Search (21 results, page 1 of 2)

0.035879306 = product of:
  0.07175861 = sum of:
    0.016202414 = weight(_text_:information in 1177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016202414 = score(doc=1177,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047586527 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 1177, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1177)
    0.055556197 = sum of:
      0.02331961 = weight(_text_:technology in 1177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02331961 = score(doc=1177,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.047586527 = queryNorm
          0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 1177, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1177)
      0.032236587 = weight(_text_:22 in 1177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.032236587 = score(doc=1177,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16663991 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.047586527 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1177, 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=1177)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Search engine users typically engage in multiquery sessions in their quest to fulfill their information needs. Despite a plethora of research findings suggesting that a significant group of users look for information within a specific geographical scope, existing reformulation studies lack a focused analysis of how users reformulate geographic queries. This study comprehensively investigates the ways in which users reformulate such needs in an attempt to fill this gap in the literature. Reformulated sessions were sampled from a query log of a major search engine to extract 2,400 entries that were manually inspected to filter geo sessions. This filter identified 471 search sessions that included geographical intent, and these sessions were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively. The results revealed that one in five of the users who reformulated their queries were looking for geographically related information. They reformulated their queries by changing the content of the query rather than the structure. Users were not following a unified sequence of modifications and instead performed a single reformulation action. However, in some cases it was possible to anticipate their next move. A number of tasks in geo modifications were identified, including standard, multi-needs, multi-places, and hybrid approaches. The research concludes that it is important to specialize query reformulation studies to focus on particular query types rather than generically analyzing them, as it is apparent that geographic queries have their special reformulation characteristics.

Date

26. 1.2014 18:48:22

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.1, S.13-24

0.022060106 = product of:
  0.04412021 = sum of:
    0.018330941 = weight(_text_:information in 6971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018330941 = score(doc=6971,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047586527 = queryNorm
        0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 6971, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6971)
    0.02578927 = product of:
      0.05157854 = sum of:
        0.05157854 = weight(_text_:22 in 6971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05157854 = score(doc=6971,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16663991 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047586527 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6971, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6971)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Source

Information retrieval: new systems and current research. Proceedings of the 16th Research Colloquium of the British Computer Society Information Retrieval Specialist Group, Drymen, Scotland, 22-23 Mar 94. Ed.: R. Leon

0.020762585 = product of:
  0.04152517 = sum of:
    0.021737823 = weight(_text_:information in 5053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021737823 = score(doc=5053,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047586527 = queryNorm
        0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 5053, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5053)
    0.019787349 = product of:
      0.039574698 = sum of:
        0.039574698 = weight(_text_:technology in 5053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039574698 = score(doc=5053,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047586527 = queryNorm
            0.2792238 = fieldWeight in 5053, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5053)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

A novel and complex form of information access is cross-language information retrieval: searching for texts written in foreign languages based on native language queries. Although the underlying technology for achieving such a search is relatively well understood, the appropriate interface design is not. The authors present three user evaluations undertaken during the iterative design of Clarity, a cross-language retrieval system for lowdensity languages, and shows how the user-interaction design evolved depending on the results of usability tests. The first test was instrumental to identify weaknesses in both functionalities and interface; the second was run to determine if query translation should be shown or not; the final was a global assessment and focused on user satisfaction criteria. Lessons were learned at every stage of the process leading to a much more informed view of what a cross-language retrieval system should offer to users.

Footnote

Beitrag einer special topic section on multilingual information systems

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.5, S.709-722

0.019503556 = product of:
  0.039007112 = sum of:
    0.022683382 = weight(_text_:information in 3447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022683382 = score(doc=3447,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047586527 = queryNorm
        0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 3447, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3447)
    0.016323728 = product of:
      0.032647457 = sum of:
        0.032647457 = weight(_text_:technology in 3447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032647457 = score(doc=3447,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047586527 = queryNorm
            0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 3447, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3447)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The authors investigate factors influencing user satisfaction in information retrieval. It is evident from this study that user satisfaction is a subjective variable, which can be influenced by several factors such as system effectiveness, user effectiveness, user effort, and user characteristics and expectations. Therefore, information retrieval evaluators should consider all these factors in obtaining user satisfaction and in using it as a criterion of system effectiveness. Previous studies have conflicting conclusions on the relationship between user satisfaction and system effectiveness; this study has substantiated these findings and supports using user satisfaction as a criterion of system effectiveness.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.5, S.859-868

