-
Egghe, L.: ¬A universal method of information retrieval evaluation : the "missing" link M and the universal IR surface (2004)
0.02
0.021289835 = product of:
0.08515934 = sum of:
0.08515934 = sum of:
0.048422787 = weight(_text_:methods in 2558) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048422787 = score(doc=2558,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18168657 = queryWeight, product of:
4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
0.045191016 = queryNorm
0.26651827 = fieldWeight in 2558, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2558)
0.03673655 = weight(_text_:22 in 2558) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03673655 = score(doc=2558,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15825124 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045191016 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2558, 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=2558)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- The paper shows that the present evaluation methods in information retrieval (basically recall R and precision P and in some cases fallout F ) lack universal comparability in the sense that their values depend on the generality of the IR problem. A solution is given by using all "parts" of the database, including the non-relevant documents and also the not-retrieved documents. It turns out that the solution is given by introducing the measure M being the fraction of the not-retrieved documents that are relevant (hence the "miss" measure). We prove that - independent of the IR problem or of the IR action - the quadruple (P,R,F,M) belongs to a universal IR surface, being the same for all IR-activities. This universality is then exploited by defining a new measure for evaluation in IR allowing for unbiased comparisons of all IR results. We also show that only using one, two or even three measures from the set {P,R,F,M} necessary leads to evaluation measures that are non-universal and hence not capable of comparing different IR situations.
- Date
- 14. 8.2004 19:17:22
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: Introduction to informetrics : quantitative methods in library, documentation and information science (1990)
0.02
0.018683389 = product of:
0.074733555 = sum of:
0.074733555 = product of:
0.14946711 = sum of:
0.14946711 = weight(_text_:methods in 1515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14946711 = score(doc=1515,freq=14.0), product of:
0.18168657 = queryWeight, product of:
4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
0.045191016 = queryNorm
0.8226646 = fieldWeight in 1515, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1515)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- LCSH
- Information science / Statistical methods
Documentation / Statistical methods
Library science / Statistical methods
- Subject
- Information science / Statistical methods
Documentation / Statistical methods
Library science / Statistical methods
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.; Hooydonk, G. van: Methods for accrediting publications to authors or countries : consequences for evaluation studies (2000)
0.01
0.010483841 = product of:
0.041935366 = sum of:
0.041935366 = product of:
0.08387073 = sum of:
0.08387073 = weight(_text_:methods in 4384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08387073 = score(doc=4384,freq=6.0), product of:
0.18168657 = queryWeight, product of:
4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
0.045191016 = queryNorm
0.4616232 = fieldWeight in 4384, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4384)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- One aim of science evaluation studies is to determine quantitatively the contribution of different players (authors, departments, countries) to the whole system. This information is then used to study the evolution of the system, for instance to gauge the results of special national or international programs. Taking articles as our basic data, we want to determine the exact relative contribution of each coauthor or each country. These numbers are brought together to obtain country scores, or department scores, etc. It turns out, as we will show in this article, that different scoring methods can yield totally different rankings. Conseqeuntly, a ranking between countries, universities, research groups or authors, based on one particular accrediting methods does not contain an absolute truth about their relative importance
-
Egghe, L.; Guns, R.; Rousseau, R.; Leuven, K.U.: Erratum (2012)
0.01
0.0076534487 = product of:
0.030613795 = sum of:
0.030613795 = product of:
0.06122759 = sum of:
0.06122759 = weight(_text_:22 in 4992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06122759 = score(doc=4992,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15825124 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045191016 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4992, 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=4992)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 14. 2.2012 12:53:22
-
Egghe, L.: ¬The measures precision, recall, fallout and miss as a function of the number of retrieved documents and their mutual interrelations (2008)
0.01
0.0050440403 = product of:
0.020176161 = sum of:
0.020176161 = product of:
0.040352322 = sum of:
0.040352322 = weight(_text_:methods in 2067) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040352322 = score(doc=2067,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18168657 = queryWeight, product of:
4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
0.045191016 = queryNorm
0.22209854 = fieldWeight in 2067, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2067)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- In this paper, for the first time, we present global curves for the measures precision, recall, fallout and miss in function of the number of retrieved documents. Different curves apply for different retrieved systems, for which we give exact definitions in terms of a retrieval density function: perverse retrieval, perfect retrieval, random retrieval, normal retrieval, hereby extending results of Buckland and Gey and of Egghe in the following sense: mathematically more advanced methods yield a better insight into these curves, more types of retrieval are considered and, very importantly, the theory is developed for the "complete" set of measures: precision, recall, fallout and miss. Next we study the interrelationships between precision, recall, fallout and miss in these different types of retrieval, hereby again extending results of Buckland and Gey (incl. a correction) and of Egghe. In the case of normal retrieval we prove that precision in function of recall and recall in function of miss is a concavely decreasing relationship while recall in function of fallout is a concavely increasing relationship. We also show, by producing examples, that the relationships between fallout and precision, miss and precision and miss and fallout are not always convex or concave.
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: Averaging and globalising quotients of informetric and scientometric data (1996)
0.00
0.004592069 = product of:
0.018368276 = sum of:
0.018368276 = product of:
0.03673655 = sum of:
0.03673655 = weight(_text_:22 in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03673655 = score(doc=7659,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15825124 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045191016 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 7659, 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=7659)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.3, S.165-170
