Search (36 results, page 2 of 2)

  • × author_ss:"Järvelin, K."
  1. Kristensen, J.; Järvelin, K.: ¬The effectiveness of a searching thesaurus in free-text searching in a full-text database (1990) 0.00
    0.0031564306 = product of:
      0.009469291 = sum of:
        0.009469291 = product of:
          0.018938582 = sum of:
            0.018938582 = weight(_text_:of in 2043) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018938582 = score(doc=2043,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 2043, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2043)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
  2. Lehtokangas, R.; Keskustalo, H.; Järvelin, K.: Experiments with transitive dictionary translation and pseudo-relevance feedback using graded relevance assessments (2008) 0.00
    0.0031316737 = product of:
      0.009395021 = sum of:
        0.009395021 = product of:
          0.018790042 = sum of:
            0.018790042 = weight(_text_:of in 1349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018790042 = score(doc=1349,freq=14.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.2742677 = fieldWeight in 1349, product of:
                  3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                    14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1349)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    In this article, the authors present evaluation results for transitive dictionary-based cross-language information retrieval (CLIR) using graded relevance assessments in a best match retrieval environment. A text database containing newspaper articles and a related set of 35 search topics were used in the tests. Source language topics (in English, German, and Swedish) were automatically translated into the target language (Finnish) via an intermediate (or pivot) language. Effectiveness of the transitively translated queries was compared to that of the directly translated and monolingual Finnish queries. Pseudo-relevance feedback (PRF) was also used to expand the original transitive target queries. Cross-language information retrieval performance was evaluated on three relevance thresholds: stringent, regular, and liberal. The transitive translations performed well achieving, on the average, 85-93% of the direct translation performance, and 66-72% of monolingual performance. Moreover, PRF was successful in raising the performance of transitive translation routes in absolute terms as well as in relation to monolingual and direct translation performance applying PRF.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.3, S.476-488
  3. Lehtokangas, R.; Järvelin, K.: Consistency of textual expression in newspaper articles : an argument for semantically based query expansion (2001) 0.00
    0.0031192217 = product of:
      0.009357665 = sum of:
        0.009357665 = product of:
          0.01871533 = sum of:
            0.01871533 = weight(_text_:of in 4485) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.01871533 = score(doc=4485,freq=20.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.27317715 = fieldWeight in 4485, product of:
                  4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                    20.0 = termFreq=20.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4485)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This article investigates how consistent different newspapers are in their choice of words when writing about the same news events. News articles on the same news events were taken from three Finnish newspapers and compared in regard to their central concepts and words representing the concepts in the news texts. Consistency figures were calculated for each set of three articles (the total number of sets was sixty). Inconsistency in words and concepts was found between news articles from different newspapers. The mean value of consistency calculated on the basis of words was 65 per cent; this however depended on the article length. For short news wires consistency was 83 per cent while for long articles it was only 47 per cent. At the concept level, consistency was considerably higher, ranging from 92 per cent to 97 per cent between short and long articles. The articles also represented three categories of topic (event, process and opinion). Statistically significant differences in consistency were found in regard to length but not in regard to the categories of topic. We argue that the expression inconsistency is a clear sign of a retrieval problem and that query expansion based on semantic relationships can significantly improve retrieval performance on free-text sources.
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 57(2001) no.4, S.535-548
  4. Talvensaari, T.; Laurikkala, J.; Järvelin, K.; Juhola, M.: ¬A study on automatic creation of a comparable document collection in cross-language information retrieval (2006) 0.00
    0.0031192217 = product of:
      0.009357665 = sum of:
        0.009357665 = product of:
          0.01871533 = sum of:
            0.01871533 = weight(_text_:of in 5601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.01871533 = score(doc=5601,freq=20.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.27317715 = fieldWeight in 5601, product of:
                  4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                    20.0 = termFreq=20.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5601)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - To present a method for creating a comparable document collection from two document collections in different languages. Design/methodology/approach - The best query keys were extracted from a Finnish source collection (articles of the newspaper Aamulehti) with the relative average term frequency formula. The keys were translated into English with a dictionary-based query translation program. The resulting lists of words were used as queries that were run against the target collection (Los Angeles Times articles) with the nearest neighbor method. The documents were aligned with unrestricted and date-restricted alignment schemes, which were also combined. Findings - The combined alignment scheme was found the best, when the relatedness of the document pairs was assessed with a five-degree relevance scale. Of the 400 document pairs, roughly 40 percent were highly or fairly related and 75 percent included at least lexical similarity. Research limitations/implications - The number of alignment pairs was small due to the short common time period of the two collections, and their geographical (and thus, topical) remoteness. In future, our aim is to build larger comparable corpora in various languages and use them as source of translation knowledge for the purposes of cross-language information retrieval (CLIR). Practical implications - Readily available parallel corpora are scarce. With this method, two unrelated document collections can relatively easily be aligned to create a CLIR resource. Originality/value - The method can be applied to weakly linked collections and morphologically complex languages, such as Finnish.
