Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.012266726 = product of:
  0.049066905 = sum of:
    0.049066905 = product of:
      0.09813381 = sum of:
        0.09813381 = weight(_text_:terminology in 4714) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09813381 = score(doc=4714,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24053115 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045596033 = queryNorm
            0.40798795 = fieldWeight in 4714, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4714)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

For the purposes of this article, the indexing of information is interpreted as the pre-processing of information in order to enable its retrieval. The definition thus spans a dimension extending from classification-based approaches (pre-co-ordinate) to keyword searching (post-co-ordinate). In the first section we clarify our use of terminology, by briefly describing a framework for modelling IR systems in terms of sets of objects, relationships and functions. In the following 3 sections, we discuss the application of indexing functions to document collections of 3 specific types: (1) 'conventional' text databases; (2) hypertext databases; and (3) the World Wide Web, globally distributed across the Internet

0.010514337 = product of:
  0.042057347 = sum of:
    0.042057347 = product of:
      0.08411469 = sum of:
        0.08411469 = weight(_text_:terminology in 5233) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08411469 = score(doc=5233,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24053115 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045596033 = queryNorm
            0.34970397 = fieldWeight in 5233, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5233)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Ellis, et alia, now provide part five of their study on mediated searching which is treated separately here because of the presence of additional authors. The data source remains cases collected from 198 individuals, 87 in Texas and 111 in Sheffield in the U.K. but the focus here is on seeker/intermediary interaction utilizing the Saracevic triadic IR model, and the method is the analysis of discourse. While the pre-search interview stressed problem definition, interaction during the search in terms of relevance and magnitude continued to develop the problem statement. The user and intermediary focused on search tactics, review and relevance, while the intermediary interaction with the system was comprised of terminology and answers. The interaction clearly affected the search process. Users and intermediaries considered the process effective and users felt the intermediary increased their overall satisfaction.

0.007722041 = product of:
  0.030888164 = sum of:
    0.030888164 = product of:
      0.06177633 = sum of:
        0.06177633 = weight(_text_:22 in 4342) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06177633 = score(doc=4342,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045596033 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4342, 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=4342)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

17. 1.2000 13:16:22

0.007722041 = product of:
  0.030888164 = sum of:
    0.030888164 = product of:
      0.06177633 = sum of:
        0.06177633 = weight(_text_:22 in 3341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06177633 = score(doc=3341,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045596033 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3341, 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=3341)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 1.2017 16:45:48

0.007009558 = product of:
  0.028038232 = sum of:
    0.028038232 = product of:
      0.056076463 = sum of:
        0.056076463 = weight(_text_:terminology in 5167) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056076463 = score(doc=5167,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24053115 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045596033 = queryNorm
            0.23313597 = fieldWeight in 5167, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5167)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In this issue Ford, Miller and Moss utilize 68 volunteers from a population of 250 Master's students to complete on the web three search tasks with clear fact based goals and three or less facets. One task required broadening the search concepts from those given, a second provided a specific terminology for one facet but required a second facet that would require translation, and the third required general to specific transformation. The students were measured as to their performance on Entewistle's Revised Inventory of Approaches to Studying providing values for ten study variables and asked to assess their experience on the Internet, with Alta Vista, and with Boolean search. Searches were conducted on Alta Vista using Netscape Navigator 4 with participants free to choose and switch Boolean, best match or combined search modes at will while a front end script recorded all submitted searches and help access. Search related variables extracted were from Boolean only queries, best match only queries, and combined queries. Factor analyses were conducted on all variables for each search mode for each search. In task one Boolean is differentiated from best match search by sharing high loads on active interest, intention to reproduce, fear of failure, and relating ideas. The combined searcher is linked with the best match searcher with low active interest, low intention to reproduce and low fear of failure. In task 2 Boolean is differentiated from best match search by sharing high loads on intention to reproduce and low on intention to understand. Best match loads positively with intention to understand and negatively with intention to reproduce. Combined searching linked with both good and with poor time management. In task 3 the loads mimic task 1. It seems Boolean is consistently linked to a reproductive rather than a meaning seeking approach, but also with high levels of interest and fear of failure. Best match associates with the converse of these measures.

0.0046332246 = product of:
  0.018532898 = sum of:
    0.018532898 = product of:
      0.037065797 = sum of:
        0.037065797 = weight(_text_:22 in 4341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037065797 = score(doc=4341,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045596033 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.2, S.79-92