-
Dalrymple, P.W.: Retrieval by reformulation in two library catalogs : toward a cognitive model of searching behavior (1990)
0.11
0.11338474 = product of:
0.1700771 = sum of:
0.014948557 = weight(_text_:in in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014948557 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.21040362 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
0.15512854 = sum of:
0.056056995 = weight(_text_:science in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056056995 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.40744454 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
0.09907155 = weight(_text_:22 in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09907155 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 18:43:54
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 41(1990) no.4, S.272-281
-
Saracevic, T.: On a method for studying the structure and nature of requests in information retrieval (1983)
0.08
0.083937615 = product of:
0.12590642 = sum of:
0.015100324 = weight(_text_:in in 2417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015100324 = score(doc=2417,freq=4.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 2417, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2417)
0.1108061 = sum of:
0.04004071 = weight(_text_:science in 2417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04004071 = score(doc=2417,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.2910318 = fieldWeight in 2417, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2417)
0.07076539 = weight(_text_:22 in 2417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07076539 = score(doc=2417,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2417, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2417)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Pages
- S.22-25
- Series
- Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science; vol. 20
- Source
- Productivity in the information age : proceedings of the 46th ASIS annual meeting, 1983. Ed.: Raymond F Vondra
-
Hodges, P.R.: Keyword in title indexes : effectiveness of retrieval in computer searches (1983)
0.07
0.065803155 = product of:
0.098704726 = sum of:
0.021140454 = weight(_text_:in in 5001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021140454 = score(doc=5001,freq=16.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.29755569 = fieldWeight in 5001, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5001)
0.07756427 = sum of:
0.028028497 = weight(_text_:science in 5001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028028497 = score(doc=5001,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.20372227 = fieldWeight in 5001, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5001)
0.049535774 = weight(_text_:22 in 5001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049535774 = score(doc=5001,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5001, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5001)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- A study was done to test the effectiveness of retrieval using title word searching. It was based on actual search profiles used in the Mechanized Information Center at Ohio State University, in order ro replicate as closely as possible actual searching conditions. Fewer than 50% of the relevant titles were retrieved by keywords in titles. The low rate of retrieval can be attributes to three sources: titles themselves, user and information specialist ignorance of the subject vocabulary in use, and to general language problems. Across fields it was found that the social sciences had the best retrieval rate, with science having the next best, and arts and humanities the lowest. Ways to enhance and supplement keyword in title searching on the computer and in printed indexes are discussed.
- Date
- 14. 3.1996 13:22:21
-
Blair, D.C.: STAIRS Redux : thoughts on the STAIRS evaluation, ten years after (1996)
0.06
0.06391496 = product of:
0.09587244 = sum of:
0.01830817 = weight(_text_:in in 3002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01830817 = score(doc=3002,freq=12.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.2576908 = fieldWeight in 3002, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3002)
0.07756427 = sum of:
0.028028497 = weight(_text_:science in 3002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028028497 = score(doc=3002,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.20372227 = fieldWeight in 3002, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3002)
0.049535774 = weight(_text_:22 in 3002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049535774 = score(doc=3002,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3002, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3002)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- The test of retrieval effectiveness performed on IBM's STAIRS and reported in 'Communications of the ACM' 10 years ago, continues to be cited frequently in the information retrieval literature. The reasons for the study's continuing pertinence to today's research are discussed, and the political, legal, and commercial aspects of the study are presented. In addition, the method of calculating recall that was used in the STAIRS study is discussed in some detail, especially how it reduces the 5 major types of uncertainty in recall estimations. It is also suggested that this method of recall estimation may serve as the basis for recall estimations that might be truly comparable between systems
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 47(1996) no.1, S.4-22
-
Brown, M.E.: By any other name : accounting for failure in the naming of subject categories (1995)
