Search (21 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalstudien"
  • × year_i:[1990 TO 2000}
  1. Huffman, G.D.; Vital, D.A.; Bivins, R.G.: Generating indices with lexical association methods : term uniqueness (1990) 0.03
    0.030214114 = product of:
      0.06042823 = sum of:
        0.06042823 = product of:
          0.12085646 = sum of:
            0.12085646 = weight(_text_:assessment in 4152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.12085646 = score(doc=4152,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.2801951 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.52102 = idf(docFreq=480, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = queryNorm
                0.43132967 = fieldWeight in 4152, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  5.52102 = idf(docFreq=480, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4152)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    A software system has been developed which orders citations retrieved from an online database in terms of relevancy. The system resulted from an effort generated by NASA's Technology Utilization Program to create new advanced software tools to largely automate the process of determining relevancy of database citations retrieved to support large technology transfer studies. The ranking is based on the generation of an enriched vocabulary using lexical association methods, a user assessment of the vocabulary and a combination of the user assessment and the lexical metric. One of the key elements in relevancy ranking is the enriched vocabulary -the terms mst be both unique and descriptive. This paper examines term uniqueness. Six lexical association methods were employed to generate characteristic word indices. A limited subset of the terms - the highest 20,40,60 and 7,5% of the uniquess words - we compared and uniquess factors developed. Computational times were also measured. It was found that methods based on occurrences and signal produced virtually the same terms. The limited subset of terms producedby the exact and centroid discrimination value were also nearly identical. Unique terms sets were produced by teh occurrence, variance and discrimination value (centroid), An end-user evaluation showed that the generated terms were largely distinct and had values of word precision which were consistent with values of the search precision.
  2. Janes, J.W.; McKinney, R.: Relevance judgements of actual users and secondary judges : a comparative study (1992) 0.03
    0.029910447 = product of:
      0.059820894 = sum of:
        0.059820894 = product of:
          0.11964179 = sum of:
            0.11964179 = weight(_text_:assessment in 4276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11964179 = score(doc=4276,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2801951 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.52102 = idf(docFreq=480, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = queryNorm
                0.4269946 = fieldWeight in 4276, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.52102 = idf(docFreq=480, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4276)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Examines judgements of relevance of document representations to query statements made by people other than the the originators of the queries. A small group of graduate students in the School of Information and Library Studies and undergraduates of Michigan Univ. judges sets of documents that had been retrieved for and judged by real users for a previous study. The assessment of relevance, by the secondary judges, were analysed by themselves and in comparison with the users' assessments. The judges performed reasonably well but some important differences were identified. Secondary judges use the various fields of document records in different ways than users and have a higher threshold of relevance
  3. Hersh, W.; Pentecost, J.; Hickam, D.: ¬A task-oriented approach to information retrieval evaluation : overview and design for empirical testing (1996) 0.03
    0.025637524 = product of:
      0.05127505 = sum of:
        0.05127505 = product of:
          0.1025501 = sum of:
            0.1025501 = weight(_text_:assessment in 3001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.1025501 = score(doc=3001,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2801951 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.52102 = idf(docFreq=480, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = queryNorm
                0.36599535 = fieldWeight in 3001, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.52102 = idf(docFreq=480, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3001)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    As retrieval system become more oriented towards end-users, there is an increasing need for improved methods to evaluate their effectiveness. We performed a task-oriented assessment of 2 MEDLINE searching systems, one which promotes traditional Boolean searching on human-indexed thesaurus terms and the other natural language searching on words in the title, abstracts and indexing terms. Medical students were randomized to one of the 2 systems and given clinical questions to answer. The students were able to use each system successfully, with no significant differences in questions correctly answered, time taken, relevant articles retrieved, or user satisfaction between the systems. This approach to evaluation was successful in measuring effectiveness of system use and demonstrates that both types of systems can be used equally well with minimal training
  4. Hersh, W.R.; Pentecost, J.; Hickam, D.H.: ¬A task-oriented approach to retrieval system evaluation (1995) 0.03
    0.025637524 = product of:
      0.05127505 = sum of:
        0.05127505 = product of:
          0.1025501 = sum of:
            0.1025501 = weight(_text_:assessment in 3867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.1025501 = score(doc=3867,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2801951 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.52102 = idf(docFreq=480, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = queryNorm
