Search (84 results, page 1 of 5)

0.034962818 = product of:
  0.069925636 = sum of:
    0.069925636 = sum of:
      0.03470073 = weight(_text_:search in 2337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03470073 = score(doc=2337,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18072747 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051997773 = 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)
      0.035224903 = weight(_text_:22 in 2337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035224903 = score(doc=2337,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18208735 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051997773 = 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)

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

0.03127882 = product of:
  0.06255764 = sum of:
    0.06255764 = product of:
      0.12511528 = sum of:
        0.12511528 = weight(_text_:search in 2964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12511528 = score(doc=2964,freq=26.0), product of:
            0.18072747 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051997773 = queryNorm
            0.69228697 = fieldWeight in 2964, product of:
              5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
                26.0 = termFreq=26.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2964)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Although the technical, mathematical and linguistic principles of search date back to the early 1960s and enterprise search applications have been commercially available since the 1980s; it is only since the launch of Microsoft SharePoint 2010 and the integration of the Apache Lucene and Solr projects in 2010 that there has been a wider adoption of enterprise search applications. Surveys carried out over the last five years indicate that although enterprises accept that search applications are essential in locating information, there has not been any significant investment in search teams to support these applications. Where taxonomies, thesauri and metadata have been used to improve the search user interface and enhance the search experience, the indications are that levels of search satisfaction are significantly higher. The challenges faced by search managers in developing and maintaining these tools include a lack of published research on the use of these tools and difficulty in recruiting search team members with the requisite skills and experience. There would seem to be an important and immediate opportunity to bring together the research, knowledge organization and enterprise search communities to explore how good practice in the use of taxonomies, thesauri and metadata in enterprise search can be established, enhanced and promoted.

0.031230655 = product of:
  0.06246131 = sum of:
    0.06246131 = product of:
      0.12492262 = sum of:
        0.12492262 = weight(_text_:search in 1322) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12492262 = score(doc=1322,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.18072747 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051997773 = queryNorm
            0.691221 = fieldWeight in 1322, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1322)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Powering search offers a clear and comprehensive treatment of the role of thesauri in search user interfaces across a range of information search and retrieval systems - from bibliographic and full-text databases to digital libraries, portals, open archives, and content management systems.

Content

Thesauri : introduction and recent developments -- Thesauri in interactive information retrieval -- User-centered approach to the evaluation of thesauri : query formulation and expansion -- Thesauri in web-based search systems -- Thesaurus-based search and browsing functionalities in new thesaurus construction standards -- Design of search user interfaces for thesauri -- Design of user interfaces for multilingual and meta-thesauri -- User-centered evaluation of thesaurus-enhanced search user interfaces -- Guidelines for the design of thesaurus-enhanced search user interfaces -- Current trends and developments.

0.027433334 = product of:
  0.054866668 = sum of:
    0.054866668 = product of:
      0.109733336 = sum of:
        0.109733336 = weight(_text_:search in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.109733336 = score(doc=613,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.18072747 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051997773 = queryNorm
            0.60717577 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - To evaluate the extent to which familiarity with search topics affects the ways in which users select and browse search terms in a thesaurus-enhanced search setting. Design/methodology/approach - An experimental methodology was adopted to study users' search behaviour in an operational information retrieval environment. Findings - Topic familiarity and subject knowledge influence some search and interaction behaviours. Searches involving moderately and very familiar topics were associated with browsing around twice as many thesaurus terms as was the case for unfamiliar topics. Research limitations/implications - Some search behaviours such as thesaurus browsing and term selection could be used as an indication of user levels of topic familiarity. Practical implications - The results of this study provide design implications as to how to develop personalized search interfaces where users with varying levels of familiarity with search topics can carry out searches. Originality/value - This paper establishes the importance of topic familiarity characteristics and the effects of those characteristics on users' interaction with search interfaces enhanced with semantic tools such as thesauri.

