-
Klas, C.-P.; Fuhr, N.; Schaefer, A.: Evaluating strategic support for information access in the DAFFODIL system (2004)
0.03
0.03244828 = product of:
0.06489656 = sum of:
0.046296693 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046296693 = score(doc=2419,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.30797386 = fieldWeight in 2419, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2419)
0.018599868 = product of:
0.037199736 = sum of:
0.037199736 = weight(_text_:22 in 2419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037199736 = score(doc=2419,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2419, 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=2419)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- The digital library system Daffodil is targeted at strategic support of users during the information search process. For searching, exploring and managing digital library objects it provides user-customisable information seeking patterns over a federation of heterogeneous digital libraries. In this paper evaluation results with respect to retrieval effectiveness, efficiency and user satisfaction are presented. The analysis focuses on strategic support for the scientific work-flow. Daffodil supports the whole work-flow, from data source selection over information seeking to the representation, organisation and reuse of information. By embedding high level search functionality into the scientific work-flow, the user experiences better strategic system support due to a more systematic work process. These ideas have been implemented in Daffodil followed by a qualitative evaluation. The evaluation has been conducted with 28 participants, ranging from information seeking novices to experts. The results are promising, as they support the chosen model.
- Date
- 16.11.2008 16:22:48
- Source
- Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 8th European conference, ECDL 2004, Bath, UK, September 12-17, 2004 : proceedings. Eds.: Heery, R. u. E. Lyon
-
Ruthven, I.; Lalmas, M.: Selective relevance feedback using term characteristics (1999)
0.01
0.013640295 = product of:
0.05456118 = sum of:
0.05456118 = weight(_text_:libraries in 3824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05456118 = score(doc=3824,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.36295068 = fieldWeight in 3824, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3824)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Vocabulary as a central concept in digital libraries: interdisciplinary concepts, challenges, and opportunities : proceedings of the Third International Conference an Conceptions of Library and Information Science (COLIS3), Dubrovnik, Croatia, 23-26 May 1999. Ed. by T. Arpanac et al
-
Voorhees, E.M.: Implementing agglomerative hierarchic clustering algorithms for use in document retrieval (1986)
0.01
0.012399912 = product of:
0.049599648 = sum of:
0.049599648 = product of:
0.099199295 = sum of:
0.099199295 = weight(_text_:22 in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.099199295 = score(doc=402,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 22(1986) no.6, S.465-476
-
Schaefer, A.; Jordan, M.; Klas, C.-P.; Fuhr, N.: Active support for query formulation in virtual digital libraries : a case study with DAFFODIL (2005)
0.01
0.0118128415 = product of:
0.047251366 = sum of:
0.047251366 = weight(_text_:libraries in 4296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047251366 = score(doc=4296,freq=6.0), product of:
0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.3143245 = fieldWeight in 4296, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4296)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Daffodil is a front-end to federated, heterogeneous digital libraries targeting at strategic support of users during the information seeking process. This is done by offering a variety of functions for searching, exploring and managing digital library objects. However, the distributed search increases response time and the conceptual model of the underlying search processes is inherently weaker. This makes query formulation harder and the resulting waiting times can be frustrating. In this paper, we investigate the concept of proactive support during the user's query formulation. For improving user efficiency and satisfaction, we implemented annotations, proactive support and error markers on the query form itself. These functions decrease the probability for syntactical or semantical errors in queries. Furthermore, the user is able to make better tactical decisions and feels more confident that the system handles the query properly. Evaluations with 30 subjects showed that user satisfaction is improved, whereas no conclusive results were received for efficiency.
- Source
- Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 9th European conference, ECDL 2005, Vienna, Austria, September 18-23, 2005 ; proceedings / Andreas Rauber ... (eds.)