                0.36599535 = fieldWeight in 3867, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.52102 = idf(docFreq=480, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3867)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    There is a need for improved methods to evaluate the effectiveness of end user information retrieval systems. Performs a task oriented assessment of 2 MEDLINE searching systems, one which promotes Boolean searching on human indexed thesaurus terms and the other natural language searching on words in the title, abstract, and indexing terms. Each was used by medical students to answer clinical questions. Students were able to use each system successfully, with no significant differences in questions correctly answered, time taken, relevant articles retrieved, or user satisfaction between the systems. This approach to evaluation was successful in measuring effectiveness of system use and demonstrates that both types of systems can be used equally well with minimal training
  5. Tomaiuolo, N.G.; Parker, J.: Maximizing relevant retrieval : keyword and natural language searching (1998) 0.02
    0.024066022 = product of:
      0.048132043 = sum of:
        0.048132043 = product of:
          0.09626409 = sum of:
            0.09626409 = weight(_text_:22 in 6418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09626409 = score(doc=6418,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17771997 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6418, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6418)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Online. 22(1998) no.6, S.57-58
  6. Dalrymple, P.W.: Retrieval by reformulation in two library catalogs : toward a cognitive model of searching behavior (1990) 0.02
    0.024066022 = product of:
      0.048132043 = sum of:
        0.048132043 = product of:
          0.09626409 = sum of:
            0.09626409 = weight(_text_:22 in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09626409 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17771997 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2006 18:43:54
  7. Allan, J.; Callan, J.P.; Croft, W.B.; Ballesteros, L.; Broglio, J.; Xu, J.; Shu, H.: INQUERY at TREC-5 (1997) 0.02
    0.017190015 = product of:
      0.03438003 = sum of:
        0.03438003 = product of:
          0.06876006 = sum of:
            0.06876006 = weight(_text_:22 in 3103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06876006 = score(doc=3103,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17771997 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3103, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3103)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    27. 2.1999 20:55:22
  8. Ng, K.B.; Loewenstern, D.; Basu, C.; Hirsh, H.; Kantor, P.B.: Data fusion of machine-learning methods for the TREC5 routing tak (and other work) (1997) 0.02
    0.017190015 = product of:
      0.03438003 = sum of:
        0.03438003 = product of:
          0.06876006 = sum of:
            0.06876006 = weight(_text_:22 in 3107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06876006 = score(doc=3107,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17771997 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3107, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3107)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    27. 2.1999 20:59:22
  9. Sanderson, M.: ¬The Reuters test collection (1996) 0.01
    0.0137520125 = product of:
      0.027504025 = sum of:
        0.027504025 = product of:
          0.05500805 = sum of:
            0.05500805 = weight(_text_:22 in 6971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05500805 = score(doc=6971,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17771997 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = 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(1/2)
    
    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
  10. Lespinasse, K.: TREC: une conference pour l'evaluation des systemes de recherche d'information (1997) 0.01
    0.0137520125 = product of:
      0.027504025 = sum of:
        0.027504025 = product of:
          0.05500805 = sum of:
            0.05500805 = weight(_text_:22 in 744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05500805 = score(doc=744,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17771997 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 744, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=744)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
  11. ¬The Fifth Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-5) (1997) 0.01
    0.0137520125 = product of:
      0.027504025 = sum of:
        0.027504025 = product of:
          0.05500805 = sum of:
            0.05500805 = weight(_text_:22 in 3087) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05500805 = score(doc=3087,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17771997 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3087, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3087)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Proceedings of the 5th TREC-confrerence held in Gaithersburgh, Maryland, Nov 20-22, 1996. Aim of the conference was discussion on retrieval techniques for large test collections. Different research groups used different techniques, such as automated thesauri, term weighting, natural language techniques, relevance feedback and advanced pattern matching, for information retrieval from the same large database. This procedure makes it possible to compare the results. The proceedings include papers, tables of the system results, and brief system descriptions including timing and storage information
  12. Pemberton, J.K.; Ojala, M.; Garman, N.: Head to head : searching the Web versus traditional services (1998) 0.01
    0.0137520125 = product of:
      0.027504025 = sum of:
        0.027504025 = product of:
          0.05500805 = sum of:
            0.05500805 = weight(_text_:22 in 3572) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05500805 = score(doc=3572,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17771997 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3572, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3572)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Online. 22(1998) no.3, S.24-26,28
  13. Ellis, D.: Progress and problems in information retrieval (1996) 0.01
    0.0137520125 = product of:
      0.027504025 = sum of:
        0.027504025 = product of:
          0.05500805 = sum of:
            0.05500805 = weight(_text_:22 in 789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05500805 = score(doc=789,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17771997 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 789, 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=789)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    26. 7.2002 20:22:46
  14. Smithson, S.: Information retrieval evaluation in practice : a case study approach (1994) 0.01
    0.012033011 = product of:
      0.024066022 = sum of:
        0.024066022 = product of:
          0.048132043 = sum of:
            0.048132043 = weight(_text_:22 in 7302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048132043 = score(doc=7302,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17771997 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7302, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7302)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The evaluation of information retrieval systems is an important yet difficult operation. This paper describes an exploratory evaluation study that takes an interpretive approach to evaluation. The longitudinal study examines evaluation through the information-seeking behaviour of 22 case studies of 'real' users. The eclectic approach to data collection produced behavioral data that is compared with relevance judgements and satisfaction ratings. The study demonstrates considerable variations among the cases, among different evaluation measures within the same case, and among the same measures at different stages within a single case. It is argued that those involved in evaluation should be aware of the difficulties, and base any evaluation on a good understanding of the cases in question
  15. Blair, D.C.: STAIRS Redux : thoughts on the STAIRS evaluation, ten years after (1996) 0.01
    0.012033011 = product of:
      0.024066022 = sum of:
        0.024066022 = product of:
          0.048132043 = sum of:
            0.048132043 = weight(_text_:22 in 3002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048132043 = score(doc=3002,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17771997 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3002, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3002)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 47(1996) no.1, S.4-22
  16. Losee, R.M.: Determining information retrieval and filtering performance without experimentation (1995) 0.01
    0.012033011 = product of:
      0.024066022 = sum of:
        0.024066022 = product of:
          0.048132043 = sum of:
            0.048132043 = weight(_text_:22 in 3368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048132043 = score(doc=3368,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17771997 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3368, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3368)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 2.1996 13:14:10
  17. Brown, M.E.: By any other name : accounting for failure in the naming of subject categories (1995) 0.01
    0.012033011 = product of:
      0.024066022 = sum of:
        0.024066022 = product of:
          0.048132043 = sum of:
            0.048132043 = weight(_text_:22 in 5598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048132043 = score(doc=5598,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17771997 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5598, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5598)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    2.11.1996 13:08:22
  18. Iivonen, M.: Consistency in the selection of search concepts and search terms (1995) 0.01
    0.010314009 = product of:
      0.020628018 = sum of:
        0.020628018 = product of:
          0.041256037 = sum of:
            0.041256037 = weight(_text_:22 in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.041256037 = score(doc=1757,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17771997 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1757, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1757)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Considers intersearcher and intrasearcher consistency in the selection of search terms. Based on an empirical study where 22 searchers from 4 different types of search environments analyzed altogether 12 search requests of 4 different types in 2 separate test situations between which 2 months elapsed. Statistically very significant differences in consistency were found according to the types of search environments and search requests. Consistency was also considered according to the extent of the scope of search concept. At level I search terms were compared character by character. At level II different search terms were accepted as the same search concept with a rather simple evaluation of linguistic expressions. At level III, in addition to level II, the hierarchical approach of the search request was also controlled. At level IV different search terms were accepted as the same search concept with a broad interpretation of the search concept. Both intersearcher and intrasearcher consistency grew most immediately after a rather simple evaluation of linguistic impressions
  19. Wood, F.; Ford, N.; Miller, D.; Sobczyk, G.; Duffin, R.: Information skills, searching behaviour and cognitive styles for student-centred learning : a computer-assisted learning approach (1996) 0.01
    0.010314009 = product of:
      0.020628018 = sum of:
        0.020628018 = product of:
          0.041256037 = sum of:
            0.041256037 = weight(_text_:22 in 4341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.041256037 = score(doc=4341,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17771997 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4341, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4341)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.2, S.79-92
  20. Crestani, F.; Rijsbergen, C.J. van: Information retrieval by imaging (1996) 0.01
    0.010314009 = product of:
      0.020628018 = sum of:
        0.020628018 = product of:
          0.041256037 = sum of:
            0.041256037 = weight(_text_:22 in 6967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.041256037 = score(doc=6967,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17771997 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050750602 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 6967, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6967)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    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