Search (1413 results, page 1 of 71)

  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Verwer, K.: Freiheit und Verantwortung bei Hans Jonas (2011) 0.08 
    0.08291535 = product of:
  0.1658307 = sum of:
    0.1658307 = product of:
      0.4974921 = sum of:
        0.4974921 = weight(_text_:3a in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.4974921 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.44259444 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052204985 = queryNorm
            1.1240361 = fieldWeight in 973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=973)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fcreativechoice.org%2Fdoc%2FHansJonas.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1TM3teaYKgABL5H9yoIifA&opi=89978449.
  2. Guidi, F.; Sacerdoti Coen, C.: ¬A survey on retrieval of mathematical knowledge (2015) 0.08 
    0.081071354 = product of:
  0.16214271 = sum of:
    0.16214271 = sum of:
      0.091412164 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.091412164 = score(doc=5865,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.5788671 = fieldWeight in 5865, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5865)
      0.070730545 = weight(_text_:22 in 5865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.070730545 = score(doc=5865,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5865, 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=5865)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    We present a short survey of the literature on indexing and retrieval of mathematical knowledge, with pointers to 72 papers and tentative taxonomies of both retrieval problems and recurring techniques.
    Date
    22. 2.2017 12:51:57
  3. Xiong, C.: Knowledge based text representations for information retrieval (2016) 0.08 
    0.076387644 = sum of:
  0.055276908 = product of:
    0.16583072 = sum of:
      0.16583072 = weight(_text_:3a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.16583072 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.44259444 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
    0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.021110734 = product of:
    0.042221468 = sum of:
      0.042221468 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042221468 = score(doc=5820,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The successes of information retrieval (IR) in recent decades were built upon bag-of-words representations. Effective as it is, bag-of-words is only a shallow text understanding; there is a limited amount of information for document ranking in the word space. This dissertation goes beyond words and builds knowledge based text representations, which embed the external and carefully curated information from knowledge bases, and provide richer and structured evidence for more advanced information retrieval systems. This thesis research first builds query representations with entities associated with the query. Entities' descriptions are used by query expansion techniques that enrich the query with explanation terms. Then we present a general framework that represents a query with entities that appear in the query, are retrieved by the query, or frequently show up in the top retrieved documents. A latent space model is developed to jointly learn the connections from query to entities and the ranking of documents, modeling the external evidence from knowledge bases and internal ranking features cooperatively. To further improve the quality of relevant entities, a defining factor of our query representations, we introduce learning to rank to entity search and retrieve better entities from knowledge bases. In the document representation part, this thesis research also moves one step forward with a bag-of-entities model, in which documents are represented by their automatic entity annotations, and the ranking is performed in the entity space.
    This proposal includes plans to improve the quality of relevant entities with a co-learning framework that learns from both entity labels and document labels. We also plan to develop a hybrid ranking system that combines word based and entity based representations together with their uncertainties considered. At last, we plan to enrich the text representations with connections between entities. We propose several ways to infer entity graph representations for texts, and to rank documents using their structure representations. This dissertation overcomes the limitation of word based representations with external and carefully curated information from knowledge bases. We believe this thesis research is a solid start towards the new generation of intelligent, semantic, and structured information retrieval.
    Content
    Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Language and Information Technologies. Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cs.cmu.edu%2F~cx%2Fpapers%2Fknowledge_based_text_representation.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0SaTSvhWLTh__Uz_HtOtl3.
  4. Kleineberg, M.: Context analysis and context indexing : formal pragmatics in knowledge organization (2014) 0.07 
    0.06909613 = product of:
  0.13819227 = sum of:
    0.13819227 = product of:
      0.41457677 = sum of:
        0.41457677 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.41457677 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.44259444 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052204985 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja
  5. Gödert, W.; Hubrich, J.; Nagelschmidt, M.: Semantic knowledge representation for information retrieval (2014) 0.06 
    0.06310947 = product of:
  0.12621894 = sum of:
    0.12621894 = sum of:
      0.083780624 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.083780624 = score(doc=987,freq=14.0), product of:
          0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.5305404 = fieldWeight in 987, product of:
            3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
              14.0 = termFreq=14.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=987)
      0.04243833 = weight(_text_:22 in 987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04243833 = score(doc=987,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 987, 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=987)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Introduction: envisioning semantic information spacesIndexing and knowledge organization -- Semantic technologies for knowledge representation -- Information retrieval and knowledge exploration -- Approaches to handle heterogeneity -- Problems with establishing semantic interoperability -- Formalization in indexing languages -- Typification of semantic relations -- Inferences in retrieval processes -- Semantic interoperability and inferences -- Remaining research questions.
