Search (63 results, page 1 of 4)

0.05533334 = product of:
  0.11066668 = sum of:
    0.089426495 = weight(_text_:engines in 5296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.089426495 = score(doc=5296,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04479146 = queryNorm
        0.39294976 = fieldWeight in 5296, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5296)
    0.021240186 = product of:
      0.042480372 = sum of:
        0.042480372 = weight(_text_:22 in 5296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042480372 = score(doc=5296,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04479146 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5296, 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=5296)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

User interfaces of Web search engines reflect attributes of the underlying tools used to create them, rather than what we know about how people look for information. In this article, the author examines several characteristics of user search behavior: the variety of information-seeking goals, the cultural and situational context of search, and the iterative nature of the search task. An analysis of these characteristics suggests ways that interfaces can be redesigned to make searching more effective for users.

Date

22. 7.2006 17:58:06

0.038722813 = product of:
  0.15489125 = sum of:
    0.15489125 = weight(_text_:engines in 2255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15489125 = score(doc=2255,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04479146 = queryNorm
        0.68060905 = fieldWeight in 2255, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2255)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The behavior of academic library users has drastically changed in recent years. Internet search engines have become the preferred tool over the library online public access catalog (OPAC) for finding information. Libraries are losing ground to online search engines. In this paper, two aspects of OPAC use are studied: (1) the current OPAC interface and searching capabilities, and (2) the OPAC bibliographic display. The purpose of the study is to find answers to the following questions: Why is the current OPAC ineffective? What can libraries and librarians do to deliver an OPAC that is as good as search engines to better serve our users? Revitalizing the library OPAC is one of the pressing issues that has to be accomplished.

0.031938035 = product of:
  0.12775214 = sum of:
    0.12775214 = weight(_text_:engines in 7235) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12775214 = score(doc=7235,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04479146 = queryNorm
        0.5613568 = fieldWeight in 7235, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=7235)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Evaluates 3 CD-ROM search engines. WinSPIRS, the Microsoft Windows version of SilverPlatter's retrieval engine, and Map'n'Go from DeLorme Mapping, a graphical planning tool, employ a graphical approach, Bowker/Whitaker Global Books in Print uses a powerful MS-DOS shell

0.03161704 = product of:
  0.12646817 = sum of:
    0.12646817 = weight(_text_:engines in 6756) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12646817 = score(doc=6756,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04479146 = queryNorm
        0.5557149 = fieldWeight in 6756, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6756)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Reports results of study, undertaken at the Project Whistlestop Web site, Missouri University at Columbia to examine the indexing and retrieval rates of 5 WWW search engines: InfoSeek; Excite; Yahoo; Lycos and AltaVista. Character strings were planted in the Project Whistlestop Web site and daily searches were performed for 6 weeks. The HTML tag was indexed in 4 of the 5 search engines and problems encountered include insufficient and inconsistent indexing

0.025550429 = product of:
  0.102201715 = sum of:
    0.102201715 = weight(_text_:engines in 3611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.102201715 = score(doc=3611,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04479146 = queryNorm
        0.44908544 = fieldWeight in 3611, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3611)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In the short term, technological advances will not solve the problems of information saturation and electronic gridlock on the Internet. Advocates interface design techniques as the only effective means of addressing the usability problems that frustrate interaction with Internet resources. Collaborative approaches to information retrieval, where search engines are augmented by advice from human experts, can reduce the problems of electronic gridlock and information saturation

0.022583602 = product of:
  0.09033441 = sum of:
    0.09033441 = weight(_text_:engines in 697) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09033441 = score(doc=697,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04479146 = queryNorm
        0.39693922 = fieldWeight in 697, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=697)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Those seeking information from the Internet often start from a search engine, using either its organised directory structure or its text query facility. In response to the difficulty in identifying the most relevant pages for some information needs, many search engines offer Boolean text matching and some, including Google, AltaVista and HotBot, offer the facility to integrate additional information into a more advanced request. Amongst web users, however, it is known that the employment of complex enquiries is far from universal, with very short queries being the norm. It is demonstrated that the gap between the provision of advanced search facilities and their use can be bridged, for specific information needs, by the construction of a simple interface in the form of a website that automatically formulates the necessary requests. It is argued that this kind of resource, perhaps employing additional knowledge domain specific information, is one that could be useful for websites or portals of common interest groups. The approach is illustrated by a website that enables a user to search the individual websites of university level institutions in European Union associated countries.

0.022127323 = product of:
  0.08850929 = sum of:
    0.08850929 = weight(_text_:engines in 4029) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08850929 = score(doc=4029,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04479146 = queryNorm
        0.38891944 = fieldWeight in 4029, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4029)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This book outlines the human side of the information seeking process, and focuses on the aspects of this process that can best be supported by the user interface. It describes the methods behind user interface design generally, and search interface design in particular, with an emphasis on how best to evaluate search interfaces. It discusses research results and current practices surrounding user interfaces for query specification, display of retrieval results, grouping retrieval results, navigation of information collections, query reformulation, search personalization, and the broader tasks of sensemaking and text analysis. Much of the discussion pertains to Web search engines, but the book also covers the special considerations surrounding search of other information collections.