0.024657432 = product of:
  0.049314864 = sum of:
    0.049314864 = product of:
      0.09862973 = sum of:
        0.09862973 = weight(_text_:22 in 4199) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09862973 = score(doc=4199,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18208735 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051997773 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4199, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4199)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Mitteilungen der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Parlaments- und Behördenbibliotheken. 1989, H.67, S.1-22

0.024537122 = product of:
  0.049074244 = sum of:
    0.049074244 = product of:
      0.09814849 = sum of:
        0.09814849 = weight(_text_:search in 4417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09814849 = score(doc=4417,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.18072747 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051997773 = queryNorm
            0.54307455 = fieldWeight in 4417, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4417)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This study explores how experts and novices in pedagogics expanded queries supported by the ERIC thesaurus, and how this was connected to the search effectiveness in an easy and a difficult search task. The expert group consisted of 15 undergraduates in pedagogy and the novice group of 15 students with no previous studies in this field. Their search logs were recorded and a pre- and post-search interview was conducted. The results show that the number and type of terms selected from the thesaurus for expansion by experts improved search effectiveness, whereas there were no connections between the use of thesaurus and improvement of effectiveness among novices. The effectiveness of expansions varied between the facets of the queries. Thus, a vital condition for benefiting from a thesaurus in query expansion to improve search results is sufficient familiarity with the search topic. The results suggest also that it is not in the first place the number of terms used in expansion, but their type and quality that are crucial for search success.

0.023277957 = product of:
  0.046555914 = sum of:
    0.046555914 = product of:
      0.09311183 = sum of:
        0.09311183 = weight(_text_:search in 1330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09311183 = score(doc=1330,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.18072747 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051997773 = queryNorm
            0.51520574 = fieldWeight in 1330, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1330)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper provides a review of the literature related to the application of domain-specific thesauri in the search and retrieval process. Focusing an studies that adopt a user-centred approach, the review presents a survey of the methodologies and results from empirical studies undertaken an the use of thesauri as sources of term selection for query formulation and expansion during the search process. It summarises the ways in which domain-specific thesauri from different disciplines have been used by various types of users and how these tools aid users in the selection of search terms. The review consists of two main sections: first, studies an thesaurus-aided search term selection; and second, studies dealing with query expansion using thesauri. Both sections are illustrated with case studies that have adopted a user-centred approach.

0.023277957 = product of:
  0.046555914 = sum of:
    0.046555914 = product of:
      0.09311183 = sum of:
        0.09311183 = weight(_text_:search in 2658) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09311183 = score(doc=2658,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.18072747 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051997773 = queryNorm
            0.51520574 = fieldWeight in 2658, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2658)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The use of thesaurus-enhanced search tools is an the increase. This paper provides an insight into end-users interaction with and perceptions of such tools. In particular the overlap between users' initial query formulation and thesaurus structures is investigated. This investigation involved the performance of genuine search tasks an the CAB Abstracts database by academic users in the domain of veterinary medicine. The perception of these users regarding the nature and usefulness of the terms suggested from the thesaurus during the search interaction is reported. The results indicated that around 80% of terms entered were matched either exactly or partially to thesaurus terms. Users found over 90% of the terms suggested to be close to their search topics and where terms were selected they indicated that around 50% were to support a 'narrowing down' activity. These findings have implications for the design of thesaurus-enhanced interfaces.