    Date
    23. 7.2017 13:49:22
    LCSH
    Information retrieval
    RSWK
    Information Retrieval
    Subject
    Information retrieval
    Information Retrieval
  6. Raieli, R.: ¬The semantic hole : enthusiasm and caution around multimedia information retrieval (2012) 0.06 
    0.06232588 = product of:
  0.12465176 = sum of:
    0.12465176 = sum of:
      0.07463771 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07463771 = score(doc=4888,freq=16.0), product of:
          0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.47264296 = fieldWeight in 4888, product of:
            4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
              16.0 = termFreq=16.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4888)
      0.05001405 = weight(_text_:22 in 4888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05001405 = score(doc=4888,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 4888, 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=4888)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This paper centres on the tools for the management of new digital documents, which are not only textual, but also visual-video, audio or multimedia in the full sense. Among the aims is to demonstrate that operating within the terms of generic Information Retrieval through textual language only is limiting, and it is instead necessary to consider ampler criteria, such as those of MultiMedia Information Retrieval, according to which, every type of digital document can be analyzed and searched by the proper elements of language for its proper nature. MMIR is presented as the organic complex of the systems of Text Retrieval, Visual Retrieval, Video Retrieval, and Audio Retrieval, each of which has an approach to information management that handles the concrete textual, visual, audio, or video content of the documents directly, here defined as content-based. In conclusion, the limits of this content-based objective access to documents is underlined. The discrepancy known as the semantic gap is that which occurs between semantic-interpretive access and content-based access. Finally, the integration of these conceptions is explained, gathering and composing the merits and the advantages of each of the approaches and of the systems to access to information.
    Date
    22. 1.2012 13:02:10
    Footnote
    Bezugnahme auf: Enser, P.G.B.: Visual image retrieval. In: Annual review of information science and technology. 42(2008), S.3-42.
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 39(2012) no.1, S.13-22
  7. Rekabsaz, N. et al.: Toward optimized multimodal concept indexing (2016) 0.06 
    0.06175369 = product of:
  0.12350738 = sum of:
    0.12350738 = sum of:
      0.052776836 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.052776836 = score(doc=2751,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 2751, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2751)
      0.070730545 = weight(_text_:22 in 2751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.070730545 = score(doc=2751,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2751, 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=2751)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    1. 2.2016 18:25:22
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  8. Kozikowski, P. et al.: Support of part-whole relations in query answering (2016) 0.06 
    0.06175369 = product of:
  0.12350738 = sum of:
    0.12350738 = sum of:
      0.052776836 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2754) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.052776836 = score(doc=2754,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 2754, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2754)
      0.070730545 = weight(_text_:22 in 2754) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.070730545 = score(doc=2754,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2754, 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=2754)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    1. 2.2016 18:25:22
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  9. Pobar, M. et al.: Multimodal image retrieval based on keywords and low-level image features (2016) 0.06 
    0.06175369 = product of:
  0.12350738 = sum of:
    0.12350738 = sum of:
      0.052776836 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.052776836 = score(doc=2757,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 2757, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2757)
      0.070730545 = weight(_text_:22 in 2757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.070730545 = score(doc=2757,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2757, 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=2757)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    1. 2.2016 18:25:22
  10. Zhou, Y. et al.: Analysing entity context in multilingual Wikipedia to support entity-centric retrieval applications (2016) 0.06 
    0.06175369 = product of:
  0.12350738 = sum of:
    0.12350738 = sum of:
      0.052776836 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.052776836 = score(doc=2758,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 2758, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2758)
      0.070730545 = weight(_text_:22 in 2758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.070730545 = score(doc=2758,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2758, 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=2758)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    1. 2.2016 18:25:22
  11. Marx, E. et al.: Exploring term networks for semantic search over RDF knowledge graphs (2016) 0.06 
    0.06175369 = product of:
  0.12350738 = sum of:
    0.12350738 = sum of:
      0.052776836 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.052776836 = score(doc=3279,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 3279, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3279)