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 62(2006) no.3, S.372-387
  5. Vakkari, P.; Järvelin, K.: Explanation in information seeking and retrieval (2005) 0.00
    0.0030562007 = product of:
      0.009168602 = sum of:
        0.009168602 = product of:
          0.018337203 = sum of:
            0.018337203 = weight(_text_:of in 643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018337203 = score(doc=643,freq=30.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.26765788 = fieldWeight in 643, product of:
                  5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
                    30.0 = termFreq=30.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=643)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Information Retrieval (IR) is a research area both within Computer Science and Information Science. It has by and large two communities: a Computer Science oriented experimental approach and a user-oriented Information Science approach with a Social Science background. The communities hold a critical stance towards each other (e.g., Ingwersen, 1996), the latter suspecting the realism of the former, and the former suspecting the usefulness of the latter. Within Information Science the study of information seeking (IS) also has a Social Science background. There is a lot of research in each of these particular areas of information seeking and retrieval (IS&R). However, the three communities do not really communicate with each other. Why is this, and could the relationships be otherwise? Do the communities in fact belong together? Or perhaps each community is better off forgetting about the existence of the other two? We feel that the relationships between the research areas have not been properly analyzed. One way to analyze the relationships is to examine what each research area is trying to find out: which phenomena are being explained and how. We believe that IS&R research would benefit from being analytic about its frameworks, models and theories, not just at the level of meta-theories, but also much more concretely at the level of study designs. Over the years there have been calls for more context in the study of IS&R. Work tasks as well as cultural activities/interests have been proposed as the proper context for information access. For example, Wersig (1973) conceptualized information needs from the tasks perspective. He argued that in order to learn about information needs and seeking, one needs to take into account the whole active professional role of the individuals being investigated. Byström and Järvelin (1995) analysed IS processes in the light of tasks of varying complexity. Ingwersen (1996) discussed the role of tasks and their descriptions and problematic situations from a cognitive perspective on IR. Most recently, Vakkari (2003) reviewed task-based IR and Järvelin and Ingwersen (2004) proposed the extension of IS&R research toward the task context. Therefore there is much support to the task context, but how should it be applied in IS&R?
  6. Vakkari, P.; Chang, Y.-W.; Järvelin, K.: Disciplinary contributions to research topics and methodology in Library and Information Science : leading to fragmentation? (2022) 0.00
    0.0029591531 = product of:
      0.008877459 = sum of:
        0.008877459 = product of:
          0.017754918 = sum of:
            0.017754918 = weight(_text_:of in 767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017754918 = score(doc=767,freq=18.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.25915858 = fieldWeight in 767, product of:
                  4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                    18.0 = termFreq=18.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=767)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The study analyses contributions to Library and Information Science (LIS) by researchers representing various disciplines. How are such contributions associated with the choice of research topics and methodology? The study employs a quantitative content analysis of articles published in 31 scholarly LIS journals in 2015. Each article is seen as a contribution to LIS by the authors' disciplines, which are inferred from their affiliations. The unit of analysis is the article-discipline pair. Of the contribution instances, the share of LIS is one third. Computer Science contributes one fifth and Business and Economics one sixth. The latter disciplines dominate the contributions in information retrieval, information seeking, and scientific communication indicating strong influences in LIS. Correspondence analysis reveals three clusters of research, one focusing on traditional LIS with contributions from LIS and Humanities and survey-type research; another on information retrieval with contributions from Computer Science and experimental research; and the third on scientific communication with contributions from Natural Sciences and Medicine and citation analytic research. The strong differentiation of scholarly contributions in LIS hints to the fragmentation of LIS as a discipline.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.12, S.1706-1722
  7. Niemi, T.; Hirvonen, L.; Järvelin, K.: Multidimensional data model and query language for informetrics (2003) 0.00
