Search (59 results, page 1 of 3)

0.049055643 = product of:
  0.09811129 = sum of:
    0.09811129 = sum of:
      0.05608411 = weight(_text_:searching in 2419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05608411 = score(doc=2419,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.26816747 = fieldWeight in 2419, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2419)
      0.04202718 = weight(_text_:22 in 2419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04202718 = score(doc=2419,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2419, 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=2419)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The digital library system Daffodil is targeted at strategic support of users during the information search process. For searching, exploring and managing digital library objects it provides user-customisable information seeking patterns over a federation of heterogeneous digital libraries. In this paper evaluation results with respect to retrieval effectiveness, efficiency and user satisfaction are presented. The analysis focuses on strategic support for the scientific work-flow. Daffodil supports the whole work-flow, from data source selection over information seeking to the representation, organisation and reuse of information. By embedding high level search functionality into the scientific work-flow, the user experiences better strategic system support due to a more systematic work process. These ideas have been implemented in Daffodil followed by a qualitative evaluation. The evaluation has been conducted with 28 participants, ranging from information seeking novices to experts. The results are promising, as they support the chosen model.

Date

16.11.2008 16:22:48

0.028615793 = product of:
  0.057231586 = sum of:
    0.057231586 = sum of:
      0.03271573 = weight(_text_:searching in 1633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03271573 = score(doc=1633,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.15643102 = fieldWeight in 1633, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1633)
      0.024515856 = weight(_text_:22 in 1633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024515856 = score(doc=1633,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 1633, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1633)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.026126644 = product of:
  0.052253287 = sum of:
    0.052253287 = product of:
      0.104506575 = sum of:
        0.104506575 = weight(_text_:searching in 5691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.104506575 = score(doc=5691,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.49970058 = fieldWeight in 5691, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5691)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The second half of a 'before and after' study to evaluate the impact of an online catalogue on subject searching behaviour is reported. A holistic approach is adopted encompassing both catalogue use and browsing at the shelves for catalogue users and non-users. Verbal and non-verbal data were elicited from searchers using a combined methodology including talk-aloud technique, observation and a screen logging facility. An extensive qualitative analysis was carried out correlating expressed topics, search formulation strategies and documents retrieved at the shelves. The online catalogue environment does not appear to have increased the extent of subject searching nor the use of the bibliographic tool. The manual PRECIS index supported a contextual approach for broad and more interactive search formulations whereas the OPAC encouraged a matching approach and narrow formulations with fewer but user generated formulations. The success rate of the online catalogue was slightly better than that of the manual tools but fewer items were retrieved at the shelves. Non-users of the bibliographic tools seemed to be just as successful. To improve retrieval effectiveness it is suggested that online catalogues should cater for both matching and contextual approaches to searching. Recent research indicates that a more interactive process could be promoted by providing query expansion through a combination of searching aids for matching, for search formulation assistance and for structured contextual retrieval

0.024764754 = product of:
  0.049529508 = sum of:
    0.049529508 = product of:
      0.099059016 = sum of:
        0.099059016 = weight(_text_:22 in 1352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.099059016 = score(doc=1352,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 1352, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1352)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 2.2003 17:25:39
22. 2.2003 18:17:40

0.024515856 = product of:
  0.049031712 = sum of:
    0.049031712 = product of:
      0.098063424 = sum of:
        0.098063424 = weight(_text_:22 in 2134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.098063424 = score(doc=2134,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2134, 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=2134)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

30. 3.2001 13:32:22

0.024285134 = product of:
  0.048570268 = sum of:
    0.048570268 = product of:
      0.097140536 = sum of:
        0.097140536 = weight(_text_:searching in 5698) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.097140536 = score(doc=5698,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.46447968 = fieldWeight in 5698, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5698)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Describes the shortcomings of search engines for the WWW comparing their current capabilities to those of the first generation CD-ROM products. Some allow phrase searching and most are improving their Boolean searching. Few allow truncation, wild cards or nested logic. They are stateless, losing previous search criteria. Unlike the indexing and classification systems for today's CD-ROMs, those for Web pages are random, unstructured and of variable quality. Considers that at best Web search engines can only offer free text searching. Discusses whether automatic data classification systems such as Infoseek Ultra can overcome the haphazard nature of the Web with neural network technology, and whether Boolean search techniques may be redundant when replaced by technology such as the Euroferret search engine. However, artificial intelligence is rarely successful on huge, varied databases. Relevance ranking and automatic query expansion still use the same simple inverted indexes. Most Web search engines do nothing more than word counting. Further complications arise with foreign languages