      0.070730545 = weight(_text_:22 in 3279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.070730545 = score(doc=3279,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3279, 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=3279)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Metadata and semantics research: 10th International Conference, MTSR 2016, Göttingen, Germany, November 22-25, 2016, Proceedings. Eds.: E. Garoufallou
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  12. Kopácsi, S. et al.: Development of a classification server to support metadata harmonization in a long term preservation system (2016) 0.06 
    0.06175369 = product of:
  0.12350738 = sum of:
    0.12350738 = sum of:
      0.052776836 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.052776836 = score(doc=3280,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 3280, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3280)
      0.070730545 = weight(_text_:22 in 3280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.070730545 = score(doc=3280,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3280, 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=3280)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Metadata and semantics research: 10th International Conference, MTSR 2016, Göttingen, Germany, November 22-25, 2016, Proceedings. Eds.: E. Garoufallou
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  13. Sojka, P.; Liska, M.: ¬The art of mathematics retrieval (2011) 0.06 
    0.061133035 = product of:
  0.12226607 = sum of:
    0.12226607 = sum of:
      0.0522464 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0522464 = score(doc=3450,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 3450, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3450)
      0.07001967 = weight(_text_:22 in 3450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07001967 = score(doc=3450,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 3450, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3450)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The design and architecture of MIaS (Math Indexer and Searcher), a system for mathematics retrieval is presented, and design decisions are discussed. We argue for an approach based on Presentation MathML using a similarity of math subformulae. The system was implemented as a math-aware search engine based on the state-ofthe-art system Apache Lucene. Scalability issues were checked against more than 400,000 arXiv documents with 158 million mathematical formulae. Almost three billion MathML subformulae were indexed using a Solr-compatible Lucene.
    Content
    Vgl.: DocEng2011, September 19-22, 2011, Mountain View, California, USA Copyright 2011 ACM 978-1-4503-0863-2/11/09
    Date
    22. 2.2017 13:00:42
  14. Bouidghaghen, O.; Tamine, L.: Spatio-temporal based personalization for mobile search (2012) 0.05 
    0.052885264 = product of:
  0.10577053 = sum of:
    0.10577053 = sum of:
      0.0633322 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0633322 = score(doc=108,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 108, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=108)
      0.04243833 = weight(_text_:22 in 108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04243833 = score(doc=108,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 108, 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=108)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The explosion of the information available on the Internet has made traditional information retrieval systems, characterized by one size fits all approaches, less effective. Indeed, users are overwhelmed by the information delivered by such systems in response to their queries, particularly when the latter are ambiguous. In order to tackle this problem, the state-of-the-art reveals that there is a growing interest towards contextual information retrieval (CIR) which relies on various sources of evidence issued from the user's search background and environment, in order to improve the retrieval accuracy. This chapter focuses on mobile context, highlights challenges they present for IR, and gives an overview of CIR approaches applied in this environment. Then, the authors present an approach to personalize search results for mobile users by exploiting both cognitive and spatio-temporal contexts. The experimental evaluation undertaken in front of Yahoo search shows that the approach improves the quality of top search result lists and enhances search result precision.
    Date
    20. 4.2012 13:19:22
    Source
    Next generation search engines: advanced models for information retrieval. Eds.: C. Jouis, u.a
  15. Bawden, D.: Encountering on the road to serendip? : Browsing in new information environments (2011) 0.05 
    0.05087889 = product of:
  0.10175778 = sum of:
    0.10175778 = sum of:
      0.0522464 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3361) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0522464 = score(doc=3361,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 3361, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3361)
      0.04951138 = weight(_text_:22 in 3361) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04951138 = score(doc=3361,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3361, 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=3361)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This chapter considers the continuing relevance of the ideas of browsing, serendipity, information encountering and literature discovery in the context of the information retrieval (IR) environment of 2010, though its scope extends to the ideas in the broader contexts of information seeking and information-related behaviour. It is based around a selective review of the literature since 1990 and reflection and speculation on the results. The central focus is on questions of how the concept of browsing, serendipity and related ideas have changed in the new IR environment of the web and whether, indeed, they are still meaningfull concepts.
