Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Blair, D.C."
  1. Blair, D.C.: ¬The challenge of commercial document retrieval : Part II: a strategy for document searching based on identifiable document partitions (2002) 0.00
    0.0033633395 = product of:
      0.04708675 = sum of:
        0.04708675 = weight(_text_:representation in 2576) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04708675 = score(doc=2576,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
              0.025165197 = queryNorm
            0.40667427 = fieldWeight in 2576, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2576)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Abstract
    In the first article of this three-part series, three factors were identified as major influences on the effectiveness of document retrieval, where document retrieval is concerned with the access to intellectual content. These factors are, search exhaustivity, determinacy of representation and document collection size. In this article, some of the implications of these factors for document searching are discussed, and a two-part searching procedure based on identifiable partitions is proposed.
  2. Blair, D.C.: ¬The challenge of commercial document retrieval : Part I: Major issues, and a framework based on search exhaustivity, determinacy of representation and document collection size (2002) 0.00
    0.00237824 = product of:
      0.03329536 = sum of:
        0.03329536 = weight(_text_:representation in 2580) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03329536 = score(doc=2580,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
              0.025165197 = queryNorm
            0.28756213 = fieldWeight in 2580, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2580)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Abstract
    With the growing focus on what is collectively known as "knowledge management", a shift continues to take place in commercial information system development: a shift away from the well-understood data retrieval/database model, to the more complex and challenging development of commercial document/information retrieval models. While document retrieval has had a long and rich legacy of research, its impact on commercial applications has been modest. At the enterprise level most large organizations have little understanding of, or commitment to, high quality document access and management. Part of the reason for this is that we still do not have a good framework for understanding the major factors which affect the performance of large-scale corporate document retrieval systems. The thesis of this discussion is that document retrieval - specifically, access to intellectual content - is a complex process which is most strongly influenced by three factors: the size of the document collection; the type of search (exhaustive, existence or sample); and, the determinacy of document representation. Collectively, these factors can be used to provide a useful framework for, or taxonomy of, document retrieval, and highlight some of the fundamental issues facing the design and development of commercial document retrieval systems. This is the first of a series of three articles. Part II (D.C. Blair, The challenge of commercial document retrieval. Part II. A strategy for document searching based on identifiable document partitions, Information Processing and Management, 2001b, this issue) will discuss the implications of this framework for search strategy, and Part III (D.C. Blair, Some thoughts on the reported results of Text REtrieval Conference (TREC), Information Processing and Management, 2002, forthcoming) will consider the importance of the TREC results for our understanding of operating information retrieval systems.
  3. Blair, D.C.: Information retrieval and the philosophy of language (2002) 0.00
    0.0016816697 = product of:
      0.023543375 = sum of:
        0.023543375 = weight(_text_:representation in 4283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023543375 = score(doc=4283,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
              0.025165197 = queryNorm
            0.20333713 = fieldWeight in 4283, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4283)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Abstract
    Information retrieval - the retrieval, primarily, of documents or textual material - is fundamentally a linguistic process. At the very least we must describe what we want and match that description with descriptions of the information that is available to us. Furthermore, when we describe what we want, we must mean something by that description. This is a deceptively simple act, but such linguistic events have been the grist for philosophical analysis since Aristotle. Although there are complexities involved in referring to authors, document types, or other categories of information retrieval context, here I wish to focus an one of the most problematic activities in information retrieval: the description of the intellectual content of information items. And even though I take information retrieval to involve the description and retrieval of written text, what I say here is applicable to any information item whose intellectual content can be described for retrieval-books, documents, images, audio clips, video clips, scientific specimens, engineering schematics, and so forth. For convenience, though, I will refer only to the description and retrieval of documents. The description of intellectual content can go wrong in many obvious ways. We may describe what we want incorrectly; we may describe it correctly but in such general terms that its description is useless for retrieval; or we may describe what we want correctly, but misinterpret the descriptions of available information, and thereby match our description of what we want incorrectly. From a linguistic point of view, we can be misunderstood in the process of retrieval in many ways. Because the philosophy of language deals specifically with how we are understood and mis-understood, it should have some use for understanding the process of description in information retrieval. First, however, let us examine more closely the kinds of misunderstandings that can occur in information retrieval. We use language in searching for information in two principal ways. We use it to describe what we want and to discriminate what we want from other information that is available to us but that we do not want. Description and discrimination together articulate the goals of the information search process; they also delineate the two principal ways in which language can fail us in this process. Van Rijsbergen (1979) was the first to make this distinction, calling them "representation" and "discrimination.""
  4. Blair, D.C.: Language and representation in information retrieval (1991) 0.00
    0.0016816697 = product of:
      0.023543375 = sum of:
        0.023543375 = weight(_text_:representation in 1545) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023543375 = score(doc=1545,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
              0.025165197 = queryNorm
            0.20333713 = fieldWeight in 1545, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1545)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
  5. Blair, D.C.; Maron, M.E.: ¬An evaluation of retrieval effectiveness for a full-text document-retrieval system (1985) 0.00
    8.1916346E-4 = product of:
      0.011468288 = sum of:
        0.011468288 = product of:
          0.034404863 = sum of:
            0.034404863 = weight(_text_:29 in 1345) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034404863 = score(doc=1345,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.08852329 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.025165197 = queryNorm
                0.38865322 = fieldWeight in 1345, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1345)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Footnote
    Vgl. auch : Salton, G.: Another look ... Comm. ACM 29(1986) S.S.648-656; Blair, D.C.: Full text retrieval ... Int. Class. 13(1986) S.18-23: Blair, D.C., M.E. Maron: Full-text information retrieval ... Inf. proc. man. 26(1990) S.437-447.
  6. Blair, D.C.: STAIRS Redux : thoughts on the STAIRS evaluation, ten years after (1996) 0.00
    5.6825613E-4 = product of:
      0.007955586 = sum of:
        0.007955586 = product of:
          0.023866756 = sum of:
            0.023866756 = weight(_text_:22 in 3002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023866756 = score(doc=3002,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.08812423 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.025165197 = 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)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 47(1996) no.1, S.4-22
  7. Blair, D.C.: Full text retrieval : Evaluation and implications (1986) 0.00
    4.9149804E-4 = product of:
      0.006880972 = sum of:
        0.006880972 = product of:
          0.020642916 = sum of:
            0.020642916 = weight(_text_:29 in 2047) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020642916 = score(doc=2047,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.08852329 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.025165197 = queryNorm
                0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 2047, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2047)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Footnote
    Vgl.: Blair, D.C., M.E. Maron: An evaluation ... Comm. ACM 28(1985) S.280-299; Salton, G.: Another look ... Comm. ACM 29(1986) S.648-656; Blair, D.C., M.E. Maron: Full-text information retrieval ... Inf. Proc. Man. 26(1990) S.437-447.