0.06
0.061675217 = product of:
0.09251282 = sum of:
0.014948557 = weight(_text_:in in 5598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014948557 = score(doc=5598,freq=8.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.21040362 = fieldWeight in 5598, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5598)
0.07756427 = sum of:
0.028028497 = weight(_text_:science in 5598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028028497 = score(doc=5598,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.20372227 = fieldWeight in 5598, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5598)
0.049535774 = weight(_text_:22 in 5598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049535774 = score(doc=5598,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5598, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5598)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Research shows that 65-80% of subject search terms fail to match the appropriate subject heading and one third to one half of subject searches result in no references being retrieved. Examines the subject search terms geberated by 82 school and college students in Princeton, NJ, evaluated the match between the named terms and the expected subject headings, proposes an explanation for match failures in relation to 3 invariant properties common to all search terms: concreteness, complexity, and syndeticity. Suggests that match failure is a consequence of developmental naming patterns and that these patterns can be overcome through the use of metacognitive naming skills
- Date
- 2.11.1996 13:08:22
- Source
- Library and information science research. 17(1995) no.4, S.347-385
-
Leininger, K.: Interindexer consistency in PsychINFO (2000)
0.05
0.05172006 = product of:
0.07758009 = sum of:
0.011096427 = weight(_text_:in in 2552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011096427 = score(doc=2552,freq=6.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.1561842 = fieldWeight in 2552, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2552)
0.06648366 = sum of:
0.024024425 = weight(_text_:science in 2552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024024425 = score(doc=2552,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 2552, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2552)
0.042459235 = weight(_text_:22 in 2552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042459235 = score(doc=2552,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2552, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2552)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Reports results of a study to examine interindexer consistency (the degree to which indexers, when assigning terms to a chosen record, will choose the same terms to reflect that record) in the PsycINFO database using 60 records that were inadvertently processed twice between 1996 and 1998. Five aspects of interindexer consistency were analysed. Two methods were used to calculate interindexer consistency: one posited by Hooper (1965) and the other by Rollin (1981). Aspects analysed were: checktag consistency (66.24% using Hooper's calculation and 77.17% using Rollin's); major-to-all term consistency (49.31% and 62.59% respectively); overall indexing consistency (49.02% and 63.32%); classification code consistency (44.17% and 45.00%); and major-to-major term consistency (43.24% and 56.09%). The average consistency across all categories was 50.4% using Hooper's method and 60.83% using Rollin's. Although comparison with previous studies is difficult due to methodological variations in the overall study of indexing consistency and the specific characteristics of the database, results generally support previous findings when trends and similar studies are analysed.
- Date
- 9. 2.1997 18:44:22
- Source
- Journal of librarianship and information science. 32(2000) no.1, S.4-8
-
Sievert, M.E.; McKinin, E.J.: Why full-text misses some relevant documents : an analysis of documents not retrieved by CCML or MEDIS (1989)
0.05
0.050362572 = product of:
0.07554386 = sum of:
0.009060195 = weight(_text_:in in 3564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009060195 = score(doc=3564,freq=4.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 3564, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3564)
0.06648366 = sum of:
0.024024425 = weight(_text_:science in 3564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024024425 = score(doc=3564,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 3564, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3564)
0.042459235 = weight(_text_:22 in 3564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042459235 = score(doc=3564,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3564, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3564)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Searches conducted as part of the MEDLINE/Full-Text Research Project revealed that the full-text data bases of clinical medical journal articles (CCML (Comprehensive Core Medical Library) from BRS Information Technologies, and MEDIS from Mead Data Central) did not retrieve all the relevant citations. An analysis of the data indicated that 204 relevant citations were retrieved only by MEDLINE. A comparison of the strategies used on the full-text data bases with the text of the articles of these 204 citations revealed that 2 reasons contributed to these failure. The searcher often constructed a restrictive strategy which resulted in the loss of relevant documents; and as in other kinds of retrieval, the problems of natural language caused the loss of relevant documents.