    Pages
    S.1-22
    Source
    Innovations in information retrieval: perspectives for theory and practice. Eds.: A. Foster, u. P. Rafferty
  16. Hjoerland, B.: Classical databases and knowledge organisation : a case for Boolean retrieval and human decision-making during search (2014) 0.05 
    0.050001718 = product of:
  0.100003436 = sum of:
    0.100003436 = sum of:
      0.06463816 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06463816 = score(doc=1398,freq=12.0), product of:
          0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.40932083 = fieldWeight in 1398, product of:
            3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
              12.0 = termFreq=12.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1398)
      0.035365272 = weight(_text_:22 in 1398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035365272 = score(doc=1398,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1398, 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=1398)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This paper considers classical bibliographic databases based on the Boolean retrieval model (for example MEDLINE and PsycInfo). This model is challenged by modern search engines and information retrieval (IR) researchers, who often consider Boolean retrieval as a less efficient approach. This speech examines this claim and argues for the continued value of Boolean systems, which implies two further issues: (1) the important role of human expertise in searching (expert searchers and "information literacy") and (2) the role of knowledge organization (KO) in the design and use of classical databases, including controlled vocabularies and human indexing. An underlying issue is the kind of retrieval system for which one should aim. It is suggested that Julian Warner's (2010) differentiation between the computer science traditions, aiming at automatically transforming queries into (ranked) sets of relevant documents, and an older library-orientated tradition aiming at increasing the "selection power" of users seems important. The Boolean retrieval model is important in order to provide users with the power to make informed searches and have full control over what is found and what is not found. These issues may also have important implications for the maintenance of information science and KO as research fields as well as for the information profession as a profession in its own right.
    Source
    Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
  17. Bergman, O.; Whittaker, S.; Falk, N.: Shared files : the retrieval perspective (2014) 0.05 
    0.050001718 = product of:
  0.100003436 = sum of:
    0.100003436 = sum of:
      0.06463816 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1495) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06463816 = score(doc=1495,freq=12.0), product of:
          0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.40932083 = fieldWeight in 1495, product of:
            3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
              12.0 = termFreq=12.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1495)
      0.035365272 = weight(_text_:22 in 1495) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035365272 = score(doc=1495,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1495, 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=1495)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    People who are collaborating can share files in two main ways: performing Group Information Management (GIM) using a common repository or performing Personal Information Management (PIM) by distributing files as e-mail attachments and storing them in personal repositories. There is a trend toward using common repositories with many organizations encouraging workers to use GIM to avoid duplication of files and management. So far, PIM and GIM have been studied by different research communities, so their effectiveness for file retrieval has not yet been systematically compared. We compared PIM and GIM in a large-scale elicited personal information retrieval study. We asked 275 users to retrieve 860 of their own shared files, testing the effect of sharing method on success and efficiency of retrieval. Participants preferred PIM over GIM. More important, PIM retrieval was more successful: Participants using GIM failed to find 22% of their files compared with 13% failures using PIM. This may be because active organization aids retrieval: When using personally created folders, the failure percentage was 65% lower than when using default folders (e.g., My Documents), and more than 5 times lower than when using folders created by others for GIM. Theoretical reasons for this are discussed.
