Search (70 results, page 1 of 4)

0.107264124 = product of:
  0.16089618 = sum of:
    0.09677197 = weight(_text_:search in 2596) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09677197 = score(doc=2596,freq=26.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.55382955 = fieldWeight in 2596, product of:
          5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
            26.0 = termFreq=26.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2596)
    0.06412421 = product of:
      0.12824842 = sum of:
        0.12824842 = weight(_text_:engines in 2596) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12824842 = score(doc=2596,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.50209284 = fieldWeight in 2596, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2596)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This series of meetings originated in Albuquerque, New Mexico in 1995. This inaugural meeting (part of an ASIDIC series) was transplanted to Bath in England (1996 and 1997) and then to Boston, Massachusetts (1998 and 1999). The Search Engines Meetings bring together commercial search engine developers, academics and corporate professionals to learn from each other. Infonortics, sponsor of meetings post-1995 with Ev Brenner, plans to continue the same success in Boston in 2000.

Content

Ramana Rao (Inxight, Palo Alto, CA) 7 ± 2 Insights on achieving Effective Information Access Session One: Updates and a twelve month perspective Danny Sullivan (Search Engine Watch, US / England) Portalization and other search trends Carol Tenopir (University of Tennessee) Search realities faced by end users and professional searchers Session Two: Today's search engines and beyond Daniel Hoogterp (Retrieval Technologies, McLean, VA) Effective presentation and utilization of search techniques Rick Kenny (Fulcrum Technologies, Ontario, Canada) Beyond document clustering: The knowledge impact statement Gary Stock (Ingenius, Kalamazoo, MI) Automated change monitoring Gary Culliss (Direct Hit, Wellesley Hills, MA) User popularity ranked search engines Byron Dom (IBM, CA) Automatically finding the best pages on the World Wide Web (CLEVER) Peter Tomassi (LookSmart, San Francisco, CA) Adding human intellect to search technology Session Three: Panel discussion: Human v automated categorization and editing Ev Brenner (New York, NY)- Chairman James Callan (University of Massachusetts, MA) Marc Krellenstein (Northern Light Technology, Cambridge, MA) Dan Miller (Ask Jeeves, Berkeley, CA) Session Four: Updates and a twelve month perspective Steve Arnold (AIT, Harrods Creek, KY) Review: The leading edge in search and retrieval software Ellen Voorhees (NIST, Gaithersburg, MD) TREC update Session Five: Search engines now and beyond Intelligent Agents John Snyder (Muscat, Cambridge, England) Practical issues behind intelligent agents Text summarization Therese Firmin, (Dept of Defense, Ft George G. Meade, MD) The TIPSTER/SUMMAC evaluation of automatic text summarization systems Cross language searching Elizabeth Liddy (TextWise, Syracuse, NY) A conceptual interlingua approach to cross-language retrieval. Video search and retrieval Armon Amir (IBM, Almaden, CA) CueVideo: Modular system for automatic indexing and browsing of video/audio Speech recognition Michael Witbrock (Lycos, Waltham, MA) Retrieval of spoken documents Visualization James A. Wise (Integral Visuals, Richland, WA) Information visualization in the new millennium: Emerging science or passing fashion? Text mining David Evans (Claritech, Pittsburgh, PA) Text mining - towards decision support

0.08110181 = product of:
  0.121652715 = sum of:
    0.0929755 = weight(_text_:search in 1264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0929755 = score(doc=1264,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.5321022 = fieldWeight in 1264, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1264)
    0.028677218 = product of:
      0.057354435 = sum of:
        0.057354435 = weight(_text_:engines in 1264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057354435 = score(doc=1264,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.22454272 = fieldWeight in 1264, 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=1264)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Over the past decade, the volume of information available digitally over the Internet has grown enormously. Technical developments in the area of search, such as Google's Page Rank algorithm, have proved so good at serving relevant results that Internet search has become integrated into daily human activity. One can endlessly explore topics of interest simply by querying and reading through the resulting links. Yet, although search engines are well known for providing relevant results based on users' queries, users do not always receive the results they are looking for. Google's Director of Research describes clickstream evidence of frustrated users repeatedly reformulating queries and searching through page after page of results. Given the general quality of search engine results, one must consider the possibility that the frustrated user's query is not effective; that is, it does not describe the essence of the user's interest. Indeed, extensive research into human search behavior has found that humans are not very effective at formulating good search queries that describe what they are interested in. Ideally, the user should simply point to a portion of text that sparked the user's interest, and a system should automatically formulate a search query that captures the essence of the text. In this paper, we describe an implemented system that provides this capability. We first describe how our work differs from existing work in automatic query formulation, and propose a new method for improved quantification of the relevance of candidate search terms drawn from input text using phrase-level analysis. We then propose an implementable method designed to provide relevant queries based on a user's text input. We demonstrate the quality of our results and performance of our system through experimental studies. Our results demonstrate that our system produces relevant search terms with roughly two-thirds precision and recall compared to search terms selected by experts, and that typical users find significantly more relevant results (31% more relevant) more quickly (64% faster) using our system than self-formulated search queries. Further, we show that our implementation can scale to request loads of up to 10 requests per second within current online responsiveness expectations (<2-second response times at the highest loads tested).

0.06743714 = product of:
  0.10115571 = sum of:
    0.06709928 = weight(_text_:search in 2759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06709928 = score(doc=2759,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.3840117 = fieldWeight in 2759, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2759)
    0.03405643 = product of:
      0.06811286 = sum of:
        0.06811286 = weight(_text_:22 in 2759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06811286 = score(doc=2759,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2759, 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=2759)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Date

1. 2.2016 18:25:22

Source

Semantic keyword-based search on structured data sources: First COST Action IC1302 International KEYSTONE Conference, IKC 2015, Coimbra, Portugal, September 8-9, 2015. Revised Selected Papers. Eds.: J. Cardoso et al

0.06732484 = product of:
  0.100987256 = sum of:
    0.05752565 = weight(_text_:search in 4285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05752565 = score(doc=4285,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.32922143 = fieldWeight in 4285, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4285)
    0.043461602 = product of:
      0.086923204 = sum of:
        0.086923204 = weight(_text_:engines in 4285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.086923204 = score(doc=4285,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.34030452 = fieldWeight in 4285, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4285)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The introduction and growth of the World Wide Web (WWW, or Web) have resulted in a profound change in the way individuals and organizations access information. In terms of volume, nature, and accessibility, the characteristics of electronic information are significantly different from those of even five or six years ago. Control of, and access to, this flood of information rely heavily an automated techniques for indexing and retrieval. According to Gudivada, Raghavan, Grosky, and Kasanagottu (1997, p. 58), "The ability to search and retrieve information from the Web efficiently and effectively is an enabling technology for realizing its full potential." Almost 93 percent of those surveyed consider the Web an "indispensable" Internet technology, second only to e-mail (Graphie, Visualization & Usability Center, 1998). Although there are other ways of locating information an the Web (browsing or following directory structures), 85 percent of users identify Web pages by means of a search engine (Graphie, Visualization & Usability Center, 1998). A more recent study conducted by the Stanford Institute for the Quantitative Study of Society confirms the finding that searching for information is second only to e-mail as an Internet activity (Nie & Ebring, 2000, online). In fact, Nie and Ebring conclude, "... the Internet today is a giant public library with a decidedly commercial tilt. The most widespread use of the Internet today is as an information search utility for products, travel, hobbies, and general information. Virtually all users interviewed responded that they engaged in one or more of these information gathering activities."
Techniques for automated indexing and information retrieval (IR) have been developed, tested, and refined over the past 40 years, and are well documented (see, for example, Agosti & Smeaton, 1996; BaezaYates & Ribeiro-Neto, 1999a; Frakes & Baeza-Yates, 1992; Korfhage, 1997; Salton, 1989; Witten, Moffat, & Bell, 1999). With the introduction of the Web, and the capability to index and retrieve via search engines, these techniques have been extended to a new environment. They have been adopted, altered, and in some Gases extended to include new methods. "In short, search engines are indispensable for searching the Web, they employ a variety of relatively advanced IR techniques, and there are some peculiar aspects of search engines that make searching the Web different than more conventional information retrieval" (Gordon & Pathak, 1999, p. 145). The environment for information retrieval an the World Wide Web differs from that of "conventional" information retrieval in a number of fundamental ways. The collection is very large and changes continuously, with pages being added, deleted, and altered. Wide variability between the size, structure, focus, quality, and usefulness of documents makes Web documents much more heterogeneous than a typical electronic document collection. The wide variety of document types includes images, video, audio, and scripts, as well as many different document languages. Duplication of documents and sites is common. Documents are interconnected through networks of hyperlinks. Because of the size and dynamic nature of the Web, preprocessing all documents requires considerable resources and is often not feasible, certainly not an the frequent basis required to ensure currency. Query length is usually much shorter than in other environments-only a few words-and user behavior differs from that in other environments. These differences make the Web a novel environment for information retrieval (Baeza-Yates & Ribeiro-Neto, 1999b; Bharat & Henzinger, 1998; Huang, 2000).

0.05552859 = product of:
  0.08329288 = sum of:
    0.04744636 = weight(_text_:search in 3232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04744636 = score(doc=3232,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.27153727 = fieldWeight in 3232, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3232)
    0.03584652 = product of:
      0.07169304 = sum of:
        0.07169304 = weight(_text_:engines in 3232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07169304 = score(doc=3232,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.2806784 = fieldWeight in 3232, 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=3232)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Users of research databases, such as CiteSeerX, Google Scholar, and Microsoft Academic, often search for papers using a set of keywords. Unfortunately, many authors avoid listing sufficient keywords for their papers. As such, these applications may need to automatically associate good descriptive keywords with papers. When the full text of the paper is available this problem has been thoroughly studied. In many cases, however, due to copyright limitations, research databases do not have access to the full text. On the other hand, such databases typically maintain metadata, such as the title and abstract and the citation network of each paper. In this paper we study the problem of predicting which keywords are appropriate for a research paper, using different methods based on the citation network and available metadata. Our main goal is in providing search engines with the ability to extract keywords from the available metadata. However, our system can also be used for other applications, such as for recommending keywords for the authors of new papers. We create a data set of research papers, and their citation network, keywords, and other metadata, containing over 470K papers with and more than 2 million keywords. We compare our methods with predicting keywords using the title and abstract, in offline experiments and in a user study, concluding that the citation network provides much better predictions.

0.05551693 = product of:
  0.08327539 = sum of:
    0.04025957 = weight(_text_:search in 704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04025957 = score(doc=704,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.230407 = fieldWeight in 704, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=704)
    0.043015826 = product of:
      0.08603165 = sum of:
        0.08603165 = weight(_text_:engines in 704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08603165 = score(doc=704,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.33681408 = fieldWeight in 704, 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=704)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Considers the challenge to professional indexers posed by the Internet. Indexing and searching on the Internet appears to have a retrograde step, as well developed and efficient information retrieval techniques have been replaced by cruder techniques, involving automatic keyword indexing and frequency ranking, leading to large retrieval sets and low precision. This is made worse by the apparent acceptance of this poor perfromance by Internet users and the feeling, on the part of indexers, that they are being bypassed by the producers of these hyperlinked menus and search engines. Key issues are: how far 'human' indexing will still be required in the Internet environment; how indexing techniques will have to change to stay relevant; and the future role of indexers. The challenge facing indexers is to adapt their skills to suit the online environment and to convince publishers of the need for efficient indexes on the Internet

0.047206 = product of:
  0.070809 = sum of:
    0.0469695 = weight(_text_:search in 5001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0469695 = score(doc=5001,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 5001, 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=5001)
    0.0238395 = product of:
      0.047679 = sum of:
        0.047679 = weight(_text_:22 in 5001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047679 = score(doc=5001,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5001, 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=5001)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

A study was done to test the effectiveness of retrieval using title word searching. It was based on actual search profiles used in the Mechanized Information Center at Ohio State University, in order ro replicate as closely as possible actual searching conditions. Fewer than 50% of the relevant titles were retrieved by keywords in titles. The low rate of retrieval can be attributes to three sources: titles themselves, user and information specialist ignorance of the subject vocabulary in use, and to general language problems. Across fields it was found that the social sciences had the best retrieval rate, with science having the next best, and arts and humanities the lowest. Ways to enhance and supplement keyword in title searching on the computer and in printed indexes are discussed.

Date

14. 3.1996 13:22:21

0.035786286 = product of:
  0.10735885 = sum of:
    0.10735885 = weight(_text_:search in 2411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10735885 = score(doc=2411,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.6144187 = fieldWeight in 2411, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2411)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.035786286 = product of:
  0.10735885 = sum of:
    0.10735885 = weight(_text_:search in 2918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10735885 = score(doc=2918,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.6144187 = fieldWeight in 2918, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2918)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.035786286 = product of:
  0.10735885 = sum of:
    0.10735885 = weight(_text_:search in 5099) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10735885 = score(doc=5099,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.6144187 = fieldWeight in 5099, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5099)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Explores the potential of text analysis as a tool in full text search and design improvement. Reports on a trial analysis performed in the domain of family history. The findings offered insights into possible gains and losses in using one search or design strategy versus another and strong evidence was provided to the potential of text analysis. Makes search and design recommendation

