-
Blair, D.C.: STAIRS Redux : thoughts on the STAIRS evaluation, ten years after (1996)
0.03
0.029282015 = product of:
0.11712806 = sum of:
0.11712806 = sum of:
0.07319321 = weight(_text_:aspects in 3002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07319321 = score(doc=3002,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.3495657 = fieldWeight in 3002, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3002)
0.043934856 = weight(_text_:22 in 3002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043934856 = score(doc=3002,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = 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)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- The test of retrieval effectiveness performed on IBM's STAIRS and reported in 'Communications of the ACM' 10 years ago, continues to be cited frequently in the information retrieval literature. The reasons for the study's continuing pertinence to today's research are discussed, and the political, legal, and commercial aspects of the study are presented. In addition, the method of calculating recall that was used in the STAIRS study is discussed in some detail, especially how it reduces the 5 major types of uncertainty in recall estimations. It is also suggested that this method of recall estimation may serve as the basis for recall estimations that might be truly comparable between systems
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 47(1996) no.1, S.4-22
-
Belkin, N.J.: ¬An overview of results from Rutgers' investigations of interactive information retrieval (1998)
0.02
0.020915726 = product of:
0.083662905 = sum of:
0.083662905 = sum of:
0.052280862 = weight(_text_:aspects in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052280862 = score(doc=2339,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.2496898 = fieldWeight in 2339, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2339)
0.031382043 = weight(_text_:22 in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031382043 = score(doc=2339,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2339, 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=2339)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Over the last 4 years, the Information Interaction Laboratory at Rutgers' School of communication, Information and Library Studies has performed a series of investigations concerned with various aspects of people's interactions with advanced information retrieval (IR) systems. We have benn especially concerned with understanding not just what people do, and why, and with what effect, but also with what they would like to do, and how they attempt to accomplish it, and with what difficulties. These investigations have led to some quite interesting conclusions about the nature and structure of people's interactions with information, about support for cooperative human-computer interaction in query reformulation, and about the value of visualization of search results for supporting various forms of interaction with information. In this discussion, I give an overview of the research program and its projects, present representative results from the projects, and discuss some implications of these results for support of subject searching in information retrieval systems
- Date
- 22. 9.1997 19:16:05
-
Keen, E.M.: Aspects of computer-based indexing languages (1991)
0.01
0.014787261 = product of:
0.059149045 = sum of:
0.059149045 = product of:
0.11829809 = sum of:
0.11829809 = weight(_text_:aspects in 5072) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11829809 = score(doc=5072,freq=4.0), product of:
0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.56498355 = fieldWeight in 5072, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5072)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Comments on the relative rarity of research articles on theoretical aspects of subject indexing in computerised retrieval systems and the predominance of articles on software packages and hardware. Concludes that controlled indexing still has a future but points to major differences from the past
-
Voorbij, H.: Title keywords and subject descriptors : a comparison of subject search entries of books in the humanities and social sciences (1998)
0.01
0.014386819 = product of:
0.057547275 = sum of:
0.057547275 = weight(_text_:social in 4721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.057547275 = score(doc=4721,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.3115296 = fieldWeight in 4721, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4721)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- In order to compare the value of subject descriptors and title keywords as entries to subject searches, two studies were carried out. Both studies concentrated on monographs in the humanities and social sciences, held by the online public access catalogue of the National Library of the Netherlands. In the first study, a comparison was made by subject librarians between the subject descriptors and the title keywords of 475 records. They could express their opinion on a scale from 1 (descriptor is exactly or almost the same as word in title) to 7 (descriptor does not appear in title at all). It was concluded that 37 per cent of the records are considerably enhanced by a subject descriptor, and 49 per cent slightly or considerably enhanced. In the second study, subject librarians performed subject searches using title keywords and subject descriptors on the same topic. The relative recall amounted to 48 per cent and 86 per cent respectively. Failure analysis revealed the reasons why so many records that were found by subject descriptors were not found by title keywords. First, although completely meaningless titles hardly ever appear, the title of a publication does not always offer sufficient clues for title keyword searching. In those cases, descriptors may enhance the record of a publication. A second and even more important task of subject descriptors is controlling the vocabulary. Many relevant titles cannot be retrieved by title keyword searching because of the wide diversity of ways of expressing a topic. Descriptors take away the burden of vocabulary control from the user.
