Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Savoy, J."
  1. Picard, J.; Savoy, J.: Enhancing retrieval with hyperlinks : a general model based on propositional argumentation systems (2003) 0.05
    0.04626411 = product of:
      0.06939616 = sum of:
        0.03354964 = weight(_text_:search in 1427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03354964 = score(doc=1427,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 1427, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1427)
        0.03584652 = product of:
          0.07169304 = sum of:
            0.07169304 = weight(_text_:engines in 1427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07169304 = score(doc=1427,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.2806784 = fieldWeight in 1427, 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=1427)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Fast, effective, and adaptable techniques are needed to automatically organize and retrieve information an the ever-increasing World Wide Web. In that respect, different strategies have been suggested to take hypertext links into account. For example, hyperlinks have been used to (1) enhance document representation, (2) improve document ranking by propagating document score, (3) provide an indicator of popularity, and (4) find hubs and authorities for a given topic. Although the TREC experiments have not demonstrated the usefulness of hyperlinks for retrieval, the hypertext structure is nevertheless an essential aspect of the Web, and as such, should not be ignored. The development of abstract models of the IR task was a key factor to the improvement of search engines. However, at this time conceptual tools for modeling the hypertext retrieval task are lacking, making it difficult to compare, improve, and reason an the existing techniques. This article proposes a general model for using hyperlinks based an Probabilistic Argumentation Systems, in which each of the above-mentioned techniques can be stated. This model will allow to discover some inconsistencies in the mentioned techniques, and to take a higher level and systematic approach for using hyperlinks for retrieval.
  2. Savoy, J.: Effectiveness of information retrieval systems used in a hypertext environment (1993) 0.03
    0.025304725 = product of:
      0.075914174 = sum of:
        0.075914174 = weight(_text_:search in 6511) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.075914174 = score(doc=6511,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.43445963 = fieldWeight in 6511, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6511)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    In most hypertext systems, information retrieval techniques emphasize browsing or navigational methods which are not thorough enough to find all relevant material, especially when the number of nodes and/or links becomes very large. Reviews the main query-based search techniques currently used in hypertext environments. Explains the experimental methodology. Concentrates on the retrieval effectiveness of these retrieval strategies. Considers ways of improving search effectiveness
  3. Dolamic, L.; Savoy, J.: Retrieval effectiveness of machine translated queries (2010) 0.02
    0.018978544 = product of:
      0.056935627 = sum of:
        0.056935627 = weight(_text_:search in 4102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056935627 = score(doc=4102,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.3258447 = fieldWeight in 4102, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4102)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This article describes and evaluates various information retrieval models used to search document collections written in English through submitting queries written in various other languages, either members of the Indo-European family (English, French, German, and Spanish) or radically different language groups such as Chinese. This evaluation method involves searching a rather large number of topics (around 300) and using two commercial machine translation systems to translate across the language barriers. In this study, mean average precision is used to measure variances in retrieval effectiveness when a query language differs from the document language. Although performance differences are rather large for certain languages pairs, this does not mean that bilingual search methods are not commercially viable. Causes of the difficulties incurred when searching or during translation are analyzed and the results of concrete examples are explained.
  4. Savoy, J.; Desbois, D.: Information retrieval in hypertext systems (1991) 0.02
    0.017893143 = product of:
      0.053679425 = sum of:
        0.053679425 = weight(_text_:search in 4452) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053679425 = score(doc=4452,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.30720934 = fieldWeight in 4452, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4452)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The emphasis in most hypertext systems is on the navigational methods, rather than on the global document retrieval mechanisms. When a search mechanism is provided, it is often restricted to simple string matching or to the Boolean model (as an alternate method). proposes a retrieval mechanism using Bayesian inference networks. The main contribution of this approach is the automatic construction of this network using the expected mutual information measure to build the inference tree, and using Jaccard's formula to define fixed conditional probability relationships
  5. Savoy, J.: ¬A new probabilistic scheme for information retrieval in hypertext (1995) 0.02
    0.015656501 = product of:
      0.0469695 = sum of:
        0.0469695 = weight(_text_:search in 7254) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0469695 = score(doc=7254,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 7254, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7254)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The aim of probabilistic models is to define a retrieval strategy within which documents can be optimally ranked according to their relevance probability with respect to a given request. Presents a study which suggests representing documents not only by index term vendors, as proposed by previous probabilistic models but also by considering relevance hypertext links. To enhance retrieval effectiveness, the learning retrieval scheme should modify the weight assigned to each indexing terms, the importance attached to each search term, and the relationships between documents. Evaluation of the proposed retrieval scheme with a hypertext based on the CACM test collection which includes 3.204 documents and the CISI corpus (1,460 documents), yields interesting results on the retrieval effectiveness of this approach
  6. Savoy, J.: Bibliographic database access using free-text and controlled vocabulary : an evaluation (2005) 0.02
    0.015656501 = product of:
      0.0469695 = sum of:
        0.0469695 = weight(_text_:search in 1053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0469695 = score(doc=1053,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 1053, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1053)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This paper evaluates and compares the retrieval effectiveness of various search models, based on either automatic text-word indexing or on manually assigned controlled descriptors. Retrieval is from a relatively large collection of bibliographic material written in French. Moreover, for this French collection we evaluate improvements that result from combining automatic and manual indexing. First, when considering various contexts, this study reveals that the combined indexing strategy always obtains the best retrieval performance. Second, when users wish to conduct exhaustive searches with minimal effort, we demonstrate that manually assigned terms are essential. Third, the evaluations presented in this paper study reveal the comparative retrieval performances that result from manual and automatic indexing in a variety of circumstances.
  7. Dolamic, L.; Savoy, J.: When stopword lists make the difference (2009) 0.02
    0.015656501 = product of:
      0.0469695 = sum of:
        0.0469695 = weight(_text_:search in 3319) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0469695 = score(doc=3319,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 3319, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3319)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    In this brief communication, we evaluate the use of two stopword lists for the English language (one comprising 571 words and another with 9) and compare them with a search approach accounting for all word forms. We show that through implementing the original Okapi form or certain ones derived from the Divergence from Randomness (DFR) paradigm, significantly lower performance levels may result when using short or no stopword lists. For other DFR models and a revised Okapi implementation, performance differences between approaches using short or long stopword lists or no list at all are usually not statistically significant. Similar conclusions can be drawn when using other natural languages such as French, Hindi, or Persian.
  8. Savoy, J.: Estimating the probability of an authorship attribution (2016) 0.01
    0.0056760716 = product of:
      0.017028214 = sum of:
        0.017028214 = product of:
          0.03405643 = sum of:
            0.03405643 = weight(_text_:22 in 2937) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03405643 = score(doc=2937,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2937, 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=2937)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    7. 5.2016 21:22:27