Search (284 results, page 1 of 15)

  • × theme_ss:"Suchmaschinen"
  1. Li, L.; Shang, Y.; Zhang, W.: Improvement of HITS-based algorithms on Web documents 0.27
    0.26688817 = product of:
      0.6227391 = sum of:
        0.065653205 = product of:
          0.1969596 = sum of:
            0.1969596 = weight(_text_:3a in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.1969596 = score(doc=2514,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.35045066 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.27854294 = weight(_text_:2f in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.27854294 = score(doc=2514,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.35045066 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.7948135 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
        0.27854294 = weight(_text_:2f in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.27854294 = score(doc=2514,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.35045066 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.7948135 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
      0.42857143 = coord(3/7)
    
    Content
    Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fdelab.csd.auth.gr%2F~dimitris%2Fcourses%2Fir_spring06%2Fpage_rank_computing%2Fp527-li.pdf. Vgl. auch: http://www2002.org/CDROM/refereed/643/.
  2. Jansen, B.J.; Spink, A.: How are we searching the World Wide Web? : A comparison of nine search engine transaction logs (2006) 0.06
    0.05844656 = product of:
      0.13637531 = sum of:
        0.025943318 = weight(_text_:management in 968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025943318 = score(doc=968,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 968, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=968)
        0.0847222 = weight(_text_:europe in 968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0847222 = score(doc=968,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25178367 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.33648807 = fieldWeight in 968, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=968)
        0.025709787 = product of:
          0.051419575 = sum of:
            0.051419575 = weight(_text_:studies in 968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.051419575 = score(doc=968,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16494368 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.3117402 = fieldWeight in 968, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=968)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.42857143 = coord(3/7)
    
    Abstract
    The Web and especially major Web search engines are essential tools in the quest to locate online information for many people. This paper reports results from research that examines characteristics and changes in Web searching from nine studies of five Web search engines based in the US and Europe. We compare interactions occurring between users and Web search engines from the perspectives of session length, query length, query complexity, and content viewed among the Web search engines. The results of our research shows (1) users are viewing fewer result pages, (2) searchers on US-based Web search engines use more query operators than searchers on European-based search engines, (3) there are statistically significant differences in the use of Boolean operators and result pages viewed, and (4) one cannot necessary apply results from studies of one particular Web search engine to another Web search engine. The wide spread use of Web search engines, employment of simple queries, and decreased viewing of result pages may have resulted from algorithmic enhancements by Web search engine companies. We discuss the implications of the findings for the development of Web search engines and design of online content.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 42(2006) no.1, S.248-263
  3. MacLeod, R.: Promoting a subject gateway : a case study from EEVL (Edinburgh Engineering Virtual Library) (2000) 0.05
    0.046983022 = product of:
      0.16444057 = sum of:
        0.124838956 = weight(_text_:case in 4872) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.124838956 = score(doc=4872,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18173204 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.6869397 = fieldWeight in 4872, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4872)
        0.03960162 = product of:
          0.07920324 = sum of:
            0.07920324 = weight(_text_:22 in 4872) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07920324 = score(doc=4872,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.14475311 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 4872, 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=4872)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Describes the development of EEVL and outlines the services offered. The potential market for EEVL is discussed, and a case study of promotional activities is presented
    Date
    22. 6.2002 19:40:22
  4. Lewandowski, D.; Sünkler, S.: What does Google recommend when you want to compare insurance offerings? (2019) 0.04
    0.036035076 = product of:
      0.08408184 = sum of:
        0.025943318 = weight(_text_:management in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025943318 = score(doc=5288,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 5288, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5288)
        0.04413724 = weight(_text_:case in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04413724 = score(doc=5288,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18173204 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.24286987 = fieldWeight in 5288, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5288)
        0.0140012875 = product of:
          0.028002575 = sum of:
            0.028002575 = weight(_text_:22 in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028002575 = score(doc=5288,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14475311 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5288, 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=5288)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.42857143 = coord(3/7)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe a new method to improve the analysis of search engine results by considering the provider level as well as the domain level. This approach is tested by conducting a study using queries on the topic of insurance comparisons. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted an empirical study that analyses the results of search queries aimed at comparing insurance companies. The authors used a self-developed software system that automatically queries commercial search engines and automatically extracts the content of the returned result pages for further data analysis. The data analysis was carried out using the KNIME Analytics Platform. Findings Google's top search results are served by only a few providers that frequently appear in these results. The authors show that some providers operate several domains on the same topic and that these domains appear for the same queries in the result lists. Research limitations/implications The authors demonstrate the feasibility of this approach and draw conclusions for further investigations from the empirical study. However, the study is a limited use case based on a limited number of search queries. Originality/value The proposed method allows large-scale analysis of the composition of the top results from commercial search engines. It allows using valid empirical data to determine what users actually see on the search engine result pages.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Source
    Aslib journal of information management. 71(2019) no.3, S.310-324
  5. Bar-Ilan, J.: Evaluating the stability of the search tools Hotbot and Snap : a case study (2000) 0.03
    0.03223962 = product of:
      0.11283866 = sum of:
        0.08738727 = weight(_text_:case in 1180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08738727 = score(doc=1180,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18173204 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.48085782 = fieldWeight in 1180, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1180)
        0.02545139 = product of:
          0.05090278 = sum of:
            0.05090278 = weight(_text_:studies in 1180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05090278 = score(doc=1180,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16494368 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.30860704 = fieldWeight in 1180, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1180)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Discusses the results of a case study in which 20 random queries were presented for ten consecutive days to Hotbot and Snap, two search tools that draw their results from the database of Inktomi. The results show huge daily fluctuations in the number of hits retrieved by Hotbot, and high stability in the hits displayed by Snap. These findings are to alert users of Hotbot of its instability as of October 1999, and they raise questions about the reliability of previous studies estimating the size of Hotbot based on its overlap with other search engines.
  6. Brophy, J.; Bawden, D.: Is Google enough? : Comparison of an internet search engine with academic library resources (2005) 0.03
    0.030838823 = product of:
      0.107935876 = sum of:
        0.07644795 = weight(_text_:case in 648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07644795 = score(doc=648,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.18173204 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.420663 = fieldWeight in 648, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=648)
        0.03148793 = product of:
          0.06297586 = sum of:
            0.06297586 = weight(_text_:studies in 648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06297586 = score(doc=648,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.16494368 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.3818022 = fieldWeight in 648, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=648)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of the study was to compare an internet search engine, Google, with appropriate library databases and systems, in order to assess the relative value, strengths and weaknesses of the two sorts of system. Design/methodology/approach - A case study approach was used, with detailed analysis and failure checking of results. The performance of the two systems was assessed in terms of coverage, unique records, precision, and quality and accessibility of results. A novel form of relevance assessment, based on the work of Saracevic and others was devised. Findings - Google is superior for coverage and accessibility. Library systems are superior for quality of results. Precision is similar for both systems. Good coverage requires use of both, as both have many unique items. Improving the skills of the searcher is likely to give better results from the library systems, but not from Google. Research limitations/implications - Only four case studies were included. These were limited to the kind of queries likely to be searched by university students. Library resources were limited to those in two UK academic libraries. Only the basic Google web search functionality was used, and only the top ten records examined. Practical implications - The results offer guidance for those providing support and training for use of these retrieval systems, and also provide evidence for debates on the "Google phenomenon". Originality/value - This is one of the few studies which provide evidence on the relative performance of internet search engines and library databases, and the only one to conduct such in-depth case studies. The method for the assessment of relevance is novel.
  7. Vidinli, I.B.; Ozcan, R.: New query suggestion framework and algorithms : a case study for an educational search engine (2016) 0.03
    0.030295819 = product of:
      0.10603536 = sum of:
        0.031131983 = weight(_text_:management in 3185) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031131983 = score(doc=3185,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 3185, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3185)
        0.07490338 = weight(_text_:case in 3185) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07490338 = score(doc=3185,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18173204 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.41216385 = fieldWeight in 3185, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3185)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Query suggestion is generally an integrated part of web search engines. In this study, we first redefine and reduce the query suggestion problem as "comparison of queries". We then propose a general modular framework for query suggestion algorithm development. We also develop new query suggestion algorithms which are used in our proposed framework, exploiting query, session and user features. As a case study, we use query logs of a real educational search engine that targets K-12 students in Turkey. We also exploit educational features (course, grade) in our query suggestion algorithms. We test our framework and algorithms over a set of queries by an experiment and demonstrate a 66-90% statistically significant increase in relevance of query suggestions compared to a baseline method.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 52(2016) no.5, S.733-752
  8. Serrano Cobos, J.; Quintero Orta, A.: Design, development and management of an information recovery system for an Internet Website : from documentary theory to practice (2003) 0.03
    0.027711991 = product of:
      0.09699196 = sum of:
        0.044027276 = weight(_text_:management in 2726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.044027276 = score(doc=2726,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.31599492 = fieldWeight in 2726, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2726)
        0.052964687 = weight(_text_:case in 2726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.052964687 = score(doc=2726,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18173204 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.29144385 = fieldWeight in 2726, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2726)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    A real case study is shown, explaining in a timeline the whole process of design, development and evaluation of a search engine used as a navigational help tool for end users and clients an a content website, e-commerce driven. The nature of the website is a community website, which will determine the core design of the information service. This study will involve several steps, such as information recovery system analysis, comparative analysis of other commercial search engines, service design, functionalities and scope; software selection, design of the project, project management, future service administration and conclusions.
  9. El-Ramly, N.; Peterson. R.E.; Volonino, L.: Top ten Web sites using search engines : the case of the desalination industry (1996) 0.03
    0.02763396 = product of:
      0.096718855 = sum of:
        0.07490338 = weight(_text_:case in 945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07490338 = score(doc=945,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18173204 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.41216385 = fieldWeight in 945, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=945)
        0.021815477 = product of:
          0.043630954 = sum of:
            0.043630954 = weight(_text_:studies in 945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043630954 = score(doc=945,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16494368 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.26452032 = fieldWeight in 945, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=945)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    The desalination industry involves the desalting of sea or brackish water and achieves the purpose of increasing the worls's effective water supply. There are approximately 4.000 desalination Web sites. The six major Internet search engines were used to determine, according to each of the six, the top twenty sites for desalination. Each site was visited and the 120 gross returns were pared down to the final ten - the 'Top Ten'. The Top Ten were then analyzed to determine what it was that made the sites useful and informative. The major attributes were: a) currency (up-to-date); b) search site capability; c) access to articles on desalination; d) newsletters; e) databases; f) product information; g) online conferencing; h) valuable links to other sites; l) communication links; j) site maps; and k) case studies. Reasons for having a Web site and the current status and prospects for Internet commerce are discussed
  10. Chaudiron, S.; Ihadjadene, M.: Studying Web search engines from a user perspective : key concepts and main approaches (2012) 0.03
    0.025801437 = product of:
      0.09030502 = sum of:
        0.025943318 = weight(_text_:management in 109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025943318 = score(doc=109,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 109, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=109)
        0.06436171 = sum of:
          0.03635913 = weight(_text_:studies in 109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03635913 = score(doc=109,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16494368 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041336425 = queryNorm
              0.22043361 = fieldWeight in 109, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=109)
          0.028002575 = weight(_text_:22 in 109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.028002575 = score(doc=109,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14475311 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041336425 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 109, 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=109)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    This chapter shows that the wider use of Web search engines, reconsidering the theoretical and methodological frameworks to grasp new information practices. Beginning with an overview of the recent challenges implied by the dynamic nature of the Web, this chapter then traces the information behavior related concepts in order to present the different approaches from the user perspective. The authors pay special attention to the concept of "information practice" and other related concepts such as "use", "activity", and "behavior" largely used in the literature but not always strictly defined. The authors provide an overview of user-oriented studies that are meaningful to understand the different contexts of use of electronic information access systems, focusing on five approaches: the system-oriented approaches, the theories of information seeking, the cognitive and psychological approaches, the management science approaches, and the marketing approaches. Future directions of work are then shaped, including social searching and the ethical, cultural, and political dimensions of Web search engines. The authors conclude considering the importance of Critical theory to better understand the role of Web Search engines in our modern society.
    Date
    20. 4.2012 13:22:37
  11. Berri, J.; Benlamri, R.: Context-aware mobile search engine (2012) 0.02
    0.024027621 = product of:
      0.08409667 = sum of:
        0.031131983 = weight(_text_:management in 104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031131983 = score(doc=104,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 104, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=104)
        0.052964687 = weight(_text_:case in 104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.052964687 = score(doc=104,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18173204 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.29144385 = fieldWeight in 104, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=104)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Exploiting context information in a web search engine helps fine-tuning web services and applications to deliver custom-made information to end users. While context, including user and environment information, cannot be exploited efficiently in the wired Internet interaction type, it is becoming accessible with the mobile web where users have an intimate relationship with their handsets. In this type of interaction, context plays a significant role enhancing information search and therefore, allowing a search engine to detect relevant content in all digital forms and formats. This chapter proposes a context model and an architecture that promote integration of context information for individuals and social communities to add value to their interaction with the mobile web. The architecture relies on efficient knowledge management of multimedia resources for a wide range of applications and web services. The research is illustrated with a corporate case study showing how efficient context integration improves usability of a mobile search engine.
  12. Couvering, E. van: ¬The economy of navigation : search engines, search optimisation and search results (2007) 0.02
    0.022998964 = product of:
      0.08049637 = sum of:
        0.04413724 = weight(_text_:case in 379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04413724 = score(doc=379,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18173204 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.24286987 = fieldWeight in 379, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=379)
        0.03635913 = product of:
          0.07271826 = sum of:
            0.07271826 = weight(_text_:studies in 379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07271826 = score(doc=379,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.16494368 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.44086722 = fieldWeight in 379, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=379)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    The political economy of communication focuses critically on what structural issues in mass media - ownership, labour practices, professional ethics, and so on - mean for products of those mass media and thus for society more generally. In the case of new media, recent political economic studies have looked at the technical infrastructure of the Internet and also at Internet usage. However, political economic studies of internet content are only beginning. Recent studies on the phenomenology of the Web, that is, the way the Web is experienced from an individual user's perspective, highlight the centrality of the search engine to most users' experiences of the Web, particularly when they venture beyond familiar Web sites. Search engines are therefore an obvi ous place to begin the analysis of Web content. An important assumption of this chapter is that internet search engines are media businesses and that the tools developed in media studies can be profitably brought to bear on them. This focus on search engine as industry comes from the critical tradition of the political economy of communications in rejecting the notion that the market alone should be the arbiter of the structure of the media industry, as might be appropriate for other types of products.
  13. Thelwall, M.: Assessing web search engines : a webometric approach (2011) 0.02
    0.021365764 = product of:
      0.074780166 = sum of:
        0.052964687 = weight(_text_:case in 10) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.052964687 = score(doc=10,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18173204 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.29144385 = fieldWeight in 10, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=10)
        0.021815477 = product of:
          0.043630954 = sum of:
            0.043630954 = weight(_text_:studies in 10) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043630954 = score(doc=10,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16494368 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.26452032 = fieldWeight in 10, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=10)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Information Retrieval (IR) research typically evaluates search systems in terms of the standard precision, recall and F-measures to weight the relative importance of precision and recall (e.g. van Rijsbergen, 1979). All of these assess the extent to which the system returns good matches for a query. In contrast, webometric measures are designed specifically for web search engines and are designed to monitor changes in results over time and various aspects of the internal logic of the way in which search engine select the results to be returned. This chapter introduces a range of webometric measurements and illustrates them with case studies of Google, Bing and Yahoo! This is a very fertile area for simple and complex new investigations into search engine results.
  14. Lewandowski, D.: Evaluating the retrieval effectiveness of web search engines using a representative query sample (2015) 0.02
    0.021365764 = product of:
      0.074780166 = sum of:
        0.052964687 = weight(_text_:case in 2157) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.052964687 = score(doc=2157,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18173204 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.29144385 = fieldWeight in 2157, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2157)
        0.021815477 = product of:
          0.043630954 = sum of:
            0.043630954 = weight(_text_:studies in 2157) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043630954 = score(doc=2157,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16494368 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.26452032 = fieldWeight in 2157, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2157)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Search engine retrieval effectiveness studies are usually small scale, using only limited query samples. Furthermore, queries are selected by the researchers. We address these issues by taking a random representative sample of 1,000 informational and 1,000 navigational queries from a major German search engine and comparing Google's and Bing's results based on this sample. Jurors were found through crowdsourcing, and data were collected using specialized software, the Relevance Assessment Tool (RAT). We found that although Google outperforms Bing in both query types, the difference in the performance for informational queries was rather low. However, for navigational queries, Google found the correct answer in 95.3% of cases, whereas Bing only found the correct answer 76.6% of the time. We conclude that search engine performance on navigational queries is of great importance, because users in this case can clearly identify queries that have returned correct results. So, performance on this query type may contribute to explaining user satisfaction with search engines.
  15. Vise, D.A.; Malseed, M.: ¬The Google story (2005) 0.02
    0.0197447 = product of:
      0.069106445 = sum of:
        0.05930554 = weight(_text_:europe in 5937) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05930554 = score(doc=5937,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25178367 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.23554166 = fieldWeight in 5937, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5937)
        0.009800901 = product of:
          0.019601801 = sum of:
            0.019601801 = weight(_text_:22 in 5937) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.019601801 = score(doc=5937,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14475311 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 5937, 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=5937)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Social phenomena happen, and the historians follow. So it goes with Google, the latest star shooting through the universe of trend-setting businesses. This company has even entered our popular lexicon: as many note, "Google" has moved beyond noun to verb, becoming an action which most tech-savvy citizens at the turn of the twenty-first century recognize and in fact do, on a daily basis. It's this wide societal impact that fascinated authors David Vise and Mark Malseed, who came to the book with well-established reputations in investigative reporting. Vise authored the bestselling The Bureau and the Mole, and Malseed contributed significantly to two Bob Woodward books, Bush at War and Plan of Attack. The kind of voluminous research and behind-the-scenes insight in which both writers specialize, and on which their earlier books rested, comes through in The Google Story. The strength of the book comes from its command of many small details, and its focus on the human side of the Google story, as opposed to the merely academic one. Some may prefer a dryer, more analytic approach to Google's impact on the Internet, like The Search or books that tilt more heavily towards bits and bytes on the spectrum between technology and business, like The Singularity is Near. Those wanting to understand the motivations and personal growth of founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin and CEO Eric Schmidt, however, will enjoy this book. Vise and Malseed interviewed over 150 people, including numerous Google employees, Wall Street analysts, Stanford professors, venture capitalists, even Larry Page's Cub Scout leader, and their comprehensiveness shows. As the narrative unfolds, readers learn how Google grew out of the intellectually fertile and not particularly directed friendship between Page and Brin; how the founders attempted to peddle early versions of their search technology to different Silicon Valley firms for $1 million; how Larry and Sergey celebrated their first investor's check with breakfast at Burger King; how the pair initially housed their company in a Palo Alto office, then eventually moved to a futuristic campus dubbed the "Googleplex"; how the company found its financial footing through keyword-targeted Web ads; how various products like Google News, Froogle, and others were cooked up by an inventive staff; how Brin and Page proved their mettle as tough businessmen through negotiations with AOL Europe and their controversial IPO process, among other instances; and how the company's vision for itself continues to grow, such as geographic expansion to China and cooperation with Craig Venter on the Human Genome Project. Like the company it profiles, The Google Story is a bit of a wild ride, and fun, too. Its first appendix lists 23 "tips" which readers can use to get more utility out of Google. The second contains the intelligence test which Google Research offers to prospective job applicants, and shows the sometimes zany methods of this most unusual business. Through it all, Vise and Malseed synthesize a variety of fascinating anecdotes and speculation about Google, and readers seeking a first draft of the history of the company will enjoy an easy read.
    Date
    3. 5.1997 8:44:22
  16. Kassler, H.: ¬The search engines and beyond conference (1998) 0.02
    0.019365076 = product of:
      0.13555552 = sum of:
        0.13555552 = weight(_text_:europe in 2884) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13555552 = score(doc=2884,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25178367 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.5383809 = fieldWeight in 2884, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2884)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Footnote
    Reports on 'Search engines and beyond: a landmark conference' held in Boston, 1-2 April 1998. Participants included acacdemic and corporate researchers, online information providers, and other professionals from North America, Europe and Asia
  17. Seehaus, S.: Können Suchmaschinen von Sozialer Software profitieren? (2008) 0.02
    0.019365076 = product of:
      0.13555552 = sum of:
        0.13555552 = weight(_text_:europe in 2306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13555552 = score(doc=2306,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25178367 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.5383809 = fieldWeight in 2306, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2306)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    Im Rahmen eines Projekts gingen Stu­dierende an der HAW Hamburg für ihre Auftraggeber Lycos Europe und T-Online der Frage nach, wie sich Inhalte aus sozialen Suchdiensten in die algorithmische Suche einbinden lassen. Dazu analysierten und verglichen sie die Vor- und Nachteile der Systeme, die Relevanz der Sucher­gebnisse, die Benutzerfreundlichkeit sowie die Qualität der Inhalte. Für soziale Software ergaben sich daraus bedeutende Verbesserungspotentiale. Der Text beschreibt die Ergebnisse und die Empfehlungen für Lycos IQ.
  18. Stacey, Alison; Stacey, Adrian: Effective information retrieval from the Internet : an advanced user's guide (2004) 0.02
    0.018422639 = product of:
      0.06447923 = sum of:
        0.049935583 = weight(_text_:case in 4497) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049935583 = score(doc=4497,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18173204 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.2747759 = fieldWeight in 4497, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4497)
        0.014543652 = product of:
          0.029087303 = sum of:
            0.029087303 = weight(_text_:studies in 4497) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.029087303 = score(doc=4497,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16494368 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.17634688 = fieldWeight in 4497, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4497)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Content
    Key Features - Importantly, the book enables readers to develop strategies which will continue to be useful despite the rapidly-evolving state of the Internet and Internet technologies - it is not about technological `tricks'. - Enables readers to be aware of and compensate for bias and errors which are ubiquitous an the Internet. - Provides contemporary information an the deficiencies in web skills of novice users as well as practical techniques for teaching such users. The Authors Dr Alison Stacey works at the Learning Resource Centre, Cambridge Regional College. Dr Adrian Stacey, formerly based at Cambridge University, is a software programmer. Readership The book is aimed at a wide range of librarians and other information professionals who need to retrieve information from the Internet efficiently, to evaluate their confidence in the information they retrieve and/or to train others to use the Internet. It is primarily aimed at intermediate to advanced users of the Internet. Contents Fundamentals of information retrieval from the Internet - why learn web searching technique; types of information requests; patterns for information retrieval; leveraging the technology: Search term choice: pinpointing information an the web - why choose queries carefully; making search terms work together; how to pick search terms; finding the 'unfindable': Blas an the Internet - importance of bias; sources of bias; usergenerated bias: selecting information with which you already agree; assessing and compensating for bias; case studies: Query reformulation and longer term strategies - how to interact with your search engine; foraging for information; long term information retrieval: using the Internet to find trends; automating searches: how to make your machine do your work: Assessing the quality of results- how to assess and ensure quality: The novice user and teaching internet skills - novice users and their problems with the web; case study: research in a college library; interpreting 'second hand' web information.
  19. Schüler, P.: Wertes Wissen : Knowledge Management vermeidet Datenfriedhöfe (2001) 0.02
    0.018260393 = product of:
      0.06391137 = sum of:
        0.04150931 = weight(_text_:management in 6815) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04150931 = score(doc=6815,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.29792285 = fieldWeight in 6815, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6815)
        0.02240206 = product of:
          0.04480412 = sum of:
            0.04480412 = weight(_text_:22 in 6815) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04480412 = score(doc=6815,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14475311 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6815, 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=6815)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Date
    8.11.2001 19:58:22
  20. Maurer, H.; Balke, T.; Kappe,, F.; Kulathuramaiyer, N.; Weber, S.; Zaka, B.: Report on dangers and opportunities posed by large search engines, particularly Google (2007) 0.02
    0.017640304 = product of:
      0.06174106 = sum of:
        0.050833322 = weight(_text_:europe in 754) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050833322 = score(doc=754,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25178367 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.20189285 = fieldWeight in 754, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.091085 = idf(docFreq=271, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=754)
        0.0109077385 = product of:
          0.021815477 = sum of:
            0.021815477 = weight(_text_:studies in 754) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.021815477 = score(doc=754,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16494368 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.13226016 = fieldWeight in 754, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=754)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    The preliminary intended and approved list was: Section 1: To concentrate on Google as virtual monopoly, and Google's reported support of Wikipedia. To find experimental evidence of this support or show that the reports are not more than rumours. Section 2: To address the copy-past syndrome with socio-cultural consequences associated with it. Section 3: To deal with plagiarism and IPR violations as two intertwined topics: how they affect various players (teachers and pupils in school; academia; corporations; governmental studies, etc.). To establish that not enough is done concerning these issues, partially due to just plain ignorance. We will propose some ways to alleviate the problem. Section 4: To discuss the usual tools to fight plagiarism and their shortcomings. Section 5: To propose ways to overcome most of above problems according to proposals by Maurer/Zaka. To examples, but to make it clear that do this more seriously a pilot project is necessary beyond this particular study. Section 6: To briefly analyze various views of plagiarism as it is quite different in different fields (journalism, engineering, architecture, painting, .) and to present a concept that avoids plagiarism from the very beginning. Section 7: To point out the many other dangers of Google or Google-like undertakings: opportunistic ranking, analysis of data as window into commercial future. Section 8: To outline the need of new international laws. Section 9: To mention the feeble European attempts to fight Google, despite Google's growing power. Section 10. To argue that there is no way to catch up with Google in a frontal attack.
    We believe that the importance has shifted considerably since the approval of the project. We thus will emphasize some aspects much more than ever planned, and treat others in a shorter fashion. We believe and hope that this is also seen as unexpected benefit by BMVIT. This report is structured as follows: After an Executive Summary that will highlight why the topic is of such paramount importance we explain in an introduction possible optimal ways how to study the report and its appendices. We can report with some pride that many of the ideas have been accepted by the international scene at conferences and by journals as of such crucial importance that a number of papers (constituting the appendices and elaborating the various sections) have been considered high quality material for publication. We want to thank the Austrian Federal Ministry of Transport, Innovation and Technology (BMVIT) for making this study possible. We would be delighted if the study can be distributed widely to European decision makers, as some of the issues involved do indeed involve all of Europe, if not the world.

Years

Languages

  • e 191
  • d 90
  • f 1
  • nl 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 256
  • el 18
  • m 13
  • x 3
  • p 2
  • s 2
  • r 1
  • More… Less…