Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Sprachretrieval"
  1. Kruschwitz, U.; AI-Bakour, H.: Users want more sophisticated search assistants : results of a task-based evaluation (2005) 0.03
    0.032392055 = product of:
      0.06478411 = sum of:
        0.008323434 = product of:
          0.033293735 = sum of:
            0.033293735 = weight(_text_:based in 4575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.033293735 = score(doc=4575,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.23539014 = fieldWeight in 4575, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4575)
          0.25 = coord(1/4)
        0.056460675 = weight(_text_:term in 4575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056460675 = score(doc=4575,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21904005 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.66603 = idf(docFreq=1130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.25776416 = fieldWeight in 4575, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.66603 = idf(docFreq=1130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4575)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    The Web provides a massive knowledge source, as do intranets and other electronic document collections. However, much of that knowledge is encoded implicitly and cannot be applied directly without processing into some more appropriate structures. Searching, browsing, question answering, for example, could all benefit from domain-specific knowledge contained in the documents, and in applications such as simple search we do not actually need very "deep" knowledge structures such as ontologies, but we can get a long way with a model of the domain that consists of term hierarchies. We combine domain knowledge automatically acquired by exploiting the documents' markup structure with knowledge extracted an the fly to assist a user with ad hoc search requests. Such a search system can suggest query modification options derived from the actual data and thus guide a user through the space of documents. This article gives a detailed account of a task-based evaluation that compares a search system that uses the outlined domain knowledge with a standard search system. We found that users do use the query modification suggestions proposed by the system. The main conclusion we can draw from this evaluation, however, is that users prefer a system that can suggest query modifications over a standard search engine, which simply presents a ranked list of documents. Most interestingly, we observe this user preference despite the fact that the baseline system even performs slightly better under certain criteria.
  2. Young, C.W.; Eastman, C.M.; Oakman, R.L.: ¬An analysis of ill-formed input in natural language queries to document retrieval systems (1991) 0.03
    0.0269785 = product of:
      0.107914 = sum of:
        0.107914 = weight(_text_:frequency in 5263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.107914 = score(doc=5263,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.27643865 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.888745 = idf(docFreq=332, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.39037234 = fieldWeight in 5263, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.888745 = idf(docFreq=332, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5263)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Natrual language document retrieval queries from the Thomas Cooper Library, South Carolina Univ. were analysed in oder to investigate the frequency of various types of ill-formed input, such as spelling errors, cooccurrence violations, conjunctions, ellipsis, and missing or incorrect punctuation. Users were requested to write out their requests for information in complete sentences on the form normally used by the library. The primary reason for analysing ill-formed inputs was to determine whether there is a significant need to study ill-formed inputs in detail. Results indicated that most of the queries were sentence fragments and that many of them contained some type of ill-formed input. Conjunctions caused the most problems. The next most serious problem was caused by punctuation errors. Spelling errors occured in a small number of queries. The remaining types of ill-formed input considered, allipsis and cooccurrence violations, were not found in the queries
  3. Ferret, O.; Grau, B.; Hurault-Plantet, M.; Illouz, G.; Jacquemin, C.; Monceaux, L.; Robba, I.; Vilnat, A.: How NLP can improve question answering (2002) 0.02
    0.016938202 = product of:
      0.06775281 = sum of:
        0.06775281 = weight(_text_:term in 1850) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06775281 = score(doc=1850,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21904005 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.66603 = idf(docFreq=1130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.309317 = fieldWeight in 1850, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.66603 = idf(docFreq=1130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1850)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Answering open-domain factual questions requires Natural Language processing for refining document selection and answer identification. With our system QALC, we have participated in the Question Answering track of the TREC8, TREC9 and TREC10 evaluations. QALC performs an analysis of documents relying an multiword term searches and their linguistic variation both to minimize the number of documents selected and to provide additional clues when comparing question and sentence representations. This comparison process also makes use of the results of a syntactic parsing of the questions and Named Entity recognition functionalities. Answer extraction relies an the application of syntactic patterns chosen according to the kind of information that is sought, and categorized depending an the syntactic form of the question. These patterns allow QALC to handle nicely linguistic variations at the answer level.
  4. Srihari, R.K.: Using speech input for image interpretation, annotation, and retrieval (1997) 0.00
    0.0047701527 = product of:
      0.019080611 = sum of:
        0.019080611 = product of:
          0.038161222 = sum of:
            0.038161222 = weight(_text_:22 in 764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.038161222 = score(doc=764,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16438834 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 764, 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=764)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    22. 9.1997 19:16:05
  5. Galitsky, B.: Can many agents answer questions better than one? (2005) 0.00
    0.0017656671 = product of:
      0.0070626684 = sum of:
        0.0070626684 = product of:
          0.028250674 = sum of:
            0.028250674 = weight(_text_:based in 3094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028250674 = score(doc=3094,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.19973516 = fieldWeight in 3094, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3094)
          0.25 = coord(1/4)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    The paper addresses the issue of how online natural language question answering, based on deep semantic analysis, may compete with currently popular keyword search, open domain information retrieval systems, covering a horizontal domain. We suggest the multiagent question answering approach, where each domain is represented by an agent which tries to answer questions taking into account its specific knowledge. The meta-agent controls the cooperation between question answering agents and chooses the most relevant answer(s). We argue that multiagent question answering is optimal in terms of access to business and financial knowledge, flexibility in query phrasing, and efficiency and usability of advice. The knowledge and advice encoded in the system are initially prepared by domain experts. We analyze the commercial application of multiagent question answering and the robustness of the meta-agent. The paper suggests that a multiagent architecture is optimal when a real world question answering domain combines a number of vertical ones to form a horizontal domain.
  6. Radev, D.; Fan, W.; Qu, H.; Wu, H.; Grewal, A.: Probabilistic question answering on the Web (2005) 0.00
    0.0017656671 = product of:
      0.0070626684 = sum of:
        0.0070626684 = product of:
          0.028250674 = sum of:
            0.028250674 = weight(_text_:based in 3455) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028250674 = score(doc=3455,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.19973516 = fieldWeight in 3455, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3455)
          0.25 = coord(1/4)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Web-based search engines such as Google and NorthernLight return documents that are relevant to a user query, not answers to user questions. We have developed an architecture that augments existing search engines so that they support natural language question answering. The process entails five steps: query modulation, document retrieval, passage extraction, phrase extraction, and answer ranking. In this article, we describe some probabilistic approaches to the last three of these stages. We show how our techniques apply to a number of existing search engines, and we also present results contrasting three different methods for question answering. Our algorithm, probabilistic phrase reranking (PPR), uses proximity and question type features and achieves a total reciprocal document rank of .20 an the TREC8 corpus. Our techniques have been implemented as a Web-accessible system, called NSIR.