Search (43 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalstudien"
  • × year_i:[1990 TO 2000}
  1. Wan, T.-L.; Evens, M.; Wan, Y.-W.; Pao, Y.-Y.: Experiments with automatic indexing and a relational thesaurus in a Chinese information retrieval system (1997) 0.02
    0.024827747 = product of:
      0.07448324 = sum of:
        0.07448324 = product of:
          0.14896648 = sum of:
            0.14896648 = weight(_text_:indexing in 956) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.14896648 = score(doc=956,freq=14.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.78326553 = fieldWeight in 956, product of:
                  3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                    14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=956)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This article describes a series of experiments with an interactive Chinese information retrieval system named CIRS and an interactive relational thesaurus. 2 important issues have been explored: whether thesauri enhance the retrieval effectiveness of Chinese documents, and whether automatic indexing can complete with manual indexing in a Chinese information retrieval system. Recall and precision are used to measure and evaluate the effectiveness of the system. Statistical analysis of the recall and precision measures suggest that the use of the relational thesaurus does improve the retrieval effectiveness both in the automatic indexing environment and in the manual indexing environment and that automatic indexing is at least as good as manual indexing
  2. Ribeiro, F.: Subject indexing and authority control in archives : the need for subject indexing in archives and for an indexing policy using controlled language (1996) 0.02
    0.021280928 = product of:
      0.06384278 = sum of:
        0.06384278 = product of:
          0.12768556 = sum of:
            0.12768556 = weight(_text_:indexing in 6577) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.12768556 = score(doc=6577,freq=14.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.67137045 = fieldWeight in 6577, product of:
                  3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                    14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6577)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Describes an experiment carried out in the City Archives of Oporto, Portugal to test the relative value for information retrieval of controling or not controlling vocabulary in subject indexing. A comparison was made of the results obtained by searching 2 databases covering the same archival documents, one of them without any control in the indexing language and the other with authority control. Results indicate that the database where authority control in subject indexing was used showed better performance and efficiency in information retrieval than the database which used an uncontrolled subject indexing language. A significant complementarity between the databases was found, the addition of the retrievals of one database to those of the other adding considerable advantage. Posits the possibility of creating an archival authority list suitable for use in groups with identical characteristics, such as local archives of judicial groups. Such a list should include broader terms, representing subject classes, which will be subdivided into narrower terms, according to the particular needs of each archives or archival groups
  3. Srinivasan, P.: Optimal document-indexing vocabulary for MEDLINE (1996) 0.02
    0.020983277 = product of:
      0.06294983 = sum of:
        0.06294983 = product of:
          0.12589966 = sum of:
            0.12589966 = weight(_text_:indexing in 6634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.12589966 = score(doc=6634,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.6619802 = fieldWeight in 6634, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6634)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The indexing vocabulary is an important determinant of success in text retrieval. Researchers have compared the effectiveness of indexing using free text and controlled vocabularies in a variety of text contexts. A number of studies have investigated the relative merits of free-text, MeSH and UMLS metathesaurus indexing vocabularies for MEDLINE document indexing. Controlled vocabularies offer no advantages in retrieval performance over free text. Offers a detailed analysis of prior results and their underlying experimental designs. Offers results from a new experiment assessing 8 different retrieval strategies. Results indicate that MeSH does have an important role in text retrieval
  4. Keen, E.M.: Aspects of computer-based indexing languages (1991) 0.02
    0.018575516 = product of:
      0.055726547 = sum of:
        0.055726547 = product of:
          0.11145309 = sum of:
            0.11145309 = weight(_text_:indexing in 5072) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11145309 = score(doc=5072,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.5860202 = fieldWeight in 5072, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5072)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Comments on the relative rarity of research articles on theoretical aspects of subject indexing in computerised retrieval systems and the predominance of articles on software packages and hardware. Concludes that controlled indexing still has a future but points to major differences from the past
  5. Lepsky, K.; Siepmann, J.; Zimmermann, A.: Automatische Indexierung für Online-Kataloge : Ergebnisse eines Retrievaltests (1996) 0.02
    0.016253578 = product of:
      0.04876073 = sum of:
        0.04876073 = product of:
          0.09752146 = sum of:
            0.09752146 = weight(_text_:indexing in 3251) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09752146 = score(doc=3251,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.5127677 = fieldWeight in 3251, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3251)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      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
  6. Gödert, W.; Liebig, M.: Maschinelle Indexierung auf dem Prüfstand : Ergebnisse eines Retrievaltests zum MILOS II Projekt (1997) 0.02
    0.016253578 = product of:
      0.04876073 = sum of:
        0.04876073 = product of:
          0.09752146 = sum of:
            0.09752146 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1174) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09752146 = score(doc=1174,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.5127677 = fieldWeight in 1174, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1174)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The test ran between Nov 95-Aug 96 in Cologne Fachhochschule fur Bibliothekswesen (College of Librarianship).The test basis was a database of 190,000 book titles published between 1990-95. MILOS II mechanized indexing methods proved helpful in avoiding or reducing numbers of unsatisfied/no result retrieval searches. Retrieval from mechanised indexing is 3 times more successful than from title keyword data. MILOS II also used a standardized semantic vocabulary. Mechanised indexing demands high quality software and output data
  7. Kluck, M.: ¬Eine deutschsprachige Testdatenbank für moderne Erschließungs- und Retrievalsysteme : German Indexing and Retrieval Testdatabase - GIRT (1996) 0.02
    0.016086869 = product of:
      0.048260607 = sum of:
        0.048260607 = product of:
          0.09652121 = sum of:
            0.09652121 = weight(_text_:indexing in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09652121 = score(doc=5269,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.5075084 = fieldWeight in 5269, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5269)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
  8. Burnett, M.; Fisher, C.; Jones, R.: InTEXT precision indexing in TREC4 (1996) 0.02
    0.016086869 = product of:
      0.048260607 = sum of:
        0.048260607 = product of:
          0.09652121 = sum of:
            0.09652121 = weight(_text_:indexing in 7529) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09652121 = score(doc=7529,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.5075084 = fieldWeight in 7529, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=7529)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
  9. Chen, H.; Martinez, J.; Kirchhoff, A.; Ng, T.D.; Schatz, B.R.: Alleviating search uncertainty through concept associations : automatic indexing, co-occurence analysis, and parallel computing (1998) 0.02
    0.016086869 = product of:
      0.048260607 = sum of:
        0.048260607 = product of:
          0.09652121 = sum of:
            0.09652121 = weight(_text_:indexing in 5202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09652121 = score(doc=5202,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.5075084 = fieldWeight in 5202, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5202)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    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
  10. Tomaiuolo, N.G.; Parker, J.: Maximizing relevant retrieval : keyword and natural language searching (1998) 0.02
    0.015707046 = product of:
      0.047121134 = sum of:
        0.047121134 = product of:
          0.09424227 = sum of:
            0.09424227 = weight(_text_:22 in 6418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09424227 = score(doc=6418,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6418, 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=6418)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Online. 22(1998) no.6, S.57-58
  11. Dalrymple, P.W.: Retrieval by reformulation in two library catalogs : toward a cognitive model of searching behavior (1990) 0.02
    0.015707046 = product of:
      0.047121134 = sum of:
        0.047121134 = product of:
          0.09424227 = sum of:
            0.09424227 = weight(_text_:22 in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09424227 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 5089, 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=5089)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2006 18:43:54
  12. Evans, D.A.; Lefferts, R.G.: CLARIT-TREC experiments (1995) 0.01
    0.0134057235 = product of:
      0.04021717 = sum of:
        0.04021717 = product of:
          0.08043434 = sum of:
            0.08043434 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1912) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08043434 = score(doc=1912,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.42292362 = fieldWeight in 1912, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1912)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Describes the following elements of the CLARIT system information management system: natural language processing, document indexing, vector space querying and query augmentation. Reports on the processing results carried out as part of the TREC-2 and into system parameterization. Results demonstrate high prescision and excellent recall, but the system is not yet optimized
  13. Allan, J.; Callan, J.P.; Croft, W.B.; Ballesteros, L.; Broglio, J.; Xu, J.; Shu, H.: INQUERY at TREC-5 (1997) 0.01
    0.011219318 = product of:
      0.033657953 = sum of:
        0.033657953 = product of:
          0.06731591 = sum of:
            0.06731591 = weight(_text_:22 in 3103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06731591 = score(doc=3103,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3103, 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=3103)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    27. 2.1999 20:55:22
  14. Ng, K.B.; Loewenstern, D.; Basu, C.; Hirsh, H.; Kantor, P.B.: Data fusion of machine-learning methods for the TREC5 routing tak (and other work) (1997) 0.01
    0.011219318 = product of:
      0.033657953 = sum of:
        0.033657953 = product of:
          0.06731591 = sum of:
            0.06731591 = weight(_text_:22 in 3107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06731591 = score(doc=3107,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3107, 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=3107)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    27. 2.1999 20:59:22
  15. Sparck Jones, K.: Reflections on TREC : TREC-2 (1995) 0.01
    0.01072458 = product of:
      0.032173738 = sum of:
        0.032173738 = product of:
          0.064347476 = sum of:
            0.064347476 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1916) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.064347476 = score(doc=1916,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.3383389 = fieldWeight in 1916, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1916)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Discusses the TREC programme as a major enterprise in information retrieval research. It reviews its structure as an evaluation exercise, characterises the methods of indexing and retrieval being tested within it in terms of the approaches to system performance factors these represent; analyses the test results for solid, overall conclusions that can be drawn from them; and, in the light of the particular features of the test data, assesses TREC both for generally applicable findings that emerge from it and for directions it offers for future research