- Date
- 9. 1.1996 10:22:31
- Source
- ASIS'89. Managing information and technology. Proceedings of the 52nd annual meeting of the American Society for Information Science, Washington D.C., 30.10.-2.11.1989. Vol.26. Ed.by J. Katzer and G.B. Newby
-
Wood, F.; Ford, N.; Miller, D.; Sobczyk, G.; Duffin, R.: Information skills, searching behaviour and cognitive styles for student-centred learning : a computer-assisted learning approach (1996)
0.05
0.050362572 = product of:
0.07554386 = sum of:
0.009060195 = weight(_text_:in in 4341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009060195 = score(doc=4341,freq=4.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 4341, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4341)
0.06648366 = sum of:
0.024024425 = weight(_text_:science in 4341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024024425 = score(doc=4341,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 4341, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4341)
0.042459235 = weight(_text_:22 in 4341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042459235 = score(doc=4341,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4341, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4341)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Undergraduates were tested to establish how they searched databases, the effectiveness of their searches and their satisfaction with them. The students' cognitive and learning styles were determined by the Lancaster Approaches to Studying Inventory and Riding's Cognitive Styles Analysis tests. There were significant differences in the searching behaviour and the effectiveness of the searches carried out by students with different learning and cognitive styles. Computer-assisted learning (CAL) packages were developed for three departments. The effectiveness of the packages were evaluated. Significant differences were found in the ways students with different learning styles used the packages. Based on the experience gained, guidelines for the teaching of information skills and the production and use of packages were prepared. About 2/3 of the searches had serious weaknesses, indicating a need for effective training. It appears that choice of searching strategies, search effectiveness and use of CAL packages are all affected by the cognitive and learning styles of the searcher. Therefore, students should be made aware of their own styles and, if appropriate, how to adopt more effective strategies
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.2, S.79-92
-
Belkin, N.J.: ¬An overview of results from Rutgers' investigations of interactive information retrieval (1998)
0.05
0.048628516 = product of:
0.07294277 = sum of:
0.009247023 = weight(_text_:in in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009247023 = score(doc=2339,freq=6.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.1301535 = fieldWeight in 2339, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2339)
0.06369575 = sum of:
0.028313057 = weight(_text_:science in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028313057 = score(doc=2339,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.20579056 = fieldWeight in 2339, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2339)
0.035382695 = weight(_text_:22 in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035382695 = score(doc=2339,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2339, 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=2339)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Over the last 4 years, the Information Interaction Laboratory at Rutgers' School of communication, Information and Library Studies has performed a series of investigations concerned with various aspects of people's interactions with advanced information retrieval (IR) systems. We have benn especially concerned with understanding not just what people do, and why, and with what effect, but also with what they would like to do, and how they attempt to accomplish it, and with what difficulties. These investigations have led to some quite interesting conclusions about the nature and structure of people's interactions with information, about support for cooperative human-computer interaction in query reformulation, and about the value of visualization of search results for supporting various forms of interaction with information. In this discussion, I give an overview of the research program and its projects, present representative results from the projects, and discuss some implications of these results for support of subject searching in information retrieval systems
- Date
- 22. 9.1997 19:16:05
- Imprint
- Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science
- Source
- Visualizing subject access for 21st century information resources: Papers presented at the 1997 Clinic on Library Applications of Data Processing, 2-4 Mar 1997, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Ed.: P.A. Cochrane et al
-
King, D.W.: Blazing new trails : in celebration of an audacious career (2000)
0.05
0.046352074 = product of:
0.06952811 = sum of:
0.014125061 = weight(_text_:in in 1184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014125061 = score(doc=1184,freq=14.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.19881277 = fieldWeight in 1184, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1184)
0.05540305 = sum of:
0.020020355 = weight(_text_:science in 1184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020020355 = score(doc=1184,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 1184, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1184)
0.035382695 = weight(_text_:22 in 1184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035382695 = score(doc=1184,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1184, 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=1184)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- I had the distinct pleasure of working with Pauline Atherton (Cochrane) during the 1960s, a period that can be considered the heyday of automated information system design and evaluation in the United States. I first met Pauline at the 1962 American Documentation Institute annual meeting in North Hollywood, Florida. My company, Westat Research Analysts, had recently been awarded a contract by the U.S. Patent Office to provide statistical support for the design of experiments with automated information retrieval systems. I was asked to attend the meeting to learn more about information retrieval systems and to begin informing others of U.S. Patent Office activities in this area. At one session, Pauline and I questioned a speaker about the research that he presented. Pauline's questions concerned the logic of their approach and mine, the statistical aspects. After the session, she came over to talk to me and we began a professional and personal friendship that continues to this day. During the 1960s, Pauline was involved in several important information-retrieval projects including a series of studies for the American Institute of Physics, a dissertation examining the relevance of retrieved documents, and development and evaluation of an online information-retrieval system. I had the opportunity to work with Pauline and her colleagues an four of those projects and will briefly describe her work in the 1960s.