0.017984057 = product of:
  0.035968114 = sum of:
    0.019644385 = weight(_text_:information in 2852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019644385 = score(doc=2852,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047586527 = queryNorm
        0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 2852, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2852)
    0.016323728 = product of:
      0.032647457 = sum of:
        0.032647457 = weight(_text_:technology in 2852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032647457 = score(doc=2852,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047586527 = queryNorm
            0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 2852, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2852)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This brief communication describes the results of a questionnaire examining certain aspects of the Web-based information seeking practices of university students. The results are contrasted with past work showing that queries to Web search engines can be assigned to one of a series of categories: navigational, informational, and transactional. The survey results suggest that a large group of queries, which in the past would have been classified as informational, have become at least partially navigational. We contend that this change has occurred because of the rise of large Web sites holding particular types of information, such as Wikipedia and the Internet Movie Database.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.6, S.1290-1293

0.017864795 = product of:
  0.03572959 = sum of:
    0.021737823 = weight(_text_:information in 1129) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021737823 = score(doc=1129,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047586527 = queryNorm
        0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 1129, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1129)
    0.013991767 = product of:
      0.027983533 = sum of:
        0.027983533 = weight(_text_:technology in 1129) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027983533 = score(doc=1129,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047586527 = queryNorm
            0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 1129, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1129)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

In this paper we present results from an investigation of religious information searching based on analyzing log files from a large general-purpose search engine. From approximately 15 million queries, we identified 124,422 that were part of 60,759 user sessions. We present a method for categorizing queries based on related terms and show differences in search patterns between religious searches and web searching more generally. We also investigate the search patterns found in queries related to 5 religions: Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, and Judaism. Different search patterns are found to emerge. Results from this study complement existing studies of religious information searching and provide a level of detailed analysis not reported to date. We show, for example, that sessions involving religion-related queries tend to last longer, that the lengths of religion-related queries are greater, and that the number of unique URLs clicked is higher when compared to all queries. The results of the study can serve to provide information on what this large population of users is actually searching for.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.12, S.2492-2506

0.017864795 = product of:
  0.03572959 = sum of:
    0.021737823 = weight(_text_:information in 496) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021737823 = score(doc=496,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047586527 = queryNorm
        0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 496, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=496)
    0.013991767 = product of:
      0.027983533 = sum of:
        0.027983533 = weight(_text_:technology in 496) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027983533 = score(doc=496,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047586527 = queryNorm
            0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 496, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=496)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This research analyzes human-generated clarification questions to provide insights into how they are used to disambiguate and provide a better understanding of information needs. A set of clarification questions is extracted from posts on the Stack Exchange platform. Novel taxonomy is defined for the annotation of the questions and their responses. We investigate the clarification questions in terms of whether they add any information to the post (the initial question posted by the asker) and the accepted answer, which is the answer chosen by the asker. After identifying, which clarification questions are more useful, we investigated the characteristics of these questions in terms of their types and patterns. Non-useful clarification questions are identified, and their patterns are compared with useful clarifications. Our analysis indicates that the most useful clarification questions have similar patterns, regardless of topic. This research contributes to an understanding of clarification in conversations and can provide insight for clarification dialogues in conversational search scenarios and for the possible system generation of clarification requests in information-seeking conversations.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.3, S.449-471