LCSH

Web search engines

Subject

Web search engines

0.021265483 = product of:
  0.08506193 = sum of:
    0.08506193 = product of:
      0.17012386 = sum of:
        0.17012386 = weight(_text_:programming in 7844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17012386 = score(doc=7844,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.29361802 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04479146 = queryNorm
            0.57940537 = fieldWeight in 7844, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7844)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

MicroISIS, developed and distributed by Unesco, is used widely, aspecially in developing countries, in the design and development of databases. It has facilities for designing end user interfaces using the CDS/ISIS Pascal programming language and such interfaces can enhance the user friendliness of the software. Describes the features and application of the interface SELECT.PAS, and discusses the advantages offered by the SELECT.PAS interface to the standard MicroISIS package

0.021265483 = product of:
  0.08506193 = sum of:
    0.08506193 = product of:
      0.17012386 = sum of:
        0.17012386 = weight(_text_:programming in 4740) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17012386 = score(doc=4740,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.29361802 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04479146 = queryNorm
            0.57940537 = fieldWeight in 4740, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4740)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The Ovid Java interface is compared with the Ovid Web Gateway and Ovid Windows Client, focusing on functionality from the user's perspective. The Java version draws upon both earlier Web and Windows versions, thus combining the worlds of the Web and application programs. It is concluded that Ovid Java offers enhanced functionality and requires high-end hardware and browser software to run well. Additional enhancements are forthcoming, some dependent upon the further development of Sun Microsystems' Java programming language

0.01916282 = product of:
  0.07665128 = sum of:
    0.07665128 = weight(_text_:engines in 727) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07665128 = score(doc=727,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04479146 = queryNorm
        0.33681408 = fieldWeight in 727, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=727)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The Internet gives access for blind and visually impaired users to previously unobtainable information via Braille or speech synthesis interpretation. This paper looks at how three search engines, AltaVista, Yahoo! and Infoseek presented their information to a small group of visually impaired and blind users and how accessible individual Internet pages are. Two participants had varying levels of partial sight and two Subjects were blind and solely reliant on speech synthesis output. Subjects were asked for feedback on interface design at various stages of their search and any problems they encountered were noted. The barriers to access that were found appear to come about by lack of knowledge and thought by the page designers themselves. An accessible page does not have to be dull. By adhering to simple guidelines, visually impaired users would be able to access information more effectively than would otherwise be possible. Visually disabled people would also have the same opportunity to access knowledge as their sighted colleagues.

0.018066881 = product of:
  0.072267525 = sum of:
    0.072267525 = weight(_text_:engines in 2643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.072267525 = score(doc=2643,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04479146 = queryNorm
        0.31755137 = fieldWeight in 2643, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2643)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

1. Introduction Web search engines and digital libraries usually expect the users to use search terms that most accurately represent their information needs. Finding the most appropriate search terms to represent an information need is an age old problem in information retrieval. Keyword or phrase search may produce good search results as long as the search terms or phrase(s) match those used by the authors and have been chosen for indexing by the concerned information retrieval system. Since this does not always happen, a large number of false drops are produced by information retrieval systems. The retrieval results become worse in very large systems that deal with millions of records, such as the Web search engines and digital libraries. Vocabulary control tools are used to improve the performance of text retrieval systems. Thesauri, the most common type of vocabulary control tool used in information retrieval, appeared in the late fifties, designed for use with the emerging post-coordinate indexing systems of that time. They are used to exert terminology control in indexing, and to aid in searching by allowing the searcher to select appropriate search terms. A large volume of literature exists describing the design features, and experiments with the use, of thesauri in various types of information retrieval systems (see for example, Furnas et.al., 1987; Bates, 1986, 1998; Milstead, 1997, and Shiri et al., 2002).

0.015969018 = product of:
  0.06387607 = sum of:
    0.06387607 = weight(_text_:engines in 1957) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06387607 = score(doc=1957,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04479146 = queryNorm
        0.2806784 = fieldWeight in 1957, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1957)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This is a propitious time for information science. The WWW has propelled information services into the public eye as never before, and information professionals are sought out in all walks of life to assist people with work, learning and play in the information environment. Classical information retrieval has yielded novel techniques for applying computers to retrieval problems, including WWW search engines. The classical model of retrieval is one of matching queries to documents and ranking these matches. It is apparent, however, that a new model of retrieval is needed as people access large-scale digital libraries of multimedia content and vast collections of unstructured data in the WWW. What is needed are ways to bring human intelligence and attention more actively into the search process. To this end, researchers are beginning to combine the lessons from designing highly interactive user interfaces with the lessons from human information behavior to create new kinds of search systems that depend on continuous human control of the search process. I call this hybrid approach to the challenges of information seeking, human-computer information retrieval (HCIR). Though human-computer information interaction is perhaps a more expansive and appropriate phrase, the HCIR phrase unites two well-known fields/communities of practice and is thus adopted here. HCIR aims to empower people to explore large-scale information bases but demands that people also take responsibility for this control by expending cognitive and physical energy. This paper outlines the basic motivations and concepts of HCIR and presents design goals and challenges that are informed by two ongoing HCIR projects.