- Date
- 22. 9.1997 19:16:05
- Imprint
- Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science
- Source
- Saving the time of the library user through subject access innovation: Papers in honor of Pauline Atherton Cochrane. Ed.: W.J. Wheeler
-
Pal, S.; Mitra, M.; Kamps, J.: Evaluation effort, reliability and reusability in XML retrieval (2011)
0.04
0.044893935 = product of:
0.0673409 = sum of:
0.011937855 = weight(_text_:in in 4197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011937855 = score(doc=4197,freq=10.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.16802745 = fieldWeight in 4197, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4197)
0.05540305 = sum of:
0.020020355 = weight(_text_:science in 4197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020020355 = score(doc=4197,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 4197, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4197)
0.035382695 = weight(_text_:22 in 4197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035382695 = score(doc=4197,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4197, 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=4197)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- The Initiative for the Evaluation of XML retrieval (INEX) provides a TREC-like platform for evaluating content-oriented XML retrieval systems. Since 2007, INEX has been using a set of precision-recall based metrics for its ad hoc tasks. The authors investigate the reliability and robustness of these focused retrieval measures, and of the INEX pooling method. They explore four specific questions: How reliable are the metrics when assessments are incomplete, or when query sets are small? What is the minimum pool/query-set size that can be used to reliably evaluate systems? Can the INEX collections be used to fairly evaluate "new" systems that did not participate in the pooling process? And, for a fixed amount of assessment effort, would this effort be better spent in thoroughly judging a few queries, or in judging many queries relatively superficially? The authors' findings validate properties of precision-recall-based metrics observed in document retrieval settings. Early precision measures are found to be more error-prone and less stable under incomplete judgments and small topic-set sizes. They also find that system rankings remain largely unaffected even when assessment effort is substantially (but systematically) reduced, and confirm that the INEX collections remain usable when evaluating nonparticipating systems. Finally, they observe that for a fixed amount of effort, judging shallow pools for many queries is better than judging deep pools for a smaller set of queries. However, when judging only a random sample of a pool, it is better to completely judge fewer topics than to partially judge many topics. This result confirms the effectiveness of pooling methods.
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 14:20:56
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.2, S.375-394
-
Larsen, B.; Ingwersen, P.; Lund, B.: Data fusion according to the principle of polyrepresentation (2009)
0.03
0.03448004 = product of:
0.051720057 = sum of:
0.007397618 = weight(_text_:in in 2752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007397618 = score(doc=2752,freq=6.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.1041228 = fieldWeight in 2752, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2752)
0.04432244 = sum of:
0.016016284 = weight(_text_:science in 2752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016016284 = score(doc=2752,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.11641272 = fieldWeight in 2752, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2752)
0.028306156 = weight(_text_:22 in 2752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028306156 = score(doc=2752,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2752, 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=2752)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- We report data fusion experiments carried out on the four best-performing retrieval models from TREC 5. Three were conceptually/algorithmically very different from one another; one was algorithmically similar to one of the former. The objective of the test was to observe the performance of the 11 logical data fusion combinations compared to the performance of the four individual models and their intermediate fusions when following the principle of polyrepresentation. This principle is based on cognitive IR perspective (Ingwersen & Järvelin, 2005) and implies that each retrieval model is regarded as a representation of a unique interpretation of information retrieval (IR). It predicts that only fusions of very different, but equally good, IR models may outperform each constituent as well as their intermediate fusions. Two kinds of experiments were carried out. One tested restricted fusions, which entails that only the inner disjoint overlap documents between fused models are ranked. The second set of experiments was based on traditional data fusion methods. The experiments involved the 30 TREC 5 topics that contain more than 44 relevant documents. In all tests, the Borda and CombSUM scoring methods were used. Performance was measured by precision and recall, with document cutoff values (DCVs) at 100 and 15 documents, respectively. Results show that restricted fusions made of two, three, or four cognitively/algorithmically very different retrieval models perform significantly better than do the individual models at DCV100. At DCV15, however, the results of polyrepresentative fusion were less predictable. The traditional fusion method based on polyrepresentation principles demonstrates a clear picture of performance at both DCV levels and verifies the polyrepresentation predictions for data fusion in IR. Data fusion improves retrieval performance over their constituent IR models only if the models all are quite conceptually/algorithmically dissimilar and equally and well performing, in that order of importance.
