Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Lewandowski, D."
  1. Lewandowski, D.; Sünkler, S.: What does Google recommend when you want to compare insurance offerings? (2019) 0.03
    0.025562445 = product of:
      0.06390611 = sum of:
        0.028577866 = weight(_text_:system in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028577866 = score(doc=5288,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052150324 = queryNorm
            0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 5288, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5288)
        0.035328247 = weight(_text_:22 in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035328247 = score(doc=5288,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052150324 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5288, 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=5288)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe a new method to improve the analysis of search engine results by considering the provider level as well as the domain level. This approach is tested by conducting a study using queries on the topic of insurance comparisons. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted an empirical study that analyses the results of search queries aimed at comparing insurance companies. The authors used a self-developed software system that automatically queries commercial search engines and automatically extracts the content of the returned result pages for further data analysis. The data analysis was carried out using the KNIME Analytics Platform. Findings Google's top search results are served by only a few providers that frequently appear in these results. The authors show that some providers operate several domains on the same topic and that these domains appear for the same queries in the result lists. Research limitations/implications The authors demonstrate the feasibility of this approach and draw conclusions for further investigations from the empirical study. However, the study is a limited use case based on a limited number of search queries. Originality/value The proposed method allows large-scale analysis of the composition of the top results from commercial search engines. It allows using valid empirical data to determine what users actually see on the search engine result pages.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  2. Lewandowski, D.: Alles nur noch Google? : Entwicklungen im Bereich der WWW-Suchmaschinen (2002) 0.01
    0.011305039 = product of:
      0.056525193 = sum of:
        0.056525193 = weight(_text_:22 in 997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056525193 = score(doc=997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052150324 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 997, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=997)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    29. 9.2002 18:49:22
  3. Lewandowski, D.: Abfragesprachen und erweiterte Funktionen von WWW-Suchmaschinen (2004) 0.01
    0.011305039 = product of:
      0.056525193 = sum of:
        0.056525193 = weight(_text_:22 in 2314) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056525193 = score(doc=2314,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052150324 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2314, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2314)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    28.11.2004 13:11:22
  4. Lewandowski, D.: Query understanding (2011) 0.01
    0.011305039 = product of:
      0.056525193 = sum of:
        0.056525193 = weight(_text_:22 in 344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056525193 = score(doc=344,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052150324 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 344, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=344)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    18. 9.2018 18:22:18
  5. Lewandowski, D.: ¬Die Macht der Suchmaschinen und ihr Einfluss auf unsere Entscheidungen (2014) 0.01
    0.008478778 = product of:
      0.042393893 = sum of:
        0.042393893 = weight(_text_:22 in 1491) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042393893 = score(doc=1491,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052150324 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1491, 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=1491)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    22. 9.2014 18:54:11
  6. Lewandowski, D.: Open-Access-Archiv für Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft (2004) 0.01
    0.008083042 = product of:
      0.04041521 = sum of:
        0.04041521 = weight(_text_:system in 2816) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04041521 = score(doc=2816,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052150324 = queryNorm
            0.24605882 = fieldWeight in 2816, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2816)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Content
    "Für die Themenfelder Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft sowie verwandte Anwendungsfelder besteht über das Open-Access-Archiv E-LIS (http://eprints.rclis.org/) die Möglichkeit, Publikationen und Forschungsergebnisse schnell und kostenfrei weltweit verfügbar zu machen. Das Ziel von E-LIS ist es, die Kommunikation innerhalb der Community zu fördern und für eine rasche Verbreitung von Forschungsergebnissen zu sorgen. E-LIS hält sich an die Ziele des Eprint Movement und des Free Scholarship Movement. Das Archiv wird durch "Selbst-Archivierung" aufgebaut, d.h. jede/r Autor/in kann seine Texte selbst ins System einstellen. Bisher sind bereits über 1.000 Publikationen verfügbar, der tägliche Zuwachs kann sich sehen lassen. Allerdings sind bisher so gut wie keine Texte aus dem deutschsprachigen Raum vorhanden. Wir möchten daher alle Autoren wissenschaftlicher Texte aus dem LIS-Bereich aufrufen, ihre E-Prints in E-LIS verfügbar zu machen. Die Vorteile liegen auf der Hand: - Die Texte werden dauerhaft elektronisch verfügbar gemacht. - Es besteht ein einheitlicher und leichter Zugriff auf die Texte. - Die elektronische Verfügbarkeit erhöht die Verbreitung und damit die Wirkung der Forschungsarbeiten. Um einen Text in das System einzustellen, müssen Sie sich einmalig auf der Website anmelden (http://eprints.rclis.org/perl/register) und können dann direkt loslegen. E-LIS basiert allein auf ehrenamtlicher Arbeit und verfolgt keine kommerziellen Ziele. Für Fragen des Copyrights wurde eine eigene Seite eingerichtet (http://eprints.rclis.org/copyright.html), ebenso zur Submission Policy (http://eprints.rclis.org/policy.html)."
  7. Lewandowski, D.; Spree, U.: Ranking of Wikipedia articles in search engines revisited : fair ranking for reasonable quality? (2011) 0.01
    0.0070656496 = product of:
      0.035328247 = sum of:
        0.035328247 = weight(_text_:22 in 444) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035328247 = score(doc=444,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052150324 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 444, 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=444)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    30. 9.2012 19:27:22
  8. Behnert, C.; Lewandowski, D.: ¬A framework for designing retrieval effectiveness studies of library information systems using human relevance assessments (2017) 0.01
    0.005715573 = product of:
      0.028577866 = sum of:
        0.028577866 = weight(_text_:system in 3700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028577866 = score(doc=3700,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052150324 = queryNorm
            0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 3700, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3700)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose This paper demonstrates how to apply traditional information retrieval evaluation methods based on standards from the Text REtrieval Conference (TREC) and web search evaluation to all types of modern library information systems including online public access catalogs, discovery systems, and digital libraries that provide web search features to gather information from heterogeneous sources. Design/methodology/approach We apply conventional procedures from information retrieval evaluation to the library information system context considering the specific characteristics of modern library materials. Findings We introduce a framework consisting of five parts: (1) search queries, (2) search results, (3) assessors, (4) testing, and (5) data analysis. We show how to deal with comparability problems resulting from diverse document types, e.g., electronic articles vs. printed monographs and what issues need to be considered for retrieval tests in the library context. Practical implications The framework can be used as a guideline for conducting retrieval effectiveness studies in the library context. Originality/value Although a considerable amount of research has been done on information retrieval evaluation, and standards for conducting retrieval effectiveness studies do exist, to our knowledge this is the first attempt to provide a systematic framework for evaluating the retrieval effectiveness of twenty-first-century library information systems. We demonstrate which issues must be considered and what decisions must be made by researchers prior to a retrieval test.