Originality/value Utilizing a suitable test collection is a primary prerequisite for IR systems comparative evaluation. However, in addition to reusable test collections, having an accurate statistical testing is a necessity for these evaluations. The findings of this study will assist IR researchers to evaluate their retrieval systems and algorithms more accurately.
    Source
    Aslib journal of information management. 67(2015) no.4, S.408-421
  13. Losada, D.E.; Parapar, J.; Barreiro, A.: When to stop making relevance judgments? : a study of stopping methods for building information retrieval test collections (2019) 0.00
    0.0025760243 = product of:
      0.010304097 = sum of:
        0.010304097 = weight(_text_:information in 4674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010304097 = score(doc=4674,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 4674, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4674)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    In information retrieval evaluation, pooling is a well-known technique to extract a sample of documents to be assessed for relevance. Given the pooled documents, a number of studies have proposed different prioritization methods to adjudicate documents for judgment. These methods follow different strategies to reduce the assessment effort. However, there is no clear guidance on how many relevance judgments are required for creating a reliable test collection. In this article we investigate and further develop methods to determine when to stop making relevance judgments. We propose a highly diversified set of stopping methods and provide a comprehensive analysis of the usefulness of the resulting test collections. Some of the stopping methods introduced here combine innovative estimates of recall with time series models used in Financial Trading. Experimental results on several representative collections show that some stopping methods can reduce up to 95% of the assessment effort and still produce a robust test collection. We demonstrate that the reduced set of judgments can be reliably employed to compare search systems using disparate effectiveness metrics such as Average Precision, NDCG, P@100, and Rank Biased Precision. With all these measures, the correlations found between full pool rankings and reduced pool rankings is very high.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 70(2019) no.1, S.49-60
  14. Losada, D.E.; Parapar, J.; Barreiro, A.: Multi-armed bandits for adjudicating documents in pooling-based evaluation of information retrieval systems (2017) 0.00
    0.0025760243 = product of:
      0.010304097 = sum of:
        0.010304097 = weight(_text_:information in 5098) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010304097 = score(doc=5098,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 5098, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5098)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Evaluating Information Retrieval systems is crucial to making progress in search technologies. Evaluation is often based on assembling reference collections consisting of documents, queries and relevance judgments done by humans. In large-scale environments, exhaustively judging relevance becomes infeasible. Instead, only a pool of documents is judged for relevance. By selectively choosing documents from the pool we can optimize the number of judgments required to identify a given number of relevant documents. We argue that this iterative selection process can be naturally modeled as a reinforcement learning problem and propose innovative and formal adjudication methods based on multi-armed bandits. Casting document judging as a multi-armed bandit problem is not only theoretically appealing, but also leads to highly effective adjudication methods. Under this bandit allocation framework, we consider stationary and non-stationary models and propose seven new document adjudication methods (five stationary methods and two non-stationary variants). Our paper also reports a series of experiments performed to thoroughly compare our new methods against current adjudication methods. This comparative study includes existing methods designed for pooling-based evaluation and existing methods designed for metasearch. Our experiments show that our theoretically grounded adjudication methods can substantially minimize the assessment effort.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 53(2017) no.5, S.1005-1025
  15. Reichert, S.; Mayr, P.: Untersuchung von Relevanzeigenschaften in einem kontrollierten Eyetracking-Experiment (2012) 0.00
    0.0025239778 = product of:
      0.010095911 = sum of:
        0.010095911 = weight(_text_:information in 328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010095911 = score(doc=328,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 328, 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=328)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    In diesem Artikel wird ein Eyetracking-Experiment beschrieben, bei dem untersucht wurde, wann und auf Basis welcher Informationen Relevanzentscheidungen bei der themenbezogenen Dokumentenbewertung fallen und welche Faktoren auf die Relevanzentscheidung einwirken. Nach einer kurzen Einführung werden relevante Studien aufgeführt, in denen Eyetracking als Untersuchungsmethode für Interaktionsverhalten mit Ergebnislisten (Information Seeking Behavior) verwendet wurde. Nutzerverhalten wird hierbei vor allem durch unterschiedliche Aufgaben-Typen, dargestellte Informationen und durch das Ranking eines Ergebnisses beeinflusst. Durch EyetrackingUntersuchungen lassen sich Nutzer außerdem in verschiedene Klassen von Bewertungs- und Lesetypen einordnen. Diese Informationen können als implizites Feedback genutzt werden, um so die Suche zu personalisieren und um die Relevanz von Suchergebnissen ohne aktives Zutun des Users zu erhöhen. In einem explorativen Eyetracking-Experiment mit 12 Studenten der Hochschule Darmstadt werden anhand der Länge der Gesamtbewertung, Anzahl der Fixationen, Anzahl der besuchten Metadatenelemente und Länge des Scanpfades zwei typische Bewertungstypen identifiziert. Das Metadatenfeld Abstract wird im Experiment zuverlässig als wichtigste Dokumenteigenschaft für die Zuordnung von Relevanz ermittelt.
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 63(2012) H.3, S.145-156
  16. Li, J.; Zhang, P.; Song, D.; Wu, Y.: Understanding an enriched multidimensional user relevance model by analyzing query logs (2017) 0.00
    0.0025239778 = product of:
      0.010095911 = sum of:
        0.010095911 = weight(_text_:information in 3961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010095911 = score(doc=3961,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 3961, 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=3961)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Modeling multidimensional relevance in information retrieval (IR) has attracted much attention in recent years. However, most existing studies are conducted through relatively small-scale user studies, which may not reflect a real-world and natural search scenario. In this article, we propose to study the multidimensional user relevance model (MURM) on large scale query logs, which record users' various search behaviors (e.g., query reformulations, clicks and dwelling time, etc.) in natural search settings. We advance an existing MURM model (including five dimensions: topicality, novelty, reliability, understandability, and scope) by providing two additional dimensions, that is, interest and habit. The two new dimensions represent personalized relevance judgment on retrieved documents. Further, for each dimension in the enriched MURM model, a set of computable features are formulated. By conducting extensive document ranking experiments on Bing's query logs and TREC session Track data, we systematically investigated the impact of each dimension on retrieval performance and gained a series of insightful findings which may bring benefits for the design of future IR systems.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.12, S.2743-2754