0.024285134 = product of:
  0.048570268 = sum of:
    0.048570268 = product of:
      0.097140536 = sum of:
        0.097140536 = weight(_text_:searching in 202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.097140536 = score(doc=202,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.46447968 = fieldWeight in 202, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=202)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The authors present a model of information searching in thesaurus-enhanced search systems, intended as a reference model for system developers. The model focuses on user-system interaction and charts the specific stages of searching an indexed collection with a thesaurus. It was developed based on literature, findings from empirical studies, and analysis of existing systems. The model describes in detail the entities, processes, and decisions when interacting with a search system augmented with a thesaurus. A basic search scenario illustrates this process through the model. Graphical and textual depictions of the model are complemented by a concise matrix representation for evaluation purposes. Potential problems at different stages of the search process are discussed, together with possibilities for system developers. The aim is to set out a framework of processes, decisions, and risks involved in thesaurus-based search, within which system developers can consider potential avenues for support.

0.02336838 = product of:
  0.04673676 = sum of:
    0.04673676 = product of:
      0.09347352 = sum of:
        0.09347352 = weight(_text_:searching in 2907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09347352 = score(doc=2907,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.44694576 = fieldWeight in 2907, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2907)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.020034213 = product of:
  0.040068425 = sum of:
    0.040068425 = product of:
      0.08013685 = sum of:
        0.08013685 = weight(_text_:searching in 2768) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08013685 = score(doc=2768,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.38317618 = fieldWeight in 2768, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2768)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Subject searching is the most common but also the most conflictive searching for end user. The aim of this paper is to check how users expressions match subject headings and to prove if knowledge structure used in online catalogs enhances searching effectiveness. A bibliographic revision about difficulties in subject access and proposed methods to improve it is also presented. For the empirical analysis, transaction logs from two university libraries, online catalogs (CISNE and FAMA) were collected. Results show that more than a quarter of user queries are effective due to an alphabetical subject index approach and browsing through hypertextual links. 1. Introduction Since the 1980's, online public access catalogs (OPAC's) have become usual way to access bibliographic information. During the last two decades the technological development has helped to extend their use, making feasible the access for a whole of users that is getting more and more extensive and heterogeneous, and also to incorporate information resources in electronic formats and to interconnect systems. However, technology seems to have developed faster than our knowledge about the tasks where it has been applied and than the evolution of our capacities for adapting to it. The conceptual model of OPAC has been hardly modified recently, and for interacting with them, users still need to combine the same skills and basic knowledge than at the beginning of its introduction (Borgman, 1986, 2000): a) conceptual knowledge to translate the information need into an appropriate query because of a well-designed mental model of the system, b) semantic and syntactic knowledge to be able to implement that query (access fields, searching type, Boolean logic, etc.) and c) basic technical skills in computing. At present many users have the essential technical skills to make use, with more or less expertise, of a computer. This number is substantially reduced when it is referred to the conceptual, semantic and syntactic knowledge that is necessary to achieve a moderately satisfactory search. An added difficulty arises in subject searching, as users should concrete their unknown information needs in terms that the information retrieval system can understand. Many researches have focused an unskilled searchers' difficulties to enter an effective query. The mental models influence, users assumption about characteristics, structure, contents and operation of the system they interact with have been analysed (Dillon, 2000; Dimitroff, 2000). Another issue that implies difficulties is vocabulary: how to find the right terms to implement a query and to modify it as the case may be. Terminology and expressions characteristics used in searching (Bates, 1993), the match between user terms and the subject headings from the catalog (Carlyle, 1989; Drabensttot, 1996; Drabensttot & Vizine-Goetz, 1994), the incidence of spelling errors (Drabensttot and Weller, 1996; Ferl and Millsap, 1996; Walker and Jones, 1987), users problems