-
Mokros, H.B.; Mullins, L.S.; Saracevic, T.: Practice and personhood in professional interaction : social identities and information needs (1995)
0.01
0.01220762 = product of:
0.04883048 = sum of:
0.04883048 = weight(_text_:social in 4080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04883048 = score(doc=4080,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.26434162 = fieldWeight in 4080, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4080)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
-
Tomaiuolo, N.G.; Parker, J.: Maximizing relevant retrieval : keyword and natural language searching (1998)
0.01
0.010983714 = product of:
0.043934856 = sum of:
0.043934856 = product of:
0.08786971 = sum of:
0.08786971 = weight(_text_:22 in 6418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08786971 = score(doc=6418,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6418, 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=6418)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Online. 22(1998) no.6, S.57-58
-
Dalrymple, P.W.: Retrieval by reformulation in two library catalogs : toward a cognitive model of searching behavior (1990)
0.01
0.010983714 = product of:
0.043934856 = sum of:
0.043934856 = product of:
0.08786971 = sum of:
0.08786971 = weight(_text_:22 in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08786971 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 5089, 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=5089)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 18:43:54
-
Saracevic, T.: Individual differences in organizing, searching and retrieving information (1991)
0.01
0.010456172 = product of:
0.041824687 = sum of:
0.041824687 = product of:
0.083649375 = sum of:
0.083649375 = weight(_text_:aspects in 3692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.083649375 = score(doc=3692,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.39950368 = fieldWeight in 3692, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3692)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Synthesises the major findings of several decades of research into the magnitude of individual deffirences in information retrieval related tasks and suggests implications for practice and design. The study is related to a series of studies of human aspects and cognitive decision making in information seeking, searching and retrieving
-
Keen, E.M.: Some aspects of proximity searching in text retrieval systems (1992)
0.01
0.010456172 = product of:
0.041824687 = sum of:
0.041824687 = product of:
0.083649375 = sum of:
0.083649375 = weight(_text_:aspects in 6190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.083649375 = score(doc=6190,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.39950368 = fieldWeight in 6190, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6190)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
-
Allen, B.: Logical reasoning and retrieval performance (1993)
0.01
0.009149151 = product of:
0.036596604 = sum of:
0.036596604 = product of:
0.07319321 = sum of:
0.07319321 = weight(_text_:aspects in 5093) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07319321 = score(doc=5093,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.3495657 = fieldWeight in 5093, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5093)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Tests the logical reasoning ability of end users of a CD-ROM index and assesses associations between different levels of this ability and aspects of retrieval performance. Users' selection of vocabulary and their selection of citations for further examination are both influenced by this ability. The designs of information systems should address the effects of logical reasoning on search behaviour. People with lower levels of logical reasoning ability may experience difficulty using systems in which user selectivity plays an important role. Other systems, such as those with ranked output, may decrease the need for users to make selections and would be easier to use for people with lower levels of logical reasoning ability
-
Tillotson, J.: Is keyword searching the answer? (1995)
0.01
0.009149151 = product of:
0.036596604 = sum of:
0.036596604 = product of:
0.07319321 = sum of:
0.07319321 = weight(_text_:aspects in 1857) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07319321 = score(doc=1857,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.3495657 = fieldWeight in 1857, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1857)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Examines 3 aspects of keyword searching to see if defaulting to keyword searches might serve as a solution to the problems users find when performing subject searches in OPACs. Investigates if keyword searching produces useful results; if people who use keyword searches to find information on a subject report that they are satisfied with the results; and how keyword searching and controlled vocabulary searching are offered and explained in currently available OPAC interfaces. Concludes that both keyword and controlled vocabulary searching ought to be easily available in an OPAC, and that improvements need to be made in explanation and help offered to subject searchers
-
Allan, J.; Callan, J.P.; Croft, W.B.; Ballesteros, L.; Broglio, J.; Xu, J.; Shu, H.: INQUERY at TREC-5 (1997)
0.01
0.007845511 = product of:
0.031382043 = sum of:
0.031382043 = product of:
0.062764086 = sum of:
0.062764086 = weight(_text_:22 in 3103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.062764086 = score(doc=3103,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3103, 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=3103)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 27. 2.1999 20:55:22
-
Ng, K.B.; Loewenstern, D.; Basu, C.; Hirsh, H.; Kantor, P.B.: Data fusion of machine-learning methods for the TREC5 routing tak (and other work) (1997)
0.01
0.007845511 = product of:
0.031382043 = sum of:
0.031382043 = product of:
0.062764086 = sum of:
0.062764086 = weight(_text_:22 in 3107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.062764086 = score(doc=3107,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3107, 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=3107)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 27. 2.1999 20:59:22
-
Khan, K.; Locatis, C.: Searching through cyberspace : the effects of link display and link density on information retrieval from hypertext on the World Wide Web (1998)
0.01
0.007842129 = product of:
0.031368516 = sum of:
0.031368516 = product of:
0.06273703 = sum of:
0.06273703 = weight(_text_:aspects in 446) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06273703 = score(doc=446,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.29962775 = fieldWeight in 446, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=446)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- This study investigated information retrieval from hypertext on the WWW. Significant main and interaction effects were found for both link density (number of links per display) and display format (in paragraphs or lists) on search performance. Low link densities displayed in list format produced the best overall results, in terms of search accuracy, search time, number of links explored, and search task prioritization. Lower densities affected user ability to prioritize search tasks and produced more accurate searches, while list displays positively affected all aspects of searching except task prioritization. The performance of novices and experts, in terms of their previous experience browsing hypertext on the WWW, was compared. Experts performed better, mostly because of their superior task prioritization