0.015949111 = product of:
  0.063796446 = sum of:
    0.063796446 = product of:
      0.12759289 = sum of:
        0.12759289 = weight(_text_:programming in 2877) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12759289 = score(doc=2877,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.29361802 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04479146 = queryNorm
            0.43455404 = fieldWeight in 2877, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2877)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Capability and capacity in handling the topology of a special subject information field has made infomapping techniques and systems instrumental in information searching, monitoring and navigation. Applying the technique to communication networks can reveal the intellectual relationships among junior and senior researchers in the field, and can also show the continuing popularity of a particular researcher's citation record over time. Reports the use of Java in making a cartoon series of chronological maps based on citation analysis on a special subject field (nutrition and dietetics). The map making methods, Java programming, and statistical analysis of the map data are presented, and the advantage and significance of constructing Java maps in enhancing information retrieval discussed. Further technical developments in applying VRML to link together a 3-D spatial indexing system and a 2-D HTML Web site are suggested

0.01576675 = product of:
  0.063067 = sum of:
    0.063067 = product of:
      0.126134 = sum of:
        0.126134 = weight(_text_:22 in 1339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.126134 = score(doc=1339,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04479146 = queryNorm
            0.804159 = fieldWeight in 1339, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1339)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 2.2003 17:25:39
22. 2.2003 18:16:22

0.012873498 = product of:
  0.05149399 = sum of:
    0.05149399 = product of:
      0.10298798 = sum of:
        0.10298798 = weight(_text_:22 in 4840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10298798 = score(doc=4840,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04479146 = queryNorm
            0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 4840, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4840)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 2.2003 17:25:39
22. 2.2003 18:13:11

0.012873498 = product of:
  0.05149399 = sum of:
    0.05149399 = product of:
      0.10298798 = sum of:
        0.10298798 = weight(_text_:22 in 666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10298798 = score(doc=666,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04479146 = queryNorm
            0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 666, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=666)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 2.2003 17:25:39
22. 2.2003 18:15:14

0.012873498 = product of:
  0.05149399 = sum of:
    0.05149399 = product of:
      0.10298798 = sum of:
        0.10298798 = weight(_text_:22 in 1359) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10298798 = score(doc=1359,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04479146 = queryNorm
            0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 1359, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1359)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 2.2003 17:25:39
22. 2.2003 18:20:07

0.012873498 = product of:
  0.05149399 = sum of:
    0.05149399 = product of:
      0.10298798 = sum of:
        0.10298798 = weight(_text_:22 in 1361) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10298798 = score(doc=1361,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04479146 = queryNorm
            0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 1361, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1361)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 2.2003 17:25:39
22. 2.2003 18:19:01

0.012775214 = product of:
  0.051100858 = sum of:
    0.051100858 = weight(_text_:engines in 2511) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051100858 = score(doc=2511,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04479146 = queryNorm
        0.22454272 = fieldWeight in 2511, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2511)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In this paper, we present a novel personalized concept-based search mechanism for the Web of Data based on results categorization. The innovation of the paper comes from combining novel categorization and personalization techniques, and using categorization for providing personalization. In our approach, search results (Linked Open Data resources) are dynamically categorized into Upper Mapping and Binding Exchange Layer (UMBEL) concepts using a novel fuzzy retrieval model. Then, results with the same concepts are grouped together to form categories, which we call conceptlenses. Such categorization enables concept-based browsing of the retrieved results aligned to users' intent or interests. When the user selects a concept lens for exploration, results are immediately personalized. In particular, all concept lenses are personally re-organized according to their similarity to the selected lens. Within the selected concept lens; more relevant results are included using results re-ranking and query expansion, as well as relevant concept lenses are suggested to support results exploration. This allows dynamic adaptation of results to the user's local choices. We also support interactive personalization; when the user clicks on a result, within the interacted lens, relevant lenses and results are included using results re-ranking and query expansion. Extensive evaluations were performed to assess our approach: (i) Performance of our fuzzy-based categorization approach was evaluated on a particular benchmark (~10,000 mappings). The evaluations showed that we can achieve highly acceptable categorization accuracy and perform better than the vector space model. (ii) Personalized search efficacy was assessed using a user study with 32 participants in a tourist domain. The results revealed that our approach performed significantly better than a non-adaptive baseline search. (iii) Dynamic personalization performance was evaluated, which illustrated that our personalization approach is scalable. (iv) Finally, we compared our system with the existing LOD search engines, which showed that our approach is unique.

0.010727914 = product of:
  0.042911656 = sum of:
    0.042911656 = product of:
      0.08582331 = sum of:
        0.08582331 = weight(_text_:22 in 1352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08582331 = score(doc=1352,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04479146 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 1352, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1352)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

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