    0.0028993662 = product of:
      0.008698098 = sum of:
        0.008698098 = product of:
          0.017396197 = sum of:
            0.017396197 = weight(_text_:of in 1753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017396197 = score(doc=1753,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.25392252 = fieldWeight in 1753, product of:
                  3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                    12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1753)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Multidimensional data analysis or On-line analytical processing (OLAP) offers a single subject-oriented source for analyzing summary data based an various dimensions. We demonstrate that the OLAP approach gives a promising starting point for advanced analysis and comparison among summary data in informetrics applications. At the moment there is no single precise, commonly accepted logical/conceptual model for multidimensional analysis. This is because the requirements of applications vary considerably. We develop a conceptual/logical multidimensional model for supporting the complex and unpredictable needs of informetrics. Summary data are considered with respect of some dimensions. By changing dimensions the user may construct other views an the same summary data. We develop a multidimensional query language whose basic idea is to support the definition of views in a way, which is natural and intuitive for lay users in the informetrics area. We show that this view-oriented query language has a great expressive power and its degree of declarativity is greater than in contemporary operation-oriented or SQL (Structured Query Language)-like OLAP query languages.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.10, S.939-951
  8. Järvelin, K.: ¬An analysis of two approaches in information retrieval : from frameworks to study designs (2007) 0.00
    0.0028993662 = product of:
      0.008698098 = sum of:
        0.008698098 = product of:
          0.017396197 = sum of:
            0.017396197 = weight(_text_:of in 326) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017396197 = score(doc=326,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.25392252 = fieldWeight in 326, product of:
                  3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                    12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=326)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    There is a well-known gap between systems-oriented information retrieval (IR) and user-oriented IR, which cognitive IR seeks to bridge. It is therefore interesting to analyze approaches at the level of frameworks, models, and study designs. This article is an exercise in such an analysis, focusing on two significant approaches to IR: the lab IR approach and P. Ingwersen's (1996) cognitive IR approach. The article focuses on their research frameworks, models, hypotheses, laws and theories, study designs, and possible contributions. The two approaches are quite different, which becomes apparent in the use of Independent, controlled, and dependent variables in the study designs of each approach. Thus, each approach is capable of contributing very differently to understanding and developing information access. The article also discusses integrating the approaches at the study-design level.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.7, S.971-986
  9. Pirkola, A.; Puolamäki, D.; Järvelin, K.: Applying query structuring in cross-language retrieval (2003) 0.00
    0.0028993662 = product of:
      0.008698098 = sum of:
        0.008698098 = product of:
          0.017396197 = sum of:
            0.017396197 = weight(_text_:of in 1074) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017396197 = score(doc=1074,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.25392252 = fieldWeight in 1074, product of:
                  3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                    12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1074)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    We will explore various ways to apply query structuring in cross-language information retrieval. In the first test, English queries were translated into Finnish using an electronic dictionary, and were run in a Finnish newspaper database of 55,000 articles. Queries were structured by combining the Finnish translation equivalents of the same English query key using the syn-operator of the InQuery retrieval system. Structured queries performed markedly better than unstructured queries. Second, the effects of compound-based structuring using a proximity operator for the translation equivalents of query language compound components were tested. The method was not useful in syn-based queries but resulted in decrease in retrieval effectiveness. Proper names are often non-identical spelling variants in different languages. This allows n-gram based translation of names not included in a dictionary. In the third test, a query structuring method where the Boolean and-operator was used to assign more weight to keys translated through n-gram matching gave good results.
