Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

Bar-Ilan, J.: Evaluating the stability of the search tools Hotbot and Snap : a case study (2000) 0.03

0.03314337 = product of:
  0.13257349 = sum of:
    0.0837749 = weight(_text_:case in 1180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0837749 = score(doc=1180,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1742197 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.48085782 = fieldWeight in 1180, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1180)
    0.048798583 = weight(_text_:studies in 1180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048798583 = score(doc=1180,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.30860704 = fieldWeight in 1180, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1180)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)

Abstract: Discusses the results of a case study in which 20 random queries were presented for ten consecutive days to Hotbot and Snap, two search tools that draw their results from the database of Inktomi. The results show huge daily fluctuations in the number of hits retrieved by Hotbot, and high stability in the hits displayed by Snap. These findings are to alert users of Hotbot of its instability as of October 1999, and they raise questions about the reliability of previous studies estimating the size of Hotbot based on its overlap with other search engines.

Bar-Ilan, J.: On the overlap, the precision and estimated recall of search engines : a case study of the query 'Erdös' (1998) 0.01

0.0074047255 = product of:
  0.059237804 = sum of:
    0.059237804 = weight(_text_:case in 3753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059237804 = score(doc=3753,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1742197 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.34001783 = fieldWeight in 3753, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3753)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Bar-Ilan, J.: Methods for measuring search engine performance over time (2002) 0.01
```
0.0069712265 = product of:
  0.055769812 = sum of:
    0.055769812 = weight(_text_:studies in 305) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055769812 = score(doc=305,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.35269377 = fieldWeight in 305, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=305)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
```
Abstract

This study introduces methods for evaluating search engine performance over a time period. Several measures are defined, which as a whole describe search engine functionality over time. The necessary setup for such studies is described, and the use of these measures is illustrated through a specific example. The set of measures introduced here may serve as a guideline for the search engines for testing and improving their functionality. We recommend setting up a standard suite of measures for evaluating search engine performance.

Bar-Ilan, J.: Web links and search engine ranking : the case of Google and the query "Jew" (2006) 0.01

0.0052890894 = product of:
  0.042312715 = sum of:
    0.042312715 = weight(_text_:case in 6104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042312715 = score(doc=6104,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1742197 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.24286987 = fieldWeight in 6104, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6104)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M.; Bar-Ilan, J.; Levene, M.: Analysis of change in users' assessment of search results over time (2017) 0.01
```
0.0052890894 = product of:
  0.042312715 = sum of:
    0.042312715 = weight(_text_:case in 3593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042312715 = score(doc=3593,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1742197 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.24286987 = fieldWeight in 3593, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3593)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
```
Abstract

We present the first systematic study of the influence of time on user judgements for rankings and relevance grades of web search engine results. The goal of this study is to evaluate the change in user assessment of search results and explore how users' judgements change. To this end, we conducted a large-scale user study with 86 participants who evaluated 2 different queries and 4 diverse result sets twice with an interval of 2 months. To analyze the results we investigate whether 2 types of patterns of user behavior from the theory of categorical thinking hold for the case of evaluation of search results: (a) coarseness and (b) locality. To quantify these patterns we devised 2 new measures of change in user judgements and distinguish between local (when users swap between close ranks and relevance values) and nonlocal changes. Two types of judgements were considered in this study: (a) relevance on a 4-point scale, and (b) ranking on a 10-point scale without ties. We found that users tend to change their judgements of the results over time in about 50% of cases for relevance and in 85% of cases for ranking. However, the majority of these changes were local.

Bar-Ilan, J.; Levene, M.; Mat-Hassan, M.: Methods for evaluating dynamic changes in search engine rankings : a case study (2006) 0.00

0.004231272 = product of:
  0.033850174 = sum of:
    0.033850174 = weight(_text_:case in 616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033850174 = score(doc=616,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1742197 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.1942959 = fieldWeight in 616, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=616)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

Authors

Years

Themes