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 18:48:28
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.4, S.646-654
-
Ellis, D.: Progress and problems in information retrieval (1996)
0.03
0.031604484 = product of:
0.047406726 = sum of:
0.019100567 = weight(_text_:in in 789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019100567 = score(doc=789,freq=10.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.26884392 = fieldWeight in 789, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=789)
0.028306156 = product of:
0.056612313 = sum of:
0.056612313 = weight(_text_:22 in 789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056612313 = score(doc=789,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 789, 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=789)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- An introduction to the principal generic approaches to information retrieval research with their associated concepts, models and systems, this text is designed to keep the information professional up to date with the major themes and developments that have preoccupied researchers in recent month in relation to textual and documentary retrieval systems.
- Content
- First published 1991 as New horizons in information retrieval
- Date
- 26. 7.2002 20:22:46
- Footnote
- Rez. in: Managing information 3(1996) no.10, S.49 (D. Bawden); Program 32(1998) no.2, S.190-192 (C. Revie)
-
Feng, S.: ¬A comparative study of indexing languages in single and multidatabase searching (1989)
0.03
0.029408552 = product of:
0.044112828 = sum of:
0.01208026 = weight(_text_:in in 2494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01208026 = score(doc=2494,freq=4.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 2494, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2494)
0.032032568 = product of:
0.064065136 = sum of:
0.064065136 = weight(_text_:science in 2494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.064065136 = score(doc=2494,freq=8.0), product of:
0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 2494, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2494)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- An experiment was conducted using 3 data bases in library and information science - Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA), Information Science Abstracts and ERIC - to investigate some of the main factors affecting on-line searching: effectiveness of search vocabularies, combinations of fields searched, and overlaps among databases. Natural language, controlled vocabulary and a mixture of natural language and controlled terms were tested using different fields of bibliographic records. Also discusses a comparative evaluation of single and multi-data base searching, measuring the overlap among data bases and their influence upon on-line searching.