-
Ellis, D.: ¬The dilemma of measurement in information retrieval research (1996)
0.01
0.0065351077 = product of:
0.026140431 = sum of:
0.026140431 = product of:
0.052280862 = sum of:
0.052280862 = weight(_text_:aspects in 3003) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052280862 = score(doc=3003,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.2496898 = fieldWeight in 3003, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3003)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- The problem of measurement in information retrieval research is traced to its source in the first retrieval tests. The problem is seen as presenting a chronic dilemma for the field. This dilemma has taken 3 forms as the discipline has evloved: (1) the dilemma of measurement in the archetypal approach: stated relevance versus user relevance; (2) the dilemma of measurement in the probabilistic approach: realism versus formalism; and (3) the dilemma of measurement in the Information Retrieval-Expert System (IR-ES) approach: linear measures of relevance versus logarithmic measures of knowledge. It is argued that the dilemma of measurement has remained intractable even given the different assumptions of the different approaches for 3 connecte reasons - the nature of the subject matter of the field; the nature of relevance jidgement; and the nature of cognition and knowledge. Finally, it is concluded that the original vision of information retrieval research as a discipline founded on quantification proved restricting for its theoretical and methodological development and that increasing recognition of this is reflected in growing interest in qualitative methods in information retrieval research in relation to cognitive, behavioral, and affective aspects of the information retrieval interaction
-
Gluck, M.: Exploring the relationship between user satisfaction and relevance in information systems (1996)
0.01
0.0065351077 = product of:
0.026140431 = sum of:
0.026140431 = product of:
0.052280862 = sum of:
0.052280862 = weight(_text_:aspects in 4082) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052280862 = score(doc=4082,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.2496898 = fieldWeight in 4082, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4082)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Aims to better understand the relationship between relevance and user satisfaction, the 2 predominant aspects of user based performance in information systems. Unconfounds relevance and user satisfaction assessments of system performance at the retrieved item level. To minimize the idiosyncrasies of any one system, a generalized, naturalistic information system was employed in this study. Respondents completed sensemaking timeline questionnaires in which they described a recent need they had for geographic information. Retrieved documents from the generalized system consisted of the responses users obtained while resolving their information needs. Respondents directly provided process, product, cost benefit, and overall satisfaction assessments with the generalized geographic systems. Relevance judgements of retrieved items were obtained through content analysis from sensemaking questionnaires as a secondary observation technique. The content analysis provided relevance values on both 5 category and 2 category scales. Results indicate that relevance has strong relationships with process, product and overall user satisfaction measures while relevance and cost benefit satisfaction measures have no significant relationship. This analysis also indicates that neither relevance nor user satisfaction subsumes the other concept, and that understanding the proper units of analysis for these measures helps resolve the paradox of the management information system and information science literature not informing aech other concerning user based information system performance measures
-
Sanderson, M.: ¬The Reuters test collection (1996)
0.01
0.006276408 = product of:
0.025105633 = sum of:
0.025105633 = product of:
0.050211266 = sum of:
0.050211266 = weight(_text_:22 in 6971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050211266 = score(doc=6971,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6971, 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=6971)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Information retrieval: new systems and current research. Proceedings of the 16th Research Colloquium of the British Computer Society Information Retrieval Specialist Group, Drymen, Scotland, 22-23 Mar 94. Ed.: R. Leon
-
Lespinasse, K.: TREC: une conference pour l'evaluation des systemes de recherche d'information (1997)
0.01
0.006276408 = product of:
0.025105633 = sum of:
0.025105633 = product of:
0.050211266 = sum of:
0.050211266 = weight(_text_:22 in 744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050211266 = score(doc=744,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 744, 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=744)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
-
¬The Fifth Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-5) (1997)
0.01
0.006276408 = product of:
0.025105633 = sum of:
0.025105633 = product of:
0.050211266 = sum of:
0.050211266 = weight(_text_:22 in 3087) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050211266 = score(doc=3087,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3087, 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=3087)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Proceedings of the 5th TREC-confrerence held in Gaithersburgh, Maryland, Nov 20-22, 1996. Aim of the conference was discussion on retrieval techniques for large test collections. Different research groups used different techniques, such as automated thesauri, term weighting, natural language techniques, relevance feedback and advanced pattern matching, for information retrieval from the same large database. This procedure makes it possible to compare the results. The proceedings include papers, tables of the system results, and brief system descriptions including timing and storage information
-
Pemberton, J.K.; Ojala, M.; Garman, N.: Head to head : searching the Web versus traditional services (1998)
0.01
0.006276408 = product of:
0.025105633 = sum of:
0.025105633 = product of:
0.050211266 = sum of:
0.050211266 = weight(_text_:22 in 3572) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050211266 = score(doc=3572,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3572, 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=3572)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Online. 22(1998) no.3, S.24-26,28