  10. Talvensaari, T.; Juhola, M.; Laurikkala, J.; Järvelin, K.: Corpus-based cross-language information retrieval in retrieval of highly relevant documents (2007) 0.00
    0.0027899165 = product of:
      0.008369749 = sum of:
        0.008369749 = product of:
          0.016739499 = sum of:
            0.016739499 = weight(_text_:of in 139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.016739499 = score(doc=139,freq=16.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 139, product of:
                  4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                    16.0 = termFreq=16.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=139)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Information retrieval systems' ability to retrieve highly relevant documents has become more and more important in the age of extremely large collections, such as the World Wide Web (WWW). The authors' aim was to find out how corpus-based cross-language information retrieval (CLIR) manages in retrieving highly relevant documents. They created a Finnish-Swedish comparable corpus from two loosely related document collections and used it as a source of knowledge for query translation. Finnish test queries were translated into Swedish and run against a Swedish test collection. Graded relevance assessments were used in evaluating the results and three relevance criterion levels-liberal, regular, and stringent-were applied. The runs were also evaluated with generalized recall and precision, which weight the retrieved documents according to their relevance level. The performance of the Comparable Corpus Translation system (COCOT) was compared to that of a dictionarybased query translation program; the two translation methods were also combined. The results indicate that corpus-based CUR performs particularly well with highly relevant documents. In average precision, COCOT even matched the monolingual baseline on the highest relevance level. The performance of the different query translation methods was further analyzed by finding out reasons for poor rankings of highly relevant documents.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.3, S.322-334
  11. Järvelin, K.; Persson, O.: ¬The DCI-index : discounted cumulated impact-based research evaluation (2008) 0.00
    0.0027335489 = product of:
      0.008200646 = sum of:
        0.008200646 = product of:
          0.016401293 = sum of:
            0.016401293 = weight(_text_:of in 2332) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.016401293 = score(doc=2332,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.23940048 = fieldWeight in 2332, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2332)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The article by K. Järvelin & O. Persson published in JASIST 59(9), The DCI-Index: Discounted Cumulated Impact-Based Research Evaluation, (pp. 1433-1440) contains an unfortunate error in one of its formulas, Equation 3. The present paper gives the correction and an example of impact analysis based on the corrected formula.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.14, S.2350-2352
  12. Järvelin, K.; Ingwersen, P.; Niemi, T.: ¬A user-oriented interface for generalised informetric analysis based on applying advanced data modelling techniques (2000) 0.00
    0.001972769 = product of:
      0.0059183068 = sum of:
        0.0059183068 = product of:
          0.0118366135 = sum of:
            0.0118366135 = weight(_text_:of in 4545) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0118366135 = score(doc=4545,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.17277241 = fieldWeight in 4545, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4545)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This article presents a novel user-oriented interface for generalised informetric analysis and demonstrates how informetric calculations can easily and declaratively be specified through advanced data modelling techniques. The interface is declarative and at a high level. Therefore it is easy to use, flexible and extensible. It enables end users to perform basic informetric ad hoc calculations easily and often with much less effort than in contemporary online retrieval systems. It also provides several fruitful generalisations of typical informetric measurements like impact factors. These are based on substituting traditional foci of analysis, for instance journals, by other object types, such as authors, organisations or countries. In the interface, bibliographic data are modelled as complex objects (non-first normal form relations) and terminological and citation networks involving transitive relationships are modelled as binary relations for deductive processing. The interface is flexible, because it makes it easy to switch focus between various object types for informetric calculations, e.g. from authors to institutions. Moreover, it is demonstrated that all informetric data can easily be broken down by criteria that foster advanced analysis, e.g. by years or content-bearing attributes. Such modelling allows flexible data aggregation along many dimensions. These salient features emerge from the query interface's general data restructuring and aggregation capabilities combined with transitive processing capabilities. The features are illustrated by means of sample queries and results in the article.
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 56(2000) no.3, S.250-278
  13. Ingwersen, P.; Järvelin, K.: ¬The turn : integration of information seeking and retrieval in context (2005) 0.00
    0.001972769 = product of:
      0.0059183068 = sum of:
        0.0059183068 = product of:
          0.0118366135 = sum of:
            0.0118366135 = weight(_text_:of in 1323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0118366135 = score(doc=1323,freq=32.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.17277241 = fieldWeight in 1323, product of:
                  5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
                    32.0 = termFreq=32.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1323)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The Turn analyzes the research of information seeking and retrieval (IS&R) and proposes a new direction of integrating research in these two areas: the fields should turn off their separate and narrow paths and construct a new avenue of research. An essential direction for this avenue is context as given in the subtitle Integration of Information Seeking and Retrieval in Context. Other essential themes in the book include: IS&R research models, frameworks and theories; search and works tasks and situations in context; interaction between humans and machines; information acquisition, relevance and information use; research design and methodology based on a structured set of explicit variables - all set into the holistic cognitive approach. The present monograph invites the reader into a construction project - there is much research to do for a contextual understanding of IS&R. The Turn represents a wide-ranging perspective of IS&R by providing a novel unique research framework, covering both individual and social aspects of information behavior, including the generation, searching, retrieval and use of information. Regarding traditional laboratory information retrieval research, the monograph proposes the extension of research toward actors, search and work tasks, IR interaction and utility of information. Regarding traditional information seeking research, it proposes the extension toward information access technology and work task contexts. The Turn is the first synthesis of research in the broad area of IS&R ranging from systems oriented laboratory IR research to social science oriented information seeking studies. TOC:Introduction.- The Cognitive Framework for Information.- The Development of Information Seeking Research.- Systems-Oriented Information Retrieval.- Cognitive and User-Oriented Information Retrieval.- The Integrated IS&R Research Framework.- Implications of the Cognitive Framework for IS&R.- Towards a Research Program.- Conclusion.- Definitions.- References.- Index.
