Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Sprachretrieval"
  1. Kneedler, W.H.; Sizemore, E.J.: Speech synthesis + online library catalog = "talking catalog" (1993) 0.02
    0.0212486 = product of:
      0.0424972 = sum of:
        0.0424972 = product of:
          0.0849944 = sum of:
            0.0849944 = weight(_text_:online in 3781) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0849944 = score(doc=3781,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05220068 = queryNorm
                0.5364998 = fieldWeight in 3781, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3781)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  2. Peters, B.F.: Online searching using speech as a man / machine interface (1989) 0.02
    0.0212486 = product of:
      0.0424972 = sum of:
        0.0424972 = product of:
          0.0849944 = sum of:
            0.0849944 = weight(_text_:online in 4637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0849944 = score(doc=4637,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05220068 = queryNorm
                0.5364998 = fieldWeight in 4637, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4637)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  3. Srihari, R.K.: Using speech input for image interpretation, annotation, and retrieval (1997) 0.01
    0.010608707 = product of:
      0.021217413 = sum of:
        0.021217413 = product of:
          0.042434826 = sum of:
            0.042434826 = weight(_text_:22 in 764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.042434826 = score(doc=764,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18279788 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05220068 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 9.1997 19:16:05
  4. Galitsky, B.: Can many agents answer questions better than one? (2005) 0.01
    0.0079682255 = product of:
      0.015936451 = sum of:
        0.015936451 = product of:
          0.031872902 = sum of:
            0.031872902 = weight(_text_:online in 3094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031872902 = score(doc=3094,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05220068 = queryNorm
                0.20118743 = fieldWeight in 3094, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3094)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    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.
  5. Strötgen, R.; Mandl, T.; Schneider, R.: Entwicklung und Evaluierung eines Question Answering Systems im Rahmen des Cross Language Evaluation Forum (CLEF) (2006) 0.01
    0.0079682255 = product of:
      0.015936451 = sum of:
        0.015936451 = product of:
          0.031872902 = sum of:
            0.031872902 = weight(_text_:online in 5981) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031872902 = score(doc=5981,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05220068 = queryNorm
                0.20118743 = fieldWeight in 5981, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5981)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Question Answering Systeme versuchen, zu konkreten Fragen eine korrekte Antwort zu liefern. Dazu durchsuchen sie einen Dokumentenbestand und extrahieren einen Bruchteil eines Dokuments. Dieser Beitrag beschreibt die Entwicklung eines modularen Systems zum multilingualen Question Answering. Die Strategie bei der Entwicklung zielte auf eine schnellstmögliche Verwendbarkeit eines modularen Systems, das auf viele frei verfügbare Ressourcen zugreift. Das System integriert Module zur Erkennung von Eigennamen, zu Indexierung und Retrieval, elektronische Wörterbücher, Online-Übersetzungswerkzeuge sowie Textkorpora zu Trainings- und Testzwecken und implementiert eigene Ansätze zu den Bereichen der Frage- und AntwortTaxonomien, zum Passagenretrieval und zum Ranking alternativer Antworten.