Search (101 results, page 1 of 6)

0.071574844 = product of:
  0.1789371 = sum of:
    0.08001803 = weight(_text_:system in 2134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08001803 = score(doc=2134,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.4871716 = fieldWeight in 2134, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2134)
    0.098919086 = weight(_text_:22 in 2134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.098919086 = score(doc=2134,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2134, 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=2134)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Date

30. 3.2001 13:32:22

0.04071675 = product of:
  0.10179187 = sum of:
    0.059397984 = weight(_text_:system in 2419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059397984 = score(doc=2419,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.36163113 = fieldWeight in 2419, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2419)
    0.042393893 = weight(_text_:22 in 2419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042393893 = score(doc=2419,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2419, 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=2419)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

The digital library system Daffodil is targeted at strategic support of users during the information search process. For searching, exploring and managing digital library objects it provides user-customisable information seeking patterns over a federation of heterogeneous digital libraries. In this paper evaluation results with respect to retrieval effectiveness, efficiency and user satisfaction are presented. The analysis focuses on strategic support for the scientific work-flow. Daffodil supports the whole work-flow, from data source selection over information seeking to the representation, organisation and reuse of information. By embedding high level search functionality into the scientific work-flow, the user experiences better strategic system support due to a more systematic work process. These ideas have been implemented in Daffodil followed by a qualitative evaluation. The evaluation has been conducted with 28 participants, ranging from information seeking novices to experts. The results are promising, as they support the chosen model.

Date

16.11.2008 16:22:48

0.036356855 = product of:
  0.090892136 = sum of:
    0.048498247 = weight(_text_:system in 2717) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048498247 = score(doc=2717,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.29527056 = fieldWeight in 2717, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2717)
    0.042393893 = weight(_text_:22 in 2717) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042393893 = score(doc=2717,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2717, 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=2717)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Previous work an search-engine design has indicated that information-seekers may benefit from being given the opportunity to exploit multiple sources of evidence of document relatedness. Few existing systems, however, give users more than minimal control over the selections that may be made among methods of exploitation. By applying the methods of "document network analysis" (DNA), a unifying, graph-theoretic model of content-, collaboration-, and context-based systems (CCC) may be developed in which the nature of the similarities between types of document relatedness and document ranking are clarified. The usefulness of the approach to system design suggested by this model may be tested by constructing and evaluating a prototype system (UCXtra) that allows searchers to maintain control over the multiple ways in which document collections may be ranked and re-ranked.

Date

11. 9.2004 17:32:22

0.036150757 = product of:
  0.09037689 = sum of:
    0.04041521 = weight(_text_:system in 2591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04041521 = score(doc=2591,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.24605882 = fieldWeight in 2591, 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=2591)
    0.049961682 = weight(_text_:22 in 2591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049961682 = score(doc=2591,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2591, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2591)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Purpose In a system-based approach, replicating the web would require large test collections, and judging the relevancy of all documents per topic in creating relevance judgment through human assessors is infeasible. Due to the large amount of documents that requires judgment, there are possible errors introduced by human assessors because of disagreements. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach This study explores exponential variation and document ranking methods that generate a reliable set of relevance judgments (pseudo relevance judgments) to reduce human efforts. These methods overcome problems with large amounts of documents for judgment while avoiding human disagreement errors during the judgment process. This study utilizes two key factors: number of occurrences of each document per topic from all the system runs; and document rankings to generate the alternate methods. Findings The effectiveness of the proposed method is evaluated using the correlation coefficient of ranked systems using mean average precision scores between the original Text REtrieval Conference (TREC) relevance judgments and pseudo relevance judgments. The results suggest that the proposed document ranking method with a pool depth of 100 could be a reliable alternative to reduce human effort and disagreement errors involved in generating TREC-like relevance judgments. Originality/value Simple methods proposed in this study show improvement in the correlation coefficient in generating alternate relevance judgment without human assessors while contributing to information retrieval evaluation.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22
18. 9.2018 18:22:56