0.022952376 = product of:
  0.045904752 = sum of:
    0.045904752 = product of:
      0.091809504 = sum of:
        0.091809504 = weight(_text_:search in 2583) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.091809504 = score(doc=2583,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.18072747 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051997773 = queryNorm
            0.5079997 = fieldWeight in 2583, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2583)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - Seeks to share with digital library practitioners the development process of an online image collection that integrates the syndetic structure of a controlled vocabulary to improve end-user search and browse functionality. Design/methodology/approach - Surveys controlled vocabulary structures and their utility for catalogers and end-users. Reviews research literature and usability findings that informed the specifications for integration of the controlled vocabulary structure into search and browse functionality. Discusses database functions facilitating query expansion using a controlled vocabulary structure, and web application handling of user queries and results display. Concludes with a discussion of open-source alternatives and reuse of database and application components in other environments. Findings - Affirms that structured forms of browse and search can be successfully integrated into digital collections to significantly improve the user's discovery experience. Establishes ways in which the technologies used in implementing enhanced search and browse functionality can be abstracted to work in other digital collection environments. Originality/value - Significant amounts of research on integrating thesauri structures into search and browse functionalities exist, but examples of online resources that have implemented this approach are few in comparison. The online image collection surveyed in this paper can serve as a model to other designers of digital library resources for integrating controlled vocabularies and metadata structures into more dynamic search and browse functionality for end-users.

0.02113494 = product of:
  0.04226988 = sum of:
    0.04226988 = product of:
      0.08453976 = sum of:
        0.08453976 = weight(_text_:22 in 4483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08453976 = score(doc=4483,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18208735 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051997773 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4483, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4483)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

15. 3.2000 10:22:37

0.02113494 = product of:
  0.04226988 = sum of:
    0.04226988 = product of:
      0.08453976 = sum of:
        0.08453976 = weight(_text_:22 in 6404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08453976 = score(doc=6404,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18208735 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051997773 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6404, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6404)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

1. 8.1996 22:01:00

0.02113494 = product of:
  0.04226988 = sum of:
    0.04226988 = product of:
      0.08453976 = sum of:
        0.08453976 = weight(_text_:22 in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08453976 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18208735 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051997773 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3773, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3773)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

1. 8.1996 22:01:00

0.02113494 = product of:
  0.04226988 = sum of:
    0.04226988 = product of:
      0.08453976 = sum of:
        0.08453976 = weight(_text_:22 in 3895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08453976 = score(doc=3895,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18208735 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051997773 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3895, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3895)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

24. 8.2005 19:20:22

0.0210362 = product of:
  0.0420724 = sum of:
    0.0420724 = product of:
      0.0841448 = sum of:
        0.0841448 = weight(_text_:search in 7330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0841448 = score(doc=7330,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.18072747 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051997773 = queryNorm
            0.46558946 = fieldWeight in 7330, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7330)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Examines how far automation cluster analysis and association testing are relevant methods for smaller libraries in construction of search thesauri. Using WORDSTAR, a simple form of cluster analysis was tested, with satisfactory results in that the index terms formed clusters of a suitable size. The association test was used to elicit from users' natural language terms which can be used in the search thesaurus as entrance vocabulary. The test showed that users associated very differently in relation to the same stimuli words, with low overlap with terms used in the system's indexing. The results confirmed the need for better feedback. Concludes that while neither method can be used alone, a search thesauri which combine terms from the indexes and from users can be a powerful tool

0.020820437 = product of:
  0.041640874 = sum of:
    0.041640874 = product of:
      0.08328175 = sum of:
        0.08328175 = weight(_text_:search in 2203) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08328175 = score(doc=2203,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.18072747 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051997773 = queryNorm
            0.460814 = fieldWeight in 2203, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2203)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Presents a framework for knowledge discovery and concept exploration. In order to enhance the concept exploration capability of knowledge based systems and to alleviate the limitation of the manual browsing approach, develops 2 spreading activation based algorithms for concept exploration in large, heterogeneous networks of concepts (eg multiple thesauri). One algorithm, which is based on the symbolic AI paradigma, performs a conventional branch-and-bound search on a semantic net representation to identify other highly relevant concepts (a serial, optimal search process). The 2nd algorithm, which is absed on the neural network approach, executes the Hopfield net parallel relaxation and convergence process to identify 'convergent' concepts for some initial queries (a parallel, heuristic search process). Tests these 2 algorithms on a large text-based knowledge network of about 13.000 nodes (terms) and 80.000 directed links in the area of computing technologies