- Source
- Canadian Journal of Information Science. 14(1989) no.2, S.26-46
-
Wilbur, W.J.: Human subjectivity and performance limits in document retrieval (1999)
0.03
0.02865137 = product of:
0.042977054 = sum of:
0.014948557 = weight(_text_:in in 4539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014948557 = score(doc=4539,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.21040362 = fieldWeight in 4539, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4539)
0.028028497 = product of:
0.056056995 = sum of:
0.056056995 = weight(_text_:science in 4539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056056995 = score(doc=4539,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.40744454 = fieldWeight in 4539, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4539)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Source
- Encyclopedia of library and information science. Vol.64, [=Suppl.27]
-
Beaulieu, M.: Approaches to user-based studies in information seeking and retrieval : a Sheffield perspective (2003)
0.03
0.02865137 = product of:
0.042977054 = sum of:
0.014948557 = weight(_text_:in in 4692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014948557 = score(doc=4692,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.21040362 = fieldWeight in 4692, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4692)
0.028028497 = product of:
0.056056995 = sum of:
0.056056995 = weight(_text_:science in 4692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056056995 = score(doc=4692,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.40744454 = fieldWeight in 4692, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4692)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Source
- Journal of information science. 29(2003) no.4, S.239-248
-
Cooper, W.S.: ¬On selecting a measure of retrieval effectiveness, revisited (1973)
0.03
0.028096542 = product of:
0.042144813 = sum of:
0.01812039 = weight(_text_:in in 1930) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01812039 = score(doc=1930,freq=4.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.25504774 = fieldWeight in 1930, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1930)
0.024024425 = product of:
0.04804885 = sum of:
0.04804885 = weight(_text_:science in 1930) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04804885 = score(doc=1930,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.34923816 = fieldWeight in 1930, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1930)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Footnote
- Wiederabgedruckt in: Readings in information retrieval. Ed.: K. Sparck Jones u. P. Willett. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann 1997. S.191-204.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 24(1973), S.87-100
-
Smeaton, A.F.; Harman, D.: ¬The TREC experiments and their impact on Europe (1997)
0.03
0.025744256 = product of:
0.03861638 = sum of:
0.022600098 = weight(_text_:in in 7702) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022600098 = score(doc=7702,freq=14.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.31810042 = fieldWeight in 7702, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7702)
0.016016284 = product of:
0.032032568 = sum of:
0.032032568 = weight(_text_:science in 7702) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032032568 = score(doc=7702,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.23282544 = fieldWeight in 7702, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7702)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Reviews the overall results of the TREC experiments in information retrieval, which differed from other information retrieval research projects in that the document collections used in the research were massive, and the groups participating in the collaborative evaluation are among the main organizations in the field. Reviews the findings of TREC, the way in which it operates and the specialist 'tracks' it supports and concentrates on european involvement in TREC, examining the participants and the emergence of European TREC like exercises
- Source
- Journal of information science. 23(1997) no.2, S.169-174
-
Madelung, H.-O.: Subject searching in the social sciences : a comparison of PRECIS and KWIC indexes indexes to newspaper articles (1982)
0.03
0.025418207 = product of:
0.03812731 = sum of:
0.01830817 = weight(_text_:in in 5517) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01830817 = score(doc=5517,freq=12.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.2576908 = fieldWeight in 5517, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5517)
0.01981914 = product of:
0.03963828 = sum of:
0.03963828 = weight(_text_:science in 5517) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03963828 = score(doc=5517,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.2881068 = fieldWeight in 5517, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5517)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- 89 articles from a small, Danish left-wing newspaper were indexed by PRECIS and KWIC. The articles cover a wide range of social science subjects. Controlled test searches in both indexes were carried out by 20 students of library science. The results obtained from this small-scale retrieval test were evaluated by a chi-square test. The PRECIS index led to more correct answers and fewer wrong answers than the KWIC index, i.e. it had both better recall and greater precision. Furthermore, the students were more confident in their judgement of the relevance of retrieved articles in the PRECIS index than in the KWIC index; and they generally favoured the PRECIS index in the subjective judgement they were asked to make
-
Peritz, B.C.: On the informativeness of titles (1984)
0.03
0.025418207 = product of:
0.03812731 = sum of:
0.01830817 = weight(_text_:in in 2636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01830817 = score(doc=2636,freq=12.0), product of:
0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.2576908 = fieldWeight in 2636, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2636)
0.01981914 = product of:
0.03963828 = sum of:
0.03963828 = weight(_text_:science in 2636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03963828 = score(doc=2636,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052230705 = queryNorm
0.2881068 = fieldWeight in 2636, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2636)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- The frequency of non-informative titles of journal articles was assessed for two fields: library and information science and sociology. The percentage of non informative titles was 21% in the formaer and 15% in the latter. In both fields, the non-informative titles, were concentratein only a few journals. The non-informative titles in library science were derived mainly from non-research journals. IN sociology the reasons for non-informative titles may be more complex; some of these journals are highly cited. For the improvement of retrievaleffiency the adoption of a policy encouraging informative titles (as in journals of chemistry) is recommended.