0.019828727 = product of:
  0.039657455 = sum of:
    0.039657455 = product of:
      0.07931491 = sum of:
        0.07931491 = weight(_text_:searching in 178) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07931491 = score(doc=178,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.37924606 = fieldWeight in 178, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=178)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper describes a study that explored ways in which users' subject-searching problems in a local online catalog might be reduced. On a weekly basis, the author reviewed catalog transaction logs to identify topics of subject searches retrieving no records for which appropriate information resources may actually be represented in the catalog. For topics thus identified, the author explored two potential ameliorations of the no-hits search results through the use of authority record cross-references and pathfinder records providing brief instructions on search refinement. This paper describes the study findings, discusses possible concerns regarding the amelioration methods used, outlines additional steps needed to determine whether the potential ameliorations make a difference to users' searching experiences, and suggests related areas for further research.

0.018694704 = product of:
  0.03738941 = sum of:
    0.03738941 = product of:
      0.07477882 = sum of:
        0.07477882 = weight(_text_:searching in 5690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07477882 = score(doc=5690,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.3575566 = fieldWeight in 5690, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5690)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Discusses some of the methods of subject access to on-line catalohues (OPACs) and argues that none are entirley satisfactory. Describes 2 methods for improving subject access: best match searching; and automatic query expansion application and discusses their feasibility. Mentions emerging application standards for information retrieval and concludes that existing standards are incompatible with most methods for improving standards

0.017511327 = product of:
  0.035022654 = sum of:
    0.035022654 = product of:
      0.07004531 = sum of:
        0.07004531 = weight(_text_:22 in 2751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07004531 = score(doc=2751,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

1. 2.2016 18:25:22

0.017511327 = product of:
  0.035022654 = sum of:
    0.035022654 = product of:
      0.07004531 = sum of:
        0.07004531 = weight(_text_:22 in 2754) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07004531 = score(doc=2754,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

1. 2.2016 18:25:22

0.017511327 = product of:
  0.035022654 = sum of:
    0.035022654 = product of:
      0.07004531 = sum of:
        0.07004531 = weight(_text_:22 in 3279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07004531 = score(doc=3279,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = 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)
  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

0.017511327 = product of:
  0.035022654 = sum of:
    0.035022654 = product of:
      0.07004531 = sum of:
        0.07004531 = weight(_text_:22 in 3280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07004531 = score(doc=3280,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = 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)
  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

0.01733533 = product of:
  0.03467066 = sum of:
    0.03467066 = product of:
      0.06934132 = sum of:
        0.06934132 = weight(_text_:22 in 5295) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06934132 = score(doc=5295,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 5295, 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=5295)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 7.2006 17:56:22

0.01652394 = product of:
  0.03304788 = sum of:
    0.03304788 = product of:
      0.06609576 = sum of:
        0.06609576 = weight(_text_:searching in 1615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06609576 = score(doc=1615,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.3160384 = fieldWeight in 1615, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1615)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The Medical professionals and researchers need information from reputable sources to accomplish their work. Unfortunately, the Web has a large number of documents that are irrelevant to their work, even those documents that purport to be "medically-related." This paper describes an architecture designed to integrate advanced searching and indexing algorithms, an automatic thesaurus, or "concept space," and Kohonen-based Self-Organizing Map (SOM) technologies to provide searchers with finegrained results. Initial results indicate that these systems provide complementary retrieval functionalities. HelpfulMed not only allows users to search Web pages and other online databases, but also allows them to build searches through the use of an automatic thesaurus and browse a graphical display of medical-related topics. Evaluation results for each of the different components are included. Our spidering algorithm outperformed both breadth-first search and PageRank spiders an a test collection of 100,000 Web pages. The automatically generated thesaurus performed as well as both MeSH and UMLS-systems which require human mediation for currency. Lastly, a variant of the Kohonen SOM was comparable to MeSH terms in perceived cluster precision and significantly better at perceived cluster recall.

