Search (9 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Robertson, S.E."
  1. Robertson, S.E.; Hancock-Beaulieu, M.M.: On the evaluation of IR systems (1992) 0.02
    0.021780973 = product of:
      0.043561947 = sum of:
        0.043561947 = product of:
          0.08712389 = sum of:
            0.08712389 = weight(_text_:systems in 2619) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08712389 = score(doc=2619,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.5432656 = fieldWeight in 2619, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2619)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  2. MacFarlane, A.; Robertson, S.E.; McCann, J.A.: Parallel computing in information retrieval : an updated review (1997) 0.02
    0.015401474 = product of:
      0.030802948 = sum of:
        0.030802948 = product of:
          0.061605897 = sum of:
            0.061605897 = weight(_text_:systems in 7450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.061605897 = score(doc=7450,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.38414678 = fieldWeight in 7450, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7450)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Reviews the progress of parallel computing in information retrieval. Stresses the importance of the motivation is using parallel computing for text retrieval. Analyzes parallel IR systems using a classification defined by Rasmussen and describes some parallel IR systems. Gives a description of the retrieval models used in parallel information processing and notes areas where research is needed
  3. Robertson, S.E.: Overview of the Okapi projects (1997) 0.02
    0.015401474 = product of:
      0.030802948 = sum of:
        0.030802948 = product of:
          0.061605897 = sum of:
            0.061605897 = weight(_text_:systems in 4703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.061605897 = score(doc=4703,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.38414678 = fieldWeight in 4703, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4703)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Gives a brief description of the Okapi projects and of the work of the centre for Interactive Systems Research in the Department of Information Science at City University, London,UK, where these projects have been developed. Describes firstly one version of an information retrieval system which contains some of the central features of the Okapi projects, and follows this with an indication of the variety of systems now implemented or implementable within the present setup
  4. MacFarlane, A.; Robertson, S.E.; McCann, J.A.: Parallel computing for passage retrieval (2004) 0.01
    0.014140441 = product of:
      0.028280882 = sum of:
        0.028280882 = product of:
          0.056561764 = sum of:
            0.056561764 = weight(_text_:22 in 5108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.056561764 = score(doc=5108,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    20. 1.2007 18:30:22
  5. Robertson, S.E.; Beaulieu, M.: Research and evaluation in information retrieval (1997) 0.01
    0.010890487 = product of:
      0.021780973 = sum of:
        0.021780973 = product of:
          0.043561947 = sum of:
            0.043561947 = weight(_text_:systems in 7445) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043561947 = score(doc=7445,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.2716328 = fieldWeight in 7445, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7445)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Offered as a discussion document drawing on the experiences of the Okapi team in developing information retrieval systems. Raises some of the issues currently exercising the information retrieval community in the context of experimentation and evaluation
  6. Robertson, S.E.; Walker, S.; Beaulieu, M.: Laboratory experiments with Okapi : participation in the TREC programme (1997) 0.01
    0.009529176 = product of:
      0.019058352 = sum of:
        0.019058352 = product of:
          0.038116705 = sum of:
            0.038116705 = weight(_text_:systems in 2216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.038116705 = score(doc=2216,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 2216, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2216)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Briefly reviews the history of laboratory testing of information retrieval systems, focusing on the idea of a general purpose test collection of documents, queries and relevance judgements. Gives an overview of the methods used in TREC (Text Retrieval Conference) which is concerned with an ideal test collection, and discusses the Okapi team's participation in TREC. Also discusses some of the issues surrounding the difficult problem of interactive evaluation in TREC. The reconciliation of the requirements of the laboratory context with the concerns of interactive retrieval has a long way to go
  7. MacFarlane, A.; McCann, J.A.; Robertson, S.E.: Parallel methods for the generation of partitioned inverted files (2005) 0.01
    0.008167865 = product of:
      0.01633573 = sum of:
        0.01633573 = product of:
          0.03267146 = sum of:
            0.03267146 = weight(_text_:systems in 651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03267146 = score(doc=651,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 651, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=651)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The generation of inverted indexes is one of the most computationally intensive activities for information retrieval systems: indexing large multi-gigabyte text databases can take many hours or even days to complete. We examine the generation of partitioned inverted files in order to speed up the process of indexing. Two types of index partitions are investigated: TermId and DocId. Design/methodology/approach - We use standard measures used in parallel computing such as speedup and efficiency to examine the computing results and also the space costs of our trial indexing experiments. Findings - The results from runs on both partitioning methods are compared and contrasted, concluding that DocId is the more efficient method. Practical implications - The practical implications are that the DocId partitioning method would in most circumstances be used for distributing inverted file data in a parallel computer, particularly if indexing speed is the primary consideration. Originality/value - The paper is of value to database administrators who manage large-scale text collections, and who need to use parallel computing to implement their text retrieval services.
  8. Vechtomova, O.; Karamuftuoglum, M.; Robertson, S.E.: On document relevance and lexical cohesion between query terms (2006) 0.01
    0.008167865 = product of:
      0.01633573 = sum of:
        0.01633573 = product of:
          0.03267146 = sum of:
            0.03267146 = weight(_text_:systems in 987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03267146 = score(doc=987,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 987, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=987)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Lexical cohesion is a property of text, achieved through lexical-semantic relations between words in text. Most information retrieval systems make use of lexical relations in text only to a limited extent. In this paper we empirically investigate whether the degree of lexical cohesion between the contexts of query terms' occurrences in a document is related to its relevance to the query. Lexical cohesion between distinct query terms in a document is estimated on the basis of the lexical-semantic relations (repetition, synonymy, hyponymy and sibling) that exist between there collocates - words that co-occur with them in the same windows of text. Experiments suggest significant differences between the lexical cohesion in relevant and non-relevant document sets exist. A document ranking method based on lexical cohesion shows some performance improvements.
  9. Robertson, S.E.; Sparck Jones, K.: Simple, proven approaches to text retrieval (1997) 0.01
    0.0068065543 = product of:
      0.013613109 = sum of:
        0.013613109 = product of:
          0.027226217 = sum of:
            0.027226217 = weight(_text_:systems in 4532) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027226217 = score(doc=4532,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 4532, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4532)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This technical note describes straightforward techniques for document indexing and retrieval that have been solidly established through extensive testing and are easy to apply. They are useful for many different types of text material, are viable for very large files, and have the advantage that they do not require special skills or training for searching, but are easy for end users. The document and text retrieval methods described here have a sound theoretical basis, are well established by extensive testing, and the ideas involved are now implemented in some commercial retrieval systems. Testing in the last few years has, in particular, shown that the methods presented here work very well with full texts, not only title and abstracts, and with large files of texts containing three quarters of a million documents. These tests, the TREC Tests (see Harman 1993 - 1997; IP&M 1995), have been rigorous comparative evaluations involving many different approaches to information retrieval. These techniques depend an the use of simple terms for indexing both request and document texts; an term weighting exploiting statistical information about term occurrences; an scoring for request-document matching, using these weights, to obtain a ranked search output; and an relevance feedback to modify request weights or term sets in iterative searching. The normal implementation is via an inverted file organisation using a term list with linked document identifiers, plus counting data, and pointers to the actual texts. The user's request can be a word list, phrases, sentences or extended text.