0.025562445 = product of:
  0.06390611 = sum of:
    0.028577866 = weight(_text_:system in 3365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028577866 = score(doc=3365,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 3365, 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=3365)
    0.035328247 = weight(_text_:22 in 3365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035328247 = score(doc=3365,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3365, 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=3365)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

The retrieval effectiveness of 5 hierarchical clustering methods (single link, complete link, group average, Ward's method, and weighted average) is examined as a function of indexing exhaustivity with 4 test collections (CR, Cranfield, Medlars, and Time). Evaluations of retrieval effectiveness, based on 3 measures of optimal retrieval performance, confirm earlier findings that the performance of a retrieval system based on single link clustering varies as a function of indexing exhaustivity but fail ti find similar patterns for other clustering methods. The data also confirm earlier findings regarding the poor performance of single link clustering is a retrieval environment. The poor performance of single link clustering appears to derive from that method's tendency to produce a small number of large, ill defined document clusters. By contrast, the data examined here found the retrieval performance of the other clustering methods to be general comparable. The data presented also provides an opportunity to examine the theoretical limits of cluster based retrieval and to compare these theoretical limits to the effectiveness of operational implementations. Performance standards of the 4 document collections examined were found to vary widely, and the effectiveness of operational implementations were found to be in the range defined as unacceptable. Further improvements in search strategies and document representations warrant investigations

Date

22. 2.1996 11:20:06

0.025562445 = product of:
  0.06390611 = sum of:
    0.028577866 = weight(_text_:system in 5697) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028577866 = score(doc=5697,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 5697, 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=5697)
    0.035328247 = weight(_text_:22 in 5697) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035328247 = score(doc=5697,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5697, 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=5697)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

The performance of 8 ranking algorithms was evaluated with respect to their effectiveness in ranking terms for query expansion. The evaluation was conducted within an investigation of interactive query expansion and relevance feedback in a real operational environment. Focuses on the identification of algorithms that most effectively take cognizance of user preferences. user choices (i.e. the terms selected by the searchers for the query expansion search) provided the yardstick for the evaluation of the 8 ranking algorithms. This methodology introduces a user oriented approach in evaluating ranking algorithms for query expansion in contrast to the standard, system oriented approaches. Similarities in the performance of the 8 algorithms and the ways these algorithms rank terms were the main focus of this evaluation. The findings demonstrate that the r-lohi, wpq, enim, and porter algorithms have similar performance in bringing good terms to the top of a ranked list of terms for query expansion. However, further evaluation of the algorithms in different (e.g. full text) environments is needed before these results can be generalized beyond the context of the present study

Date

22. 2.1996 13:14:10

0.025562445 = product of:
  0.06390611 = sum of:
    0.028577866 = weight(_text_:system in 56) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028577866 = score(doc=56,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 56, 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=56)
    0.035328247 = weight(_text_:22 in 56) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035328247 = score(doc=56,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 56, 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=56)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

The study reported here investigated the query expansion behavior of end-users interacting with a thesaurus-enhanced search system on the Web. Two groups, namely academic staff and postgraduate students, were recruited into this study. Data were collected from 90 searches performed by 30 users using the OVID interface to the CAB abstracts database. Data-gathering techniques included questionnaires, screen capturing software, and interviews. The results presented here relate to issues of search-topic and search-term characteristics, number and types of expanded queries, usefulness of thesaurus terms, and behavioral differences between academic staff and postgraduate students in their interaction. The key conclusions drawn were that (a) academic staff chose more narrow and synonymous terms than did postgraduate students, who generally selected broader and related terms; (b) topic complexity affected users' interaction with the thesaurus in that complex topics required more query expansion and search term selection; (c) users' prior topic-search experience appeared to have a significant effect on their selection and evaluation of thesaurus terms; (d) in 50% of the searches where additional terms were suggested from the thesaurus, users stated that they had not been aware of the terms at the beginning of the search; this observation was particularly noticeable in the case of postgraduate students.