  16. Crawford, G.A.: Varieties of access : a comparison of databases via Z39.50, FirstSearch and CD-ROM (1996) 0.01
    0.01072458 = product of:
      0.032173738 = sum of:
        0.032173738 = product of:
          0.064347476 = sum of:
            0.064347476 = weight(_text_:indexing in 5655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.064347476 = score(doc=5655,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.3383389 = fieldWeight in 5655, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5655)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    3 versions of 2 databases were used as examples for examining indexing, printing/downloading capabilities, and interface design in order to provide the most useful resources to the faculty, staff, and students of Penn State Harrisburg. The databases studied were ABI/Inform and PAIS available using a Z39.50 interface from the library's OPAC, FirstSearch from OCLC, and CD-ROMs from UMI and SilverPlatter
  17. Frisch, E.; Kluck, M.: Pretest zum Projekt German Indexing and Retrieval Testdatabase (GIRT) unter Anwendung der Retrievalsysteme Messenger und freeWAISsf (1997) 0.01
    0.01072458 = product of:
      0.032173738 = sum of:
        0.032173738 = product of:
          0.064347476 = sum of:
            0.064347476 = weight(_text_:indexing in 624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.064347476 = score(doc=624,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.3383389 = fieldWeight in 624, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=624)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
  18. Chevallet, J.-P.; Bruandet, M.F.: Impact de l'utilisation de multi terms sur la qualité des résponses dùn système de recherche d'information a indexation automatique (1999) 0.01
    0.01072458 = product of:
      0.032173738 = sum of:
        0.032173738 = product of:
          0.064347476 = sum of:
            0.064347476 = weight(_text_:indexing in 6253) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.064347476 = score(doc=6253,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.3383389 = fieldWeight in 6253, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6253)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Footnote
    Übers. d. Titels: Impact of the use of multi-terms on the quality of the answers of an information retrieval system based on automatic indexing
  19. Robertson, S.E.; Sparck Jones, K.: Simple, proven approaches to text retrieval (1997) 0.01
    0.009479279 = product of:
      0.028437834 = sum of:
        0.028437834 = product of:
          0.05687567 = sum of:
            0.05687567 = weight(_text_:indexing in 4532) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05687567 = score(doc=4532,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.29905218 = fieldWeight in 4532, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4532)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This technical note describes straightforward techniques for document indexing and retrieval that have been solidly established through extensive testing and are easy to apply. They are useful for many different types of text material, are viable for very large files, and have the advantage that they do not require special skills or training for searching, but are easy for end users. The document and text retrieval methods described here have a sound theoretical basis, are well established by extensive testing, and the ideas involved are now implemented in some commercial retrieval systems. Testing in the last few years has, in particular, shown that the methods presented here work very well with full texts, not only title and abstracts, and with large files of texts containing three quarters of a million documents. These tests, the TREC Tests (see Harman 1993 - 1997; IP&M 1995), have been rigorous comparative evaluations involving many different approaches to information retrieval. These techniques depend an the use of simple terms for indexing both request and document texts; an term weighting exploiting statistical information about term occurrences; an scoring for request-document matching, using these weights, to obtain a ranked search output; and an relevance feedback to modify request weights or term sets in iterative searching. The normal implementation is via an inverted file organisation using a term list with linked document identifiers, plus counting data, and pointers to the actual texts. The user's request can be a word list, phrases, sentences or extended text.
  20. Kelledy, F.; Smeaton, A.F.: Thresholding the postings lists in information retrieval : experiments on TREC data (1995) 0.01
    0.009384007 = product of:
      0.02815202 = sum of:
        0.02815202 = product of:
          0.05630404 = sum of:
            0.05630404 = weight(_text_:indexing in 5804) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05630404 = score(doc=5804,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.29604656 = fieldWeight in 5804, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5804)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    A variety of methods for speeding up the response time of information retrieval processes have been put forward, one of which is the idea of thresholding. Thresholding relies on the data in information retrieval storage structures being organised to allow cut-off points to be used during processing. These cut-off points or thresholds are designed and ised to reduce the amount of information processed and to maintain the quality or minimise the degradation of response to a user's query. TREC is an annual series of benchmarking exercises to compare indexing and retrieval techniques. Reports experiments with a portion of the TREC data where features are introduced into the retrieval process to improve response time. These features improve response time while maintaining the same level of retrieval effectiveness

Languages

  • e 35
  • d 4
  • f 2
  • nl 1
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 38
  • m 2
  • s 2
  • el 1
  • r 1
  • More… Less…