0.016767778 = product of:
  0.033535555 = sum of:
    0.013748205 = weight(_text_:information in 2506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013748205 = score(doc=2506,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047586527 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 2506, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2506)
    0.019787349 = product of:
      0.039574698 = sum of:
        0.039574698 = weight(_text_:technology in 2506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039574698 = score(doc=2506,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047586527 = queryNorm
            0.2792238 = fieldWeight in 2506, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2506)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This report presents a case study of the development of an interface for a novel and complex form of document retrieval: searching for texts written in foreign languages based on native language queries. Although the underlying technology for achieving such a search is relatively weIl understood, the appropriate interface design is not. A study involving users from the beginning of the design process is described, and it covers initial examination of user needs and tasks, preliminary design and testing of interface components, building, testing, and refining the interface, and, finally, conducting usability tests of the system. Lessons are learned at every stage of the process, leading to a much more informed view of how such an interface should be built.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 55(2004) no.10, S.923-934

0.015414905 = product of:
  0.03082981 = sum of:
    0.016838044 = weight(_text_:information in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016838044 = score(doc=2840,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047586527 = queryNorm
        0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 2840, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2840)
    0.013991767 = product of:
      0.027983533 = sum of:
        0.027983533 = weight(_text_:technology in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027983533 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047586527 = queryNorm
            0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 2840, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2840)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Finding a place of interest (e.g., a restaurant, hotel, or attraction) is often related to a group information need, however, the actual multiparty collaboration in such searches has not been explored, and little is known about its significance and related practices. We surveyed 100 computer science students and found that 94% (of respondents) searched for places online; 87% had done so as part of a group. Search for place by multiple active participants was experienced by 78%, with group sizes typically being 2 or 3. Search occurred in a range of settings with both desktop PCs and mobile devices. Difficulties were reported with coordinating tasks, sharing results, and making decisions. The results show that finding a place of interest is a quite different group-based search than other multiparty information-seeking activities. The results suggest that local search systems, their interfaces and the devices that access them can be made more usable for collaborative search if they include support for coordination, sharing of results, and decision making.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.6, S.1331-1344

0.013869986 = product of:
  0.027739972 = sum of:
    0.013748205 = weight(_text_:information in 5052) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013748205 = score(doc=5052,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047586527 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 5052, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5052)
    0.013991767 = product of:
      0.027983533 = sum of:
        0.027983533 = weight(_text_:technology in 5052) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027983533 = score(doc=5052,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047586527 = queryNorm
            0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 5052, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5052)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Footnote

Beitrag einer special topic section on multilingual information systems

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.5, S.697-708

0.012845755 = product of:
  0.02569151 = sum of:
    0.0140317045 = weight(_text_:information in 2926) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0140317045 = score(doc=2926,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047586527 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 2926, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2926)
    0.011659805 = product of:
      0.02331961 = sum of:
        0.02331961 = weight(_text_:technology in 2926) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02331961 = score(doc=2926,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047586527 = queryNorm
            0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 2926, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2926)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

We examined whether the microblog comments given by people after reading a web document could be exploited to improve the accuracy of a web document summarization system. We examined the effect of social information (i.e., tweets) on the accuracy of the generated summaries by comparing the user preference for TBS (tweet-biased summary) with GS (generic summary). The result of crowdsourcing-based evaluation shows that the user preference for TBS was significantly higher than GS. We also took random samples of the documents to see the performance of summaries in a traditional evaluation using ROUGE, which, in general, TBS was also shown to be better than GS. We further analyzed the influence of the number of tweets pointed to a web document on summarization accuracy, finding a positive moderate correlation between the number of tweets pointed to a web document and the performance of generated TBS as measured by user preference. The results show that incorporating social information into the summary generation process can improve the accuracy of summary. The reason for people choosing one summary over another in a crowdsourcing-based evaluation is also presented in this article.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.6, S.1289-1300

0.011856608 = product of:
  0.023713216 = sum of:
    0.00972145 = weight(_text_:information in 1867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00972145 = score(doc=1867,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047586527 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1867, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1867)
    0.013991767 = product of:
      0.027983533 = sum of:
        0.027983533 = weight(_text_:technology in 1867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027983533 = score(doc=1867,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047586527 = queryNorm
            0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 1867, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1867)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.7, S.1184-1190