  17. Balog, K.; Schuth, A.; Dekker, P.; Tavakolpoursaleh, N.; Schaer, P.; Chuang, P.-Y.: Overview of the TREC 2016 Open Search track Academic Search Edition (2016) 0.00
    0.002379629 = product of:
      0.009518516 = sum of:
        0.009518516 = weight(_text_:information in 43) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009518516 = score(doc=43,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 43, 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=43)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    We present the TREC Open Search track, which represents a new evaluation paradigm for information retrieval. It offers the possibility for researchers to evaluate their approaches in a live setting, with real, unsuspecting users of an existing search engine. The first edition of the track focuses on the academic search domain and features the ad-hoc scientific literature search task. We report on experiments with three different academic search engines: Cite-SeerX, SSOAR, and Microsoft Academic Search.
  18. Vakkari, P.; Huuskonen, S.: Search effort degrades search output but improves task outcome (2012) 0.00
    0.0021033147 = product of:
      0.008413259 = sum of:
        0.008413259 = weight(_text_:information in 46) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008413259 = score(doc=46,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 46, 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=46)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    We analyzed how effort in searching is associated with search output and task outcome. In a field study, we examined how students' search effort for an assigned learning task was associated with precision and relative recall, and how this was associated to the quality of learning outcome. The study subjects were 41 medical students writing essays for a class in medicine. Searching in Medline was part of their assignment. The data comprised students' search logs in Medline, their assessment of the usefulness of references retrieved, a questionnaire concerning the search process, and evaluation scores of the essays given by the teachers. Pearson correlation was calculated for answering the research questions. Finally, a path model for predicting task outcome was built. We found that effort in the search process degraded precision but improved task outcome. There were two major mechanisms reducing precision while enhancing task outcome. Effort in expanding Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms within search sessions and effort in assessing and exploring documents in the result list between the sessions degraded precision, but led to better task outcome. Thus, human effort compensated bad retrieval results on the way to good task outcome. Findings suggest that traditional effectiveness measures in information retrieval should be complemented with evaluation measures for search process and outcome.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.4, S.657-670
  19. Wildemuth, B.; Freund, L.; Toms, E.G.: Untangling search task complexity and difficulty in the context of interactive information retrieval studies (2014) 0.00
    0.0021033147 = product of:
      0.008413259 = sum of:
        0.008413259 = weight(_text_:information in 1786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008413259 = score(doc=1786,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 1786, 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=1786)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - One core element of interactive information retrieval (IIR) experiments is the assignment of search tasks. The purpose of this paper is to provide an analytical review of current practice in developing those search tasks to test, observe or control task complexity and difficulty. Design/methodology/approach - Over 100 prior studies of IIR were examined in terms of how each defined task complexity and/or difficulty (or related concepts) and subsequently interpreted those concepts in the development of the assigned search tasks. Findings - Search task complexity is found to include three dimensions: multiplicity of subtasks or steps, multiplicity of facets, and indeterminability. Search task difficulty is based on an interaction between the search task and the attributes of the searcher or the attributes of the search situation. The paper highlights the anomalies in our use of these two concepts, concluding with suggestions for future methodological research related to search task complexity and difficulty. Originality/value - By analyzing and synthesizing current practices, this paper provides guidance for future experiments in IIR that involve these two constructs.
  20. White, H.D.: Relevance theory and distributions of judgments in document retrieval (2017) 0.00
    0.0021033147 = product of:
      0.008413259 = sum of:
        0.008413259 = weight(_text_:information in 5099) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008413259 = score(doc=5099,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 5099, 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=5099)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    This article extends relevance theory (RT) from linguistic pragmatics into information retrieval. Using more than 50 retrieval experiments from the literature as examples, it applies RT to explain the frequency distributions of documents on relevance scales with three or more points. The scale points, which judges in experiments must consider in addition to queries and documents, are communications from researchers. In RT, the relevance of a communication varies directly with its cognitive effects and inversely with the effort of processing it. Researchers define and/or label the scale points to measure the cognitive effects of documents on judges. However, they apparently assume that all scale points as presented are equally easy for judges to process. Yet the notion that points cost variable effort explains fairly well the frequency distributions of judgments across them. By hypothesis, points that cost more effort are chosen by judges less frequently. Effort varies with the vagueness or strictness of scale-point labels and definitions. It is shown that vague scales tend to produce U- or V-shaped distributions, while strict scales tend to produce right-skewed distributions. These results reinforce the paper's more general argument that RT clarifies the concept of relevance in the dialogues of retrieval evaluation.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 53(2017) no.5, S.1080-1102

Languages

  • e 31
  • d 8

Types

  • a 37
  • el 4
  • r 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…