  14. Pharo, N.; Järvelin, K.: ¬The SST method : a tool for analysing Web information search processes (2004) 0.00
    0.0017084682 = product of:
      0.0051254043 = sum of:
        0.0051254043 = product of:
          0.010250809 = sum of:
            0.010250809 = weight(_text_:of in 2533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.010250809 = score(doc=2533,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.1496253 = fieldWeight in 2533, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2533)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The article presents the search situation transition (SST) method for analysing Web information search (WIS) processes. The idea of the method is to analyse searching behaviour, the process, in detail and connect both the searchers' actions (captured in a log) and his/her intentions and goals, which log analysis never captures. On the other hand, ex post factor surveys, while popular in WIS research, cannot capture the actual search processes. The method is presented through three facets: its domain, its procedure, and its justification. The method's domain is presented in the form of a conceptual framework which maps five central categories that influence WIS processes; the searcher, the social/organisational environment, the work task, the search task, and the process itself. The method's procedure includes various techniques for data collection and analysis. The article presents examples from real WIS processes and shows how the method can be used to identify the interplay of the categories during the processes. It is shown that the method presents a new approach in information seeking and retrieval by focusing on the search process as a phenomenon and by explicating how different information seeking factors directly affect the search process.
  15. Hansen, P.; Järvelin, K.: Collaborative Information Retrieval in an information-intensive domain (2005) 0.00
    0.0016739499 = product of:
      0.0050218496 = sum of:
        0.0050218496 = product of:
          0.010043699 = sum of:
            0.010043699 = weight(_text_:of in 1040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.010043699 = score(doc=1040,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.14660224 = fieldWeight in 1040, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1040)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    In this article we investigate the expressions of collaborative activities within information seeking and retrieval processes (IS&R). Generally, information seeking and retrieval is regarded as an individual and isolated process in IR research. We assume that an IS&R situation is not merely an individual effort, but inherently involves various collaborative activities. We present empirical results from a real-life and information-intensive setting within the patent domain, showing that the patent task performance process involves highly collaborative aspects throughout the stages of the information seeking and retrieval process. Furthermore, we show that these activities may be categorised and related to different stages in an information seeking and retrieval process. Therefore, the assumption that information retrieval performance is purely individual needs to be reconsidered. Finally, we also propose a refined IR framework involving collaborative aspects.
  16. Toivonen, J.; Pirkola, A.; Keskustalo, H.; Visala, K.; Järvelin, K.: Translating cross-lingual spelling variants using transformation rules (2005) 0.00
    0.0016739499 = product of:
      0.0050218496 = sum of:
        0.0050218496 = product of:
          0.010043699 = sum of:
            0.010043699 = weight(_text_:of in 1052) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.010043699 = score(doc=1052,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.14660224 = fieldWeight in 1052, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1052)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Technical terms and proper names constitute a major problem in dictionary-based cross-language information retrieval (CLIR). However, technical terms and proper names in different languages often share the same Latin or Greek origin, being thus spelling variants of each other. In this paper we present a novel two-step fuzzy translation technique for cross-lingual spelling variants. In the first step, transformation rules are applied to source words to render them more similar to their target language equivalents. The rules are generated automatically using translation dictionaries as source data. In the second step, the intermediate forms obtained in the first step are translated into a target language using fuzzy matching. The effectiveness of the technique was evaluated empirically using five source languages and English as a target language. The two-step technique performed better, in some cases considerably better, than fuzzy matching alone. Even using the first step as such showed promising results.