-
Smeaton, A.F.; Rijsbergen, C.J. van: ¬The retrieval effects of query expansion on a feedback document retrieval system (1983)
0.01
0.010849923 = product of:
0.04339969 = sum of:
0.04339969 = product of:
0.08679938 = sum of:
0.08679938 = weight(_text_:22 in 2134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08679938 = score(doc=2134,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2134, 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=2134)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 30. 3.2001 13:32:22
-
Back, J.: ¬An evaluation of relevancy ranking techniques used by Internet search engines (2000)
0.01
0.010849923 = product of:
0.04339969 = sum of:
0.04339969 = product of:
0.08679938 = sum of:
0.08679938 = weight(_text_:22 in 3445) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08679938 = score(doc=3445,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3445, 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=3445)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 25. 8.2005 17:42:22
-
Lewandowski, D.: How can library materials be ranked in the OPAC? (2009)
0.01
0.009645144 = product of:
0.038580578 = sum of:
0.038580578 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2810) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038580578 = score(doc=2810,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.25664487 = fieldWeight in 2810, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2810)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Some Online Public Access Catalogues offer a ranking component. However, ranking there is merely text-based and is doomed to fail due to limited text in bibliographic data. The main assumption for the talk is that we are in a situation where the appropriate ranking factors for OPACs should be defined, while the implementation is no major problem. We must define what we want, and not so much focus on the technical work. Some deep thinking is necessary on the "perfect results set" and how we can achieve it through ranking. The talk presents a set of potential ranking factors and clustering possibilities for further discussion. A look at commercial Web search engines could provide us with ideas how ranking can be improved with additional factors. Search engines are way beyond pure text-based ranking and apply ranking factors in the groups like popularity, freshness, personalisation, etc. The talk describes the main factors used in search engines and how derivatives of these could be used for libraries' purposes. The goal of ranking is to provide the user with the best-suitable results on top of the results list. How can this goal be achieved with the library catalogue and also concerning the library's different collections and databases? The assumption is that ranking of such materials is a complex problem and is yet nowhere near solved. Libraries should focus on ranking to improve user experience.
-
Fuhr, N.: Ranking-Experimente mit gewichteter Indexierung (1986)
0.01
0.009299934 = product of:
0.037199736 = sum of:
0.037199736 = product of:
0.07439947 = sum of:
0.07439947 = weight(_text_:22 in 58) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07439947 = score(doc=58,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 58, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=58)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 14. 6.2015 22:12:44
-
Fuhr, N.: Rankingexperimente mit gewichteter Indexierung (1986)
0.01
0.009299934 = product of:
0.037199736 = sum of:
0.037199736 = product of:
0.07439947 = sum of:
0.07439947 = weight(_text_:22 in 2051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07439947 = score(doc=2051,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2051, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2051)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 14. 6.2015 22:12:56
-
French, J.C.; Powell, A.L.; Schulman, E.: Using clustering strategies for creating authority files (2000)
0.01
0.008184176 = product of:
0.032736704 = sum of:
0.032736704 = weight(_text_:libraries in 4811) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032736704 = score(doc=4811,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.2177704 = fieldWeight in 4811, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4811)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- As more online databases are integrated into digital libraries, the issue of quality control of the data becomes increasingly important, especially as it relates to the effective retrieval of information. Authority work, the need to discover and reconcile variant forms of strings in bibliographical entries, will become more critical in the future. Spelling variants, misspellings, and transliteration differences will all increase the difficulty of retrieving information. We investigate a number of approximate string matching techniques that have traditionally been used to help with this problem. We then introduce the notion of approximate word matching and show how it can be used to improve detection and categorization of variant forms. We demonstrate the utility of these approaches using data from the Astrophysics Data System and show how we can reduce the human effort involved in the creation of authority files
-
Van der Veer Martens, B.; Fleet, C. van: Opening the black box of "relevance work" : a domain analysis (2012)
0.01
0.008184176 = product of:
0.032736704 = sum of:
0.032736704 = weight(_text_:libraries in 247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032736704 = score(doc=247,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.2177704 = fieldWeight in 247, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=247)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- In response to Hjørland's recent call for a reconceptualization of the foundations of relevance, we suggest that the sociocognitive aspects of intermediation by information agencies, such as archives and libraries, are a necessary and unexplored part of the infrastructure of the subject knowledge domains central to his recommended "view of relevance informed by a social paradigm" (2010, p. 217). From a comparative analysis of documents from 39 graduate-level introductory courses in archives, reference, and strategic/competitive intelligence taught in 13 American Library Association-accredited library and information science (LIS) programs, we identify four defining sociocognitive dimensions of "relevance work" in information agencies within Hjørland's proposed framework for relevance: tasks, time, systems, and assessors. This study is intended to supply sociocognitive content from within the relevance work domain to support further domain analytic research, and to emphasize the importance of intermediary relevance work for all subject knowledge domains.
-
Jacso, P.: Testing the calculation of a realistic h-index in Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science for F. W. Lancaster (2008)
0.01
0.0068201474 = product of:
0.02728059 = sum of:
0.02728059 = weight(_text_:libraries in 5586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02728059 = score(doc=5586,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.18147534 = fieldWeight in 5586, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5586)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Content
- Beitrag in einem Themenheft 'The Influence of F. W. Lancaster on Information Science and on Libraries', das als Festschrift für F.W. Lancaster deklariert ist.