0.01652394 = product of:
  0.03304788 = sum of:
    0.03304788 = product of:
      0.06609576 = sum of:
        0.06609576 = weight(_text_:searching in 2589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06609576 = score(doc=2589,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.3160384 = fieldWeight in 2589, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2589)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The emergence of general audience digital libraries (GADLs) defines a context that represents a hybrid of both "traditional" IR, using primarily bibliographic resources provided by database vendors, and "popular" IR, exemplified by public search systems available on the World Wide Web. Findings of a study investigating end-user searching and response to a GADL are reported. Data collected from a Web-based end-user survey and data logs of resource usage for a Web-based GADL were analyzed for user characteristics, patterns of access and use, and user feedback. Cross-tabulations using respondent demographics revealed several key differences in how the system was used and valued by users of different age groups. Older users valued the service more than younger users and engaged in different searching and viewing behaviors. The GADL more closely resembles traditional retrieval systems in terms of content and purpose of use, but is more similar to popular IR systems in terms of user behavior and accessibility. A model that defines the dual context of the GADL environment is derived from the data analysis and existing IR models in general and other specific contexts. The authors demonstrate the distinguishing characteristics of this IR context, and discuss implications for the development and evaluation of future GADLs to accommodate a variety of user needs and expectations.

0.01652394 = product of:
  0.03304788 = sum of:
    0.03304788 = product of:
      0.06609576 = sum of:
        0.06609576 = weight(_text_:searching in 4331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06609576 = score(doc=4331,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.3160384 = fieldWeight in 4331, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4331)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper seeks to report an investigation into the ways in which end-users perceive a thesaurus-enhanced search interface, in particular thesaurus and search interface usability. Design/methodology/approach - Thirty academic users, split between staff and postgraduate students, carrying out real search requests were observed during this study. Users were asked to comment on a range of thesaurus and interface characteristics including: ease of use, ease of learning, ease of browsing and navigation, problems and difficulties encountered while interacting with the system, and the effect of browsing on search term selection. Findings - The results suggest that interface usability is a factor affecting thesaurus browsing/navigation and other information-searching behaviours. Academic staff viewed the function of a thesaurus as being useful for narrowing down a search and providing alternative search terms, while postgraduates stressed the role of the thesaurus for broadening searches and providing new terms. Originality/value - The paper provides an insight into the ways in which end-users make use of and interact with a thesaurus-enhanced search interface. This area is new since previous research has particularly focused on how professional searchers and librarians make use of thesauri and thesaurus-enhanced search interfaces. The research reported here suggests that end-users with varying levels of domain knowledge are able to use thesauri that are integrated into search interfaces. It also provides design implications for search interface developers as well as information professionals who are involved in teaching online searching.

0.01652394 = product of:
  0.03304788 = sum of:
    0.03304788 = product of:
      0.06609576 = sum of:
        0.06609576 = weight(_text_:searching in 2696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06609576 = score(doc=2696,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.3160384 = fieldWeight in 2696, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2696)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Search Engines have become an integral part of our day to day life. Our reliance on search engines increases with every passing day. With the amount of data available on Internet increasing exponentially, it becomes important to develop new methods and tools that help to return results relevant to the queries and reduce the time spent on searching. The results should be diverse but at the same time should return results focused on the queries asked. Relation Based Page Rank [4] algorithms are considered to be the next frontier in improvement of Semantic Web Search. The probability of finding relevance in the search results as posited by the user while entering the query is used to measure the relevance. However, its application is limited by the complexity of determining relation between the terms and assigning explicit meaning to each term. Trust Rank is one of the most widely used ranking algorithms for semantic web search. Few other ranking algorithms like HITS algorithm, PageRank algorithm are also used for Semantic Web Searching. In this paper, we will provide a comparison of few ranking approaches.