Date

22. 7.2006 16:32:43

0.023751438 = product of:
  0.059378594 = sum of:
    0.034648824 = weight(_text_:system in 2509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034648824 = score(doc=2509,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.21095149 = fieldWeight in 2509, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2509)
    0.024729772 = weight(_text_:22 in 2509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024729772 = score(doc=2509,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 2509, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2509)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Content

"Most Web search engines accept natural language queries, perform some kind of fuzzy matching and produce ranked output, displaying first the documents that are most likely to be relevant. On the other hand, most library online public access catalogs (OPACs) an the Web are still Boolean retrieval systems that perform exact matching, and require users to express their search requests precisely in a Boolean search language and to refine their search statements to improve the search results. It is well-documented that users have difficulty searching Boolean OPACs effectively (e.g. Borgman, 1996; Ensor, 1992; Wallace, 1993). One approach to making OPACs easier to use is to develop a natural language search interface that acts as a middleware between the user's Web browser and the OPAC system. The search interface can accept a natural language query from the user and reformulate it as a series of Boolean search statements that are then submitted to the OPAC. The records retrieved by the OPAC are ranked by the search interface before forwarding them to the user's Web browser. The user, then, does not need to interact directly with the Boolean OPAC but with the natural language search interface or search intermediary. The search interface interacts with the OPAC system an the user's behalf. The advantage of this approach is that no modification to the OPAC or library system is required. Furthermore, the search interface can access multiple OPACs, acting as a meta search engine, and integrate search results from various OPACs before sending them to the user. The search interface needs to incorporate a method for converting the user's natural language query into a series of Boolean search statements, and for ranking the OPAC records retrieved. The purpose of this study was to develop a relevancyranking algorithm for a search interface to Boolean OPAC systems. This is part of an on-going effort to develop a knowledge-based search interface to OPACs called the E-Referencer (Khoo et al., 1998, 1999; Poo et al., 2000). E-Referencer v. 2 that has been implemented applies a repertoire of initial search strategies and reformulation strategies to retrieve records from OPACs using the Z39.50 protocol, and also assists users in mapping query keywords to the Library of Congress subject headings."

Source

Electronic library. 22(2004) no.2, S.112-120

0.022610078 = product of:
  0.11305039 = sum of:
    0.11305039 = weight(_text_:22 in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11305039 = score(doc=402,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Information processing and management. 22(1986) no.6, S.465-476

0.019783817 = product of:
  0.098919086 = sum of:
    0.098919086 = weight(_text_:22 in 3445) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.098919086 = score(doc=3445,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3445, 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=3445)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

25. 8.2005 17:42:22

0.018146386 = product of:
  0.090731926 = sum of:
    0.090731926 = weight(_text_:system in 3693) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.090731926 = score(doc=3693,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.5524007 = fieldWeight in 3693, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3693)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Unfamiliarity with search tactics creates difficulties for many users of online retrieval systems. User observations indicate that even experienced searchers use vocabulary incorrectly and rarely reformulate their queries. To address these problems, an expert system for online search assistance was developed. This prototype automatically reformulates queries to improve the search results, and ranks the retrieved passages to speed the identification of relevant information. User's search performance using the expert system was compared with their search performance using an online thesaurus. The following conclusions were reached: (1) the expert system significantly reduced the number of queries necessary to find relevant passages compared with the user searching alone or with the thesaurus. (2) The expert system produced marginally significant improvements in precision compared with the user searching on their own. There was no significant difference in the recall achieved by the three system configurations. (3) Overall, the expert system ranked relevant passages above irrelevant passages

0.016957557 = product of:
  0.084787786 = sum of:
    0.084787786 = weight(_text_:22 in 58) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.084787786 = score(doc=58,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 58, 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=58)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

14. 6.2015 22:12:44

0.016957557 = product of:
  0.084787786 = sum of:
    0.084787786 = weight(_text_:22 in 2051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.084787786 = score(doc=2051,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2051, 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=2051)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

14. 6.2015 22:12:56

0.016003607 = product of:
  0.08001803 = sum of:
    0.08001803 = weight(_text_:system in 788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08001803 = score(doc=788,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.4871716 = fieldWeight in 788, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=788)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.015839463 = product of:
  0.07919731 = sum of:
    0.07919731 = weight(_text_:system in 416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07919731 = score(doc=416,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.48217484 = fieldWeight in 416, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=416)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Addresses the problem of control in documentary information retrieval systems is analysed and it is shown why an IR system has to be looked at as an adaptive system. The algorithms of feedback are proposed and it is shown how they depend on the type of the collection of documents: static (no change in the collection between searches) and dynamic (when the change occurs between searches). The proposed algorithms are the basis for the development of the fully automated information retrieval systems

0.015839463 = product of:
  0.07919731 = sum of:
    0.07919731 = weight(_text_:system in 1070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07919731 = score(doc=1070,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.48217484 = fieldWeight in 1070, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1070)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Describes an adaptive information retrieval system: Information Retrieval Algorithm System (IRAS); that uses heuristic searching to sample a document space and retrieve relevant documents according to users' requests; and also a learning module based on a knowledge representation system and an approximate probabilistic characterization of relevant documents; to reproduce a user classification of relevant documents and to provide a rule controlled ranking

0.015336494 = product of:
  0.07668247 = sum of:
    0.07668247 = weight(_text_:system in 4769) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07668247 = score(doc=4769,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.46686378 = fieldWeight in 4769, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4769)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This paper summarizes a prototype geographical image retrieval system that demonstrates how to integrate image processing and information analysis techniques to support large-scale content-based image retrieval. By using an image as its interface, the prototype system addresses a troublesome aspect of traditional retrieval models, which require users to have complete knowledge of the low-level features of an image. In addition we describe an experiment to validate against that of human subjects in an effort to address the scarcity of research evaluating performance of an algorithm against that of human beings. The results of the experiment indicate that the system could do as well as human subjects in accomplishing the tasks of similarity analysis and image categorization. We also found that under some circumstances texture features of an image are insufficient to represent an geographic image. We believe, however, that our image retrieval system provides a promising approach to integrating image processing techniques and information retrieval algorithms

0.01385953 = product of:
  0.06929765 = sum of:
    0.06929765 = weight(_text_:system in 3131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06929765 = score(doc=3131,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.42190298 = fieldWeight in 3131, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3131)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Outlines a fully integrated retrieval engine that processes documents and queries at the multiple, complex linguistic levels that humans use to construe meaning. Currently undergoing beta site trials, the DR-LINK natural language text retrieval system allows searchers to state queries as fully formed, natural sentences. The meaning and matching of both queries and documents is accomplished at the conceptual level of human expression, not by the simple concurrence of keywords. Furthermore, the natural browsing behaviour of information searchers is accomodated by allowing documents identified as potentially relevant by the explicit semantics of the system to be used as relevance feedback queries which provide an appropriate implicit semantic representation of the information seeker's need

0.01385953 = product of:
  0.06929765 = sum of:
    0.06929765 = weight(_text_:system in 430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06929765 = score(doc=430,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.42190298 = fieldWeight in 430, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=430)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Explores interface design raised by the development and evaluation of Okapi, a highly interactive information retrieval system based on a probabilistic retrieval model with relevance feedback. It uses terms frequency weighting functions to display retrieved items in a best match ranked order; it can also find additional items similar to those marked as relevant by the searcher. Compares the effectiveness of automatic and interactive query expansion in different user interface environments. focuses on the nature of interaction in information retrieval and the interrelationship between functional visibility, the user's cognitive loading and the balance of control between user and system

0.013717378 = product of:
  0.068586886 = sum of:
    0.068586886 = weight(_text_:system in 6430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.068586886 = score(doc=6430,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052150324 = queryNorm
        0.41757566 = fieldWeight in 6430, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6430)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)