-
MacFarlane, A.; Robertson, S.E.; McCann, J.A.: Parallel computing for passage retrieval (2004)
0.01
0.006199956 = product of:
0.024799824 = sum of:
0.024799824 = product of:
0.049599648 = sum of:
0.049599648 = weight(_text_:22 in 5108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049599648 = score(doc=5108,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5108, 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=5108)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 20. 1.2007 18:30:22
-
Faloutsos, C.: Signature files (1992)
0.01
0.006199956 = product of:
0.024799824 = sum of:
0.024799824 = product of:
0.049599648 = sum of:
0.049599648 = weight(_text_:22 in 3499) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049599648 = score(doc=3499,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3499, 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=3499)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 7. 5.1999 15:22:48
-
Losada, D.E.; Barreiro, A.: Emebedding term similarity and inverse document frequency into a logical model of information retrieval (2003)
0.01
0.006199956 = product of:
0.024799824 = sum of:
0.024799824 = product of:
0.049599648 = sum of:
0.049599648 = weight(_text_:22 in 1422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049599648 = score(doc=1422,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1422, 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=1422)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 22. 3.2003 19:27:23
-
Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.: From P100 to P100' : a new citation-rank approach (2014)
0.01
0.006199956 = product of:
0.024799824 = sum of:
0.024799824 = product of:
0.049599648 = sum of:
0.049599648 = weight(_text_:22 in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049599648 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1431, 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=1431)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 22. 8.2014 17:05:18
-
Tober, M.; Hennig, L.; Furch, D.: SEO Ranking-Faktoren und Rang-Korrelationen 2014 : Google Deutschland (2014)
0.01
0.006199956 = product of:
0.024799824 = sum of:
0.024799824 = product of:
0.049599648 = sum of:
0.049599648 = weight(_text_:22 in 1484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049599648 = score(doc=1484,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1484, 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=1484)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 13. 9.2014 14:45:22
-
Ravana, S.D.; Rajagopal, P.; Balakrishnan, V.: Ranking retrieval systems using pseudo relevance judgments (2015)
0.01
0.0054800385 = product of:
0.021920154 = sum of:
0.021920154 = product of:
0.043840308 = sum of:
0.043840308 = weight(_text_:22 in 2591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043840308 = score(doc=2591,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2591, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2591)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
18. 9.2018 18:22:56
-
Henzinger, M.R.: Hyperlink analysis for the Web (2001)
0.01
0.005456118 = product of:
0.021824472 = sum of:
0.021824472 = weight(_text_:libraries in 8) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021824472 = score(doc=8,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1503267 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.14518027 = fieldWeight in 8, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=8)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Content
- Information retrieval is a computer science subfield whose goal is to find all documents relevant to a user query in a given collection of documents. As such, information retrieval should really be called document retrieval. Before the advent of the Web, IR systems were typically installed in libraries for use mostly by reference librarians. The retrieval algorithm for these systems was usually based exclusively on analysis of the words in the document. The Web changed all this. Now each Web user has access to various search engines whose retrieval algorithms often use not only the words in the documents but also information like the hyperlink structure of the Web or markup language tags. How are hyperlinks useful? The hyperlink functionality alone-that is, the hyperlink to Web page B that is contained in Web page A-is not directly useful in information retrieval. However, the way Web page authors use hyperlinks can give them valuable information content. Authors usually create hyperlinks they think will be useful to readers. Some may be navigational aids that, for example, take the reader back to the site's home page; others provide access to documents that augment the content of the current page. The latter tend to point to highquality pages that might be on the same topic as the page containing the hyperlink. Web information retrieval systems can exploit this information to refine searches for relevant documents. Hyperlink analysis significantly improves the relevance of the search results, so much so that all major Web search engines claim to use some type of hyperlink analysis. However, the search engines do not disclose details about the type of hyperlink analysis they perform- mostly to avoid manipulation of search results by Web-positioning companies. In this article, I discuss how hyperlink analysis can be applied to ranking algorithms, and survey other ways Web search engines can use this analysis.
-
Chang, C.-H.; Hsu, C.-C.: Integrating query expansion and conceptual relevance feedback for personalized Web information retrieval (1998)
0.01
0.0054249614 = product of:
0.021699846 = sum of:
0.021699846 = product of:
0.04339969 = sum of:
0.04339969 = weight(_text_:22 in 1319) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04339969 = score(doc=1319,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1602465 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045760795 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1319, 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=1319)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:08:06