0.011856608 = product of:
  0.023713216 = sum of:
    0.00972145 = weight(_text_:information in 4105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00972145 = score(doc=4105,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047586527 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4105, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4105)
    0.013991767 = product of:
      0.027983533 = sum of:
        0.027983533 = weight(_text_:technology in 4105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027983533 = score(doc=4105,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047586527 = queryNorm
            0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 4105, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4105)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.11, S.2300-2310

0.011856608 = product of:
  0.023713216 = sum of:
    0.00972145 = weight(_text_:information in 2347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00972145 = score(doc=2347,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047586527 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2347, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2347)
    0.013991767 = product of:
      0.027983533 = sum of:
        0.027983533 = weight(_text_:technology in 2347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027983533 = score(doc=2347,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047586527 = queryNorm
            0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 2347, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2347)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.12, S.2674-2684

0.011856608 = product of:
  0.023713216 = sum of:
    0.00972145 = weight(_text_:information in 3788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00972145 = score(doc=3788,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047586527 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3788, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3788)
    0.013991767 = product of:
      0.027983533 = sum of:
        0.027983533 = weight(_text_:technology in 3788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027983533 = score(doc=3788,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047586527 = queryNorm
            0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 3788, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3788)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.9, S.2101-2115

0.011558321 = product of:
  0.023116643 = sum of:
    0.011456838 = weight(_text_:information in 3318) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011456838 = score(doc=3318,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047586527 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 3318, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3318)
    0.011659805 = product of:
      0.02331961 = sum of:
        0.02331961 = weight(_text_:technology in 3318) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02331961 = score(doc=3318,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047586527 = queryNorm
            0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 3318, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3318)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

We analyze 18- million rows of Wi-Fi access logs collected over a 1-year period from over 120,000 anonymized users at an inner city shopping mall. The anonymized data set gathered from an opt-in system provides users' approximate physical location as well as web browsing and some search history. Such data provide a unique opportunity to analyze the interaction between people's behavior in physical retail spaces and their web behavior, serving as a proxy to their information needs. We found that (a) there is a weekly periodicity in users' visits to the mall; (b) people tend to visit similar mall locations and web content during their repeated visits to the mall; (c) around 60% of registered Wi-Fi users actively browse the web, and around 10% of them use Wi-Fi for accessing web search engines; (d) people are likely to spend a relatively constant amount of time browsing the web while the duration of their visit may vary; (e) the physical spatial context has a small, but significant, influence on the web content that indoor users browse; and (f) accompanying users tend to access resources from the same web domains.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.1, S.62-76

0.0098805055 = product of:
  0.019761011 = sum of:
    0.008101207 = weight(_text_:information in 4114) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008101207 = score(doc=4114,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047586527 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 4114, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4114)
    0.011659805 = product of:
      0.02331961 = sum of:
        0.02331961 = weight(_text_:technology in 4114) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02331961 = score(doc=4114,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047586527 = queryNorm
            0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 4114, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4114)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.12, S.2426-2441

0.0069958833 = product of:
  0.027983533 = sum of:
    0.027983533 = product of:
      0.055967066 = sum of:
        0.055967066 = weight(_text_:technology in 3088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055967066 = score(doc=3088,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047586527 = queryNorm
            0.39488205 = fieldWeight in 3088, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3088)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Imprint

Gaithersburgh, MD : National Institute of Standards and Technology

0.0058299024 = product of:
  0.02331961 = sum of:
    0.02331961 = product of:
      0.04663922 = sum of:
        0.04663922 = weight(_text_:technology in 7522) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04663922 = score(doc=7522,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047586527 = queryNorm
            0.32906836 = fieldWeight in 7522, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=7522)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Imprint

Gaithersburgh, MD : National Institute of Standards and Technology

0.004209511 = product of:
  0.016838044 = sum of:
    0.016838044 = weight(_text_:information in 37) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016838044 = score(doc=37,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047586527 = queryNorm
        0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 37, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=37)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Series

The Kluwer international series on information retrieval; 7

Source

Advances in information retrieval: Recent research from the Center for Intelligent Information Retrieval. Ed.: W.B. Croft