0.035786286 = product of:
  0.10735885 = sum of:
    0.10735885 = weight(_text_:search in 7216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10735885 = score(doc=7216,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.6144187 = fieldWeight in 7216, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7216)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The search system CANAL/LS simplifies the searching of library catalogues by analyzing search questions linguistically and translating them if required. The linguistic analysis reduces the search question words to their basic forms so that they can be compared with basic title forms. Consequently all variants of words and parts of compounds in German can be found. Presents the results of an analysis of search questions in a catalogue of 45.000 titles in the field of psychology

0.035505608 = product of:
  0.10651682 = sum of:
    0.10651682 = weight(_text_:search in 3320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10651682 = score(doc=3320,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.6095997 = fieldWeight in 3320, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3320)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The goal of this research is to develop a generic ontological model for proverbs that unifies potential classification criteria and various characteristics of proverbs to enable their effective retrieval and large-scale analysis. Because proverbs can be described and indexed by multiple characteristics and criteria, we built a multidimensional ontology suitable for proverb classification. To evaluate the effectiveness of the constructed ontology for improving search and retrieval of proverbs, a large-scale user experiment was arranged with 70 users who were asked to search a proverb repository using ontology-based and free-text search interfaces. The comparative analysis of the results shows that the use of this ontology helped to substantially improve the search recall, precision, user satisfaction, and efficiency and to minimize user effort during the search process. A practical contribution of this work is an automated web-based proverb search and retrieval system which incorporates the proposed ontological scheme and an initial corpus of ontology-based annotated proverbs.

0.03371857 = product of:
  0.050577857 = sum of:
    0.03354964 = weight(_text_:search in 2337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03354964 = score(doc=2337,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 2337, 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=2337)
    0.017028214 = product of:
      0.03405643 = sum of:
        0.03405643 = weight(_text_:22 in 2337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03405643 = score(doc=2337,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2337, 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=2337)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Despite early claims to the contemporary, thesauri continue to find use as access tools for information in the full-text environment. Their mode of use is changing, but this change actually represents an expansion rather than a contrdiction of their utility. Thesauri and similar vocabulary tools can complement full-text access by aiding users in focusing their searches, by supplementing the linguistic analysis of the text search engine, and even by serving as one of the tools used by the linguistic engine for its analysis. While human indexing contunues to be used for many databases, the trend is to increase the use of machine aids for this purpose. All machine-aided indexing (MAI) systems rely on thesauri as the basis for term selection. In the 21st century, the balance of effort between human and machine will change at both input and output, but thesauri will continue to play an important role for the foreseeable future

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

0.031318735 = product of:
  0.0469781 = sum of:
    0.029054843 = weight(_text_:search in 1875) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029054843 = score(doc=1875,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.16628194 = fieldWeight in 1875, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1875)
    0.01792326 = product of:
      0.03584652 = sum of:
        0.03584652 = weight(_text_:engines in 1875) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03584652 = score(doc=1875,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.1403392 = fieldWeight in 1875, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1875)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Content

"Until now, so-called computer vision has largely been limited to recognizing individual objects. The new software, described on Monday by researchers at Google and at Stanford University, teaches itself to identify entire scenes: a group of young men playing Frisbee, for example, or a herd of elephants marching on a grassy plain. The software then writes a caption in English describing the picture. Compared with human observations, the researchers found, the computer-written descriptions are surprisingly accurate. The advances may make it possible to better catalog and search for the billions of images and hours of video available online, which are often poorly described and archived. At the moment, search engines like Google rely largely on written language accompanying an image or video to ascertain what it contains. "I consider the pixel data in images and video to be the dark matter of the Internet," said Fei-Fei Li, director of the Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, who led the research with Andrej Karpathy, a graduate student. "We are now starting to illuminate it." Dr. Li and Mr. Karpathy published their research as a Stanford University technical report. The Google team published their paper on arXiv.org, an open source site hosted by Cornell University.
In living organisms, webs of neurons in the brain vastly outperform even the best computer-based networks in perception and pattern recognition. But by adopting some of the same architecture, computers are catching up, learning to identify patterns in speech and imagery with increasing accuracy. The advances are apparent to consumers who use Apple's Siri personal assistant, for example, or Google's image search. Both groups of researchers employed similar approaches, weaving together two types of neural networks, one focused on recognizing images and the other on human language. In both cases the researchers trained the software with relatively small sets of digital images that had been annotated with descriptive sentences by humans. After the software programs "learned" to see patterns in the pictures and description, the researchers turned them on previously unseen images. The programs were able to identify objects and actions with roughly double the accuracy of earlier efforts, although still nowhere near human perception capabilities. "I was amazed that even with the small amount of training data that we were able to do so well," said Oriol Vinyals, a Google computer scientist who wrote the paper with Alexander Toshev, Samy Bengio and Dumitru Erhan, members of the Google Brain project. "The field is just starting, and we will see a lot of increases."