  18. Frâncu, V.; Sabo, C.-N.: Implementation of a UDC-based multilingual thesaurus in a library catalogue : the case of BiblioPhil (2010) 0.05 
    0.048642814 = product of:
  0.09728563 = sum of:
    0.09728563 = sum of:
      0.0548473 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3697) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0548473 = score(doc=3697,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.34732026 = fieldWeight in 3697, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3697)
      0.04243833 = weight(_text_:22 in 3697) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04243833 = score(doc=3697,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3697, 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=3697)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    In order to enhance the use of Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) numbers in information retrieval, the authors have represented classification with multilingual thesaurus descriptors and implemented this solution in an automated way. The authors illustrate a solution implemented in a BiblioPhil library system. The standard formats used are UNIMARC for subject authority records (i.e. the UDC-based multilingual thesaurus) and MARC XML support for data transfer. The multilingual thesaurus was built according to existing standards, the constituent parts of the classification notations being used as the basis for search terms in the multilingual information retrieval. The verbal equivalents, descriptors and non-descriptors, are used to expand the number of concepts and are given in Romanian, English and French. This approach saves the time of the indexer and provides more user-friendly and easier access to the bibliographic information. The multilingual aspect of the thesaurus enhances information access for a greater number of online users
    Date
    22. 7.2010 20:40:56
    Theme
    Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
  19. Hjoerland, B.: ¬The importance of theories of knowledge : indexing and information retrieval as an example (2011) 0.05 
    0.048642814 = product of:
  0.09728563 = sum of:
    0.09728563 = sum of:
      0.0548473 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4359) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0548473 = score(doc=4359,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.34732026 = fieldWeight in 4359, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4359)
      0.04243833 = weight(_text_:22 in 4359) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04243833 = score(doc=4359,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4359, 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=4359)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    A recent study in information science (IS), raises important issues concerning the value of human indexing and basic theories of indexing and information retrieval, as well as the use of quantitative and qualitative approaches in IS and the underlying theories of knowledge informing the field. The present article uses L&E as the point of departure for demonstrating in what way more social and interpretative understandings may provide fruitful improvements for research in indexing, knowledge organization, and information retrieval. The artcle is motivated by the observation that philosophical contributions tend to be ignored in IS if they are not directly formed as criticisms or invitations to dialogs. It is part of the author's ongoing publication of articles about philosophical issues in IS and it is intended to be followed by analyzes of other examples of contributions to core issues in IS. Although it is formulated as a criticism of a specific paper, it should be seen as part of a general discussion of the philosophical foundation of IS and as a support to the emerging social paradigm in this field.
    Date
    17. 3.2011 19:22:55
  20. Jäger-Dengler-Harles, I.: Informationsvisualisierung und Retrieval im Fokus der Infromationspraxis (2013) 0.05 
    0.048642814 = product of:
  0.09728563 = sum of:
    0.09728563 = sum of:
      0.0548473 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1709) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0548473 = score(doc=1709,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.34732026 = fieldWeight in 1709, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1709)
      0.04243833 = weight(_text_:22 in 1709) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04243833 = score(doc=1709,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052204985 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1709, 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=1709)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Methoden und Techniken der Informationsvisualisierung werden seit ungefähr zwanzig Jahren im Bereich der Informationssuche eingesetzt. In dieser Literaturstudie werden ausgewählte Visualisierungsanwendungen der letzten Jahre vorgestellt. Sie betreffen zum einen den Retrievalprozess, das Boolesche Retrieval, die facettierte Suche, Dokumentbeziehungen, die Zufallssuche und Ergebnisanzeige, zum anderen spezielle Anwendungen wie die kartenbasierte und adaptive Visualisierung, Zitationsnetzwerke und Wissensordnungen. Die Einsatzszenarien für Applikationen der Informationsvisualisierung sind vielfältig. Sie reichen von mobilen kleinformatigen Anwendungen bis zu großformatigen Darstellungen auf hochauflösenden Bildschirmen, von integrativen Arbeitsplätzen für den einzelnen Nutzer bis zur Nutzung interaktiver Oberflächen für das kollaborative Retrieval. Das Konzept der Blended Library wird vorgestellt. Die Übertragbarkeit von Visualisierungsanwendungen auf Bibliothekskataloge wird im Hinblick auf die Nutzung des Kataloginputs und des Angebots an Sucheinstiegen geprüft. Perspektivische Überlegungen zu zukünftigen Entwicklungsschritten von Bibliothekskatalogen sowie zum Einfluss von Visualisierungsanwendungen auf die Informationspraxis werden angestellt.
    Date
    4. 2.2015 9:22:39

Authors

Languages

Types

  • a 1212
  • m 126
  • el 112
  • s 44
  • x 31
  • r 9
  • b 5
  • n 2
  • i 1
  • z 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications