Search (34 results, page 1 of 2)

0.029918252 = product of:
  0.08975475 = sum of:
    0.08975475 = product of:
      0.13463213 = sum of:
        0.0992141 = weight(_text_:network in 825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0992141 = score(doc=825,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.51133573 = fieldWeight in 825, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=825)
        0.035418026 = weight(_text_:22 in 825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035418026 = score(doc=825,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 825, 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=825)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Relevance Feedback consists in automatically formulating a new query according to the relevance judgments provided by the user after evaluating a set of retrieved documents. In this article, we introduce several relevance feedback methods for the Bayesian Network Retrieval ModeL The theoretical frame an which our methods are based uses the concept of partial evidences, which summarize the new pieces of information gathered after evaluating the results obtained by the original query. These partial evidences are inserted into the underlying Bayesian network and a new inference process (probabilities propagation) is run to compute the posterior relevance probabilities of the documents in the collection given the new query. The quality of the proposed methods is tested using a preliminary experimentation with different standard document collections.

Date

22. 3.2003 19:30:19

0.02783372 = product of:
  0.08350116 = sum of:
    0.08350116 = product of:
      0.12525174 = sum of:
        0.095468804 = weight(_text_:network in 2393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.095468804 = score(doc=2393,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.492033 = fieldWeight in 2393, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2393)
        0.029782942 = weight(_text_:29 in 2393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029782942 = score(doc=2393,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 2393, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2393)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This article shows how a fuzzy ontology-based approach can improve semantic documents retrieval. After formally defining a fuzzy ontology and a fuzzy knowledge base, a special type of new fuzzy relationship called (semantic) correlation, which links the concepts or entities in a fuzzy ontology, is discussed. These correlations, first assigned by experts, are updated after querying or when a document has been inserted into a database. Moreover, in order to define a dynamic knowledge of a domain adapting itself to the context, it is shown how to handle a tradeoff between the correct definition of an object, taken in the ontology structure, and the actual meaning assigned by individuals. The notion of a fuzzy concept network is extended, incorporating database objects so that entities and documents can similarly be represented in the network. Information retrieval (IR) algorithm, using an object-fuzzy concept network (O-FCN), is introduced and described. This algorithm allows us to derive a unique path among the entities involved in the query to obtain maxima semantic associations in the knowledge domain. Finally, the study has been validated by querying a database using fuzzy recall, fuzzy precision, and coefficient variant measures in the crisp and fuzzy cases.

Date

9.11.2008 13:07:29

0.020599846 = product of:
  0.061799537 = sum of:
    0.061799537 = product of:
      0.092699304 = sum of:
        0.057281278 = weight(_text_:network in 2717) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057281278 = score(doc=2717,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.29521978 = fieldWeight in 2717, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2717)
        0.035418026 = weight(_text_:22 in 2717) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035418026 = score(doc=2717,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2717, 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=2717)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Previous work an search-engine design has indicated that information-seekers may benefit from being given the opportunity to exploit multiple sources of evidence of document relatedness. Few existing systems, however, give users more than minimal control over the selections that may be made among methods of exploitation. By applying the methods of "document network analysis" (DNA), a unifying, graph-theoretic model of content-, collaboration-, and context-based systems (CCC) may be developed in which the nature of the similarities between types of document relatedness and document ranking are clarified. The usefulness of the approach to system design suggested by this model may be tested by constructing and evaluating a prototype system (UCXtra) that allows searchers to maintain control over the multiple ways in which document collections may be ranked and re-ranked.

Date

11. 9.2004 17:32:22

0.01102379 = product of:
  0.03307137 = sum of:
    0.03307137 = product of:
      0.0992141 = sum of:
        0.0992141 = weight(_text_:network in 3161) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0992141 = score(doc=3161,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.51133573 = fieldWeight in 3161, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3161)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This paper studies how varied damping factors in the PageRank algorithm influence the ranking of authors and proposes weighted PageRank algorithms. We selected the 108 most highly cited authors in the information retrieval (IR) area from the 1970s to 2008 to form the author co-citation network. We calculated the ranks of these 108 authors based on PageRank with the damping factor ranging from 0.05 to 0.95. In order to test the relationship between different measures, we compared PageRank and weighted PageRank results with the citation ranking, h-index, and centrality measures. We found that in our author co-citation network, citation rank is highly correlated with PageRank with different damping factors and also with different weighted PageRank algorithms; citation rank and PageRank are not significantly correlated with centrality measures; and h-index rank does not significantly correlate with centrality measures but does significantly correlate with other measures. The key factors that have impact on the PageRank of authors in the author co-citation network are being co-cited with important authors.

0.009359876 = product of:
  0.028079625 = sum of:
    0.028079625 = product of:
      0.08423887 = sum of:
        0.08423887 = weight(_text_:29 in 5727) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08423887 = score(doc=5727,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.5496386 = fieldWeight in 5727, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5727)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

29. 1.1996 18:23:13

Source

Ciencia da informacao. 29(2000) no.3, S.5-13

0.009265803 = product of:
  0.027797408 = sum of:
    0.027797408 = product of:
      0.083392225 = sum of:
        0.083392225 = weight(_text_:29 in 4690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.083392225 = score(doc=4690,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.5441145 = fieldWeight in 4690, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4690)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Journal of information science. 29(2003) no.2, S.87-96

0.009182452 = product of:
  0.027547356 = sum of:
    0.027547356 = product of:
      0.08264206 = sum of:
        0.08264206 = weight(_text_:22 in 3445) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08264206 = score(doc=3445,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

25. 8.2005 17:42:22

0.008486116 = product of:
  0.025458349 = sum of:
    0.025458349 = product of:
      0.076375045 = sum of:
        0.076375045 = weight(_text_:network in 2564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.076375045 = score(doc=2564,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.3936264 = fieldWeight in 2564, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2564)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The classification of documents from a bibliographic database is a task that is linked to processes of information retrieval based on partial matching. A method is described of vectorizing reference documents from LISA which permits their topological organization using Kohonen's algorithm. As an example a map is generated of 202 documents from LISA, and an analysis is made of the possibilities of this type of neural network with respect to the development of information retrieval systems based on graphical browsing.

0.007942118 = product of:
  0.023826351 = sum of:
    0.023826351 = product of:
      0.07147905 = sum of:
        0.07147905 = weight(_text_:29 in 6415) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07147905 = score(doc=6415,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.46638384 = fieldWeight in 6415, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6415)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

29. 3.2002 17:24:03

0.007500738 = product of:
  0.022502214 = sum of:
    0.022502214 = product of:
      0.06750664 = sum of:
        0.06750664 = weight(_text_:network in 751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06750664 = score(doc=751,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.34791988 = fieldWeight in 751, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=751)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to suggest an alternative to the widely used Times Cited criterion for analysing citation networks. The approach involves taking account of the natures of the papers that cite a given paper, so as to differentiate between papers that attract the same number of citations. Design/methodology/approach - ArticleRank is an algorithm that has been derived from Google's PageRank algorithm to measure the influence of journal articles. ArticleRank is applied to two datasets - a citation network based on an early paper on webometrics, and a self-citation network based on the 19 most cited papers in the Journal of Documentation - using citation data taken from the Web of Knowledge database. Findings - ArticleRank values provide a different ranking of a set of papers from that provided by the corresponding Times Cited values, and overcomes the inability of the latter to differentiate between papers with the same numbers of citations. The difference in rankings between Times Cited and ArticleRank is greatest for the most heavily cited articles in a dataset. Originality/value - This is a novel application of the PageRank algorithm.

0.0053038225 = product of:
  0.015911467 = sum of:
    0.015911467 = product of:
      0.047734402 = sum of:
        0.047734402 = weight(_text_:network in 4218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047734402 = score(doc=4218,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.2460165 = fieldWeight in 4218, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4218)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This paper proposes a new machine learning method for constructing ranking models in document retrieval. The method, which is referred to as SSRank, aims to use the advantages of both the traditional Information Retrieval (IR) methods and the supervised learning methods for IR proposed recently. The advantages include the use of limited amount of labeled data and rich model representation. To do so, the method adopts a semi-supervised learning framework in ranking model construction. Specifically, given a small number of labeled documents with respect to some queries, the method effectively labels the unlabeled documents for the queries. It then uses all the labeled data to train a machine learning model (in our case, Neural Network). In the data labeling, the method also makes use of a traditional IR model (in our case, BM25). A stopping criterion based on machine learning theory is given for the data labeling process. Experimental results on three benchmark datasets and one web search dataset indicate that SSRank consistently and almost always significantly outperforms the baseline methods (unsupervised and supervised learning methods), given the same amount of labeled data. This is because SSRank can effectively leverage the use of unlabeled data in learning.

0.0052947453 = product of:
  0.015884236 = sum of:
    0.015884236 = product of:
      0.047652703 = sum of:
        0.047652703 = weight(_text_:29 in 2074) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047652703 = score(doc=2074,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 2074, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2074)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

31. 7.2008 19:58:29

0.0052947453 = product of:
  0.015884236 = sum of:
    0.015884236 = product of:
      0.047652703 = sum of:
        0.047652703 = weight(_text_:29 in 2101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047652703 = score(doc=2101,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 2101, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2101)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

1. 8.2008 12:29:05

0.005247115 = product of:
  0.015741345 = sum of:
    0.015741345 = product of:
      0.047224034 = sum of:
        0.047224034 = weight(_text_:22 in 5108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047224034 = score(doc=5108,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

20. 1.2007 18:30:22

0.005247115 = product of:
  0.015741345 = sum of:
    0.015741345 = product of:
      0.047224034 = sum of:
        0.047224034 = weight(_text_:22 in 1422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047224034 = score(doc=1422,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 3.2003 19:27:23

0.0046329014 = product of:
  0.013898704 = sum of:
    0.013898704 = product of:
      0.041696113 = sum of:
        0.041696113 = weight(_text_:29 in 2450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041696113 = score(doc=2450,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 2450, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2450)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22.11.2008 17:11:29

0.004591226 = product of:
  0.013773678 = sum of:
    0.013773678 = product of:
      0.04132103 = sum of:
        0.04132103 = weight(_text_:22 in 3276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04132103 = score(doc=3276,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3276, 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=3276)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

20. 3.2005 16:23:22

0.003971059 = product of:
  0.011913176 = sum of:
    0.011913176 = product of:
      0.035739526 = sum of:
        0.035739526 = weight(_text_:29 in 5705) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035739526 = score(doc=5705,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 5705, 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=5705)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

29. 9.2001 13:59:55

0.003971059 = product of:
  0.011913176 = sum of:
    0.011913176 = product of:
      0.035739526 = sum of:
        0.035739526 = weight(_text_:29 in 5764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035739526 = score(doc=5764,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 5764, 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=5764)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

29. 9.2001 14:00:39

0.003971059 = product of:
  0.011913176 = sum of:
    0.011913176 = product of:
      0.035739526 = sum of:
        0.035739526 = weight(_text_:29 in 174) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035739526 = score(doc=174,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 174, 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=174)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

29. 9.2001 17:52:51