0.026839714 = product of:
  0.08051914 = sum of:
    0.08051914 = weight(_text_:search in 2409) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08051914 = score(doc=2409,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.460814 = fieldWeight in 2409, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2409)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.025304725 = product of:
  0.075914174 = sum of:
    0.075914174 = weight(_text_:search in 2331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.075914174 = score(doc=2331,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.43445963 = fieldWeight in 2331, 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=2331)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

A classified or clustered file is one where related or similar records are grouped into classes or clusters of items in such a way that all itmes within a cluster are jointly retrievable. Clustered files are easily adapted to to broad and narrow search strategies, and simple file updating methods are available. An inexpensive file clustering method applicable to large files is given together with appropriate file search methods

0.025304725 = product of:
  0.075914174 = sum of:
    0.075914174 = weight(_text_:search in 5091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.075914174 = score(doc=5091,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.43445963 = fieldWeight in 5091, 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=5091)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Reports on the design and implementation of the information searching and retrieval software, PBS (Parsing, Boolean recognition, Stemming) for the front end OAK 2, a new version of OAK developed at Toronto Univ. OAK 2 is a research tool for user behaviour studies. PBS receives natural language search statements from an end user and identifies search facets and implied Boolean logic operators

0.022141634 = product of:
  0.0664249 = sum of:
    0.0664249 = weight(_text_:search in 2214) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0664249 = score(doc=2214,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.38015217 = fieldWeight in 2214, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2214)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The original WAIS implementation by Thinking Machines and others treats documents as uniform bags of terms. Since most documents exhibit some internal structure, it is desirable to provide the user means to exploit this structure in his queries. Presents extensions to the freeWAIS indexer and server, which allows access to document structures using the original WAIS protocol. Major extensions include: arbitrary document formats, search in individual structure elements, stemming and phonetic search, support of 8-bit character sets, numeric concepts and operators. combination of Boolean and linear retrieval. Presents a WWW-WAIS gateway specially tailored for usage with freeWAIS-sf which transforms filled out HTML forms to the new query syntax

0.022141634 = product of:
  0.0664249 = sum of:
    0.0664249 = weight(_text_:search in 3251) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0664249 = score(doc=3251,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.38015217 = fieldWeight in 3251, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3251)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Examines the effectiveness of automated indexing and presents the results of a study of information retrieval from a segment (40.000 items) of the ULB Düsseldorf database. The segment was selected randomly and all the documents included were indexed automatically. The search topics included 50 subject areas ranging from economic growth to alternative energy sources. While there were 876 relevant documents in the database segment for each of the 50 search topics, the recall ranged from 1 to 244 references, with the average being 17.52 documents per topic. Therefore it seems that, in the immediate future, automatic indexing should be used in combination with intellectual indexing

0.019369897 = product of:
  0.058109686 = sum of:
    0.058109686 = weight(_text_:search in 3667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.058109686 = score(doc=3667,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.33256388 = fieldWeight in 3667, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3667)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Descriptive metadata play a key role in finding relevant search results in large amounts of unstructured data. However, current scientific audiovisual media are provided with little metadata, which makes them hard to find, let alone individual sequences. In this paper, the TIB / AV-Portal is presented as a use case where methods concerning the automatic generation of metadata, a semantic search and cross-lingual retrieval (German/English) have already been applied. These methods result in a better discoverability of the scientific audiovisual media hosted in the portal. Text, speech, and image content of the video are automatically indexed by specialised GND (Gemeinsame Normdatei) subject headings. A semantic search is established based on properties of the GND ontology. The cross-lingual retrieval uses English 'translations' that were derived by an ontology mapping (DBpedia i. a.). Further ways of increasing the discoverability and reuse of the metadata are publishing them as Linked Open Data and interlinking them with other data sets.