0.020820437 = product of:
  0.041640874 = sum of:
    0.041640874 = product of:
      0.08328175 = sum of:
        0.08328175 = weight(_text_:search in 5202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08328175 = score(doc=5202,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.18072747 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051997773 = queryNorm
            0.460814 = fieldWeight in 5202, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5202)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In this article, we report research on an algorithmic approach to alleviating search uncertainty in a large information space. Grounded on object filtering, automatic indexing, and co-occurence analysis, we performed a large-scale experiment using a parallel supercomputer (SGI Power Challenge) to analyze 400.000+ abstracts in an INSPEC computer engineering collection. Two system-generated thesauri, one based on a combined object filtering and automatic indexing method, and the other based on automatic indexing only, were compaed with the human-generated INSPEC subject thesaurus. Our user evaluation revealed that the system-generated thesauri were better than the INSPEC thesaurus in 'concept recall', but in 'concept precision' the 3 thesauri were comparable. Our analysis also revealed that the terms suggested by the 3 thesauri were complementary and could be used to significantly increase 'variety' in search terms the thereby reduce search uncertainty

0.020820437 = product of:
  0.041640874 = sum of:
    0.041640874 = product of:
      0.08328175 = sum of:
        0.08328175 = weight(_text_:search in 3807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08328175 = score(doc=3807,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18072747 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051997773 = queryNorm
            0.460814 = fieldWeight in 3807, 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=3807)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.020820437 = product of:
  0.041640874 = sum of:
    0.041640874 = product of:
      0.08328175 = sum of:
        0.08328175 = weight(_text_:search in 2263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08328175 = score(doc=2263,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.18072747 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051997773 = queryNorm
            0.460814 = fieldWeight in 2263, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2263)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

The objective of this research was to investigate the extent to which thesauri have the potential to support the search behaviour of nanoscience and technology researchers while interacting with an electronic book digital library. Transaction log data was obtained from a nanoscience and technology digital library to investigate the nature, type and characteristics of users' queries and search terms. The specific objectives was to assess the extent to which users' search terms matched with those found in two well-established thesauri attached o the INSPEC and Compendex databases.

0.019629696 = product of:
  0.039259393 = sum of:
    0.039259393 = product of:
      0.078518786 = sum of:
        0.078518786 = weight(_text_:search in 5169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.078518786 = score(doc=5169,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18072747 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051997773 = queryNorm
            0.43445963 = fieldWeight in 5169, 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=5169)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Open system protocols for search and retrieval have not provided explicit ways in which to implement thesaurus-aided searching. A number of different approaches within the existing protocols, as well as a proposed service, are evaluated. A general approach to implementing thesaurus-aided searching, particularly during consultation of a thesaurus, requires an entirely new service, whose main features are described

0.018031029 = product of:
  0.036062058 = sum of:
    0.036062058 = product of:
      0.072124116 = sum of:
        0.072124116 = weight(_text_:search in 4216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.072124116 = score(doc=4216,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.18072747 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051997773 = queryNorm
            0.39907667 = fieldWeight in 4216, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4216)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article introduces a new concept and technique for information retrieval called 'colinked descriptors'. Borrowed from an analogous idea in bibliometrics - cocited references - colinked descriptors provide a theory and method for identifying search terms that, by hypothesis, will be superior to those entered initially by a searcher. The theory suggests a means of moving automatically from 2 or more initial search terms, to other terms that should be superior in retrieval performance to the 2 original terms. A research project designed to test this colinked descriptor hypothesis is reported. The results suggest that the approach is effective, although methodological problems in testing the idea are reported. Algorithms to generate colinked descriptors can be incorporated easily into system interfaces, front-end or pre-search systems, or help software, in any database that employs a thesaurus. The potential use of colinked descriptors is a strong argument for building richer and more complex thesauri that reflect as many legitimate links among descriptors as possible