Search (9 results, page 1 of 1)

0.055522382 = product of:
  0.16656715 = sum of:
    0.16656715 = weight(_text_:query in 3875) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16656715 = score(doc=3875,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.7261926 = fieldWeight in 3875, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3875)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

A Bayesian argument is used to suggest modifications to the Robertson/Sparck Jones relevance weighting formula, to accomodate the addition to the query of terms taken from the relevant documents identified during the search

0.052673157 = product of:
  0.15801947 = sum of:
    0.15801947 = weight(_text_:query in 2733) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15801947 = score(doc=2733,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.68892676 = fieldWeight in 2733, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2733)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

We propose an approach to the retrieval of entities that have a specific relationship with the entity given in a query. Our research goal is to investigate whether related entity finding problem can be addressed by combining a measure of relatedness of candidate answer entities to the query, and likelihood that the candidate answer entity belongs to the target entity category specified in the query. An initial list of candidate entities, extracted from top ranked documents retrieved for the query, is refined using a number of statistical and linguistic methods. The proposed method extracts the category of the target entity from the query, identifies instances of this category as seed entities, and computes similarity between candidate and seed entities. The evaluation was conducted on the Related Entity Finding task of the Entity Track of TREC 2010, as well as the QA list questions from TREC 2005 and 2006. Evaluation results demonstrate that the proposed methods are effective in finding related entities.

0.04711231 = product of:
  0.14133692 = sum of:
    0.14133692 = weight(_text_:query in 987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14133692 = score(doc=987,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.61619484 = fieldWeight in 987, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=987)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Lexical cohesion is a property of text, achieved through lexical-semantic relations between words in text. Most information retrieval systems make use of lexical relations in text only to a limited extent. In this paper we empirically investigate whether the degree of lexical cohesion between the contexts of query terms' occurrences in a document is related to its relevance to the query. Lexical cohesion between distinct query terms in a document is estimated on the basis of the lexical-semantic relations (repetition, synonymy, hyponymy and sibling) that exist between there collocates - words that co-occur with them in the same windows of text. Experiments suggest significant differences between the lexical cohesion in relevant and non-relevant document sets exist. A document ranking method based on lexical cohesion shows some performance improvements.

0.04441791 = product of:
  0.13325372 = sum of:
    0.13325372 = weight(_text_:query in 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13325372 = score(doc=2650,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.5809541 = fieldWeight in 2650, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2650)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In the framework of a relevance feedback system, term values or term weights may be used to (a) select new terms for inclusion in a query, and/or (b) weight the terms for retrieval purposes once selected. It has sometimes been assumed that the same weighting formula should be used for both purposes. This paper sketches a quantitative argument which suggests that the two purposes require different weighting formulae

0.03886567 = product of:
  0.116597004 = sum of:
    0.116597004 = weight(_text_:query in 6964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.116597004 = score(doc=6964,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.5083348 = fieldWeight in 6964, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6964)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The Okapi system has been used in a series of experiments on the TREC collections, investiganting probabilistic methods, relevance feedback, and query expansion, and interaction issues. Some new probabilistic models have been developed, resulting in simple weigthing functions that take account of document length and within document and within query term frequency. All have been shown to be beneficial when based on large quantities of relevance data as in the routing task. Interaction issues are much more difficult to evaluate in the TREC framework, and no benefits have yet been demonstrated from feedback based on small numbers of 'relevant' items identified by intermediary searchers

0.031408206 = product of:
  0.09422461 = sum of:
    0.09422461 = weight(_text_:query in 8159) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09422461 = score(doc=8159,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.41079655 = fieldWeight in 8159, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8159)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.027761191 = product of:
  0.08328357 = sum of:
    0.08328357 = weight(_text_:query in 819) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08328357 = score(doc=819,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.3630963 = fieldWeight in 819, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=819)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose - An issue that tends to be ignored in information retrieval is the issue of updating inverted files. This is largely because inverted files were devised to provide fast query service, and much work has been done with the emphasis strongly on queries. This paper aims to study the effect of using parallel methods for the update of inverted files in order to reduce costs, by looking at two types of partitioning for inverted files: document identifier and term identifier. Design/methodology/approach - Raw update service and update with query service are studied with these partitioning schemes using an incremental update strategy. The paper uses standard measures used in parallel computing such as speedup to examine the computing results and also the costs of reorganising indexes while servicing transactions. Findings - Empirical results show that for both transaction processing and index reorganisation the document identifier method is superior. However, there is evidence that the term identifier partitioning method could be useful in a concurrent transaction processing context. Practical implications - There is an increasing need to service updates, which is now becoming a requirement of inverted files (for dynamic collections such as the web), demonstrating that a shift in requirements of inverted file maintenance is needed from the past. Originality/value - The paper is of value to database administrators who manage large-scale and dynamic text collections, and who need to use parallel computing to implement their text retrieval services.

0.027482178 = product of:
  0.08244653 = sum of:
    0.08244653 = weight(_text_:query in 5694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08244653 = score(doc=5694,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.35944697 = fieldWeight in 5694, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5694)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Reports text information retrieval experiments performed as part of the 3 rd round of Text Retrieval Conferences (TREC) using the Okapi online catalogue system at City University, UK. The emphasis in TREC-3 was: further refinement of term weighting functions; an investigation of run time passage determination and searching; expansion of ad hoc queries by terms extracted from the top documents retrieved by a trial search; new methods for choosing query expansion terms after relevance feedback, now split into methods of ranking terms prior to selection and subsequent selection procedures; and the development of a user interface procedure within the new TREC interactive search framework

0.008915374 = product of:
  0.026746122 = sum of:
    0.026746122 = product of:
      0.053492244 = sum of:
        0.053492244 = weight(_text_:22 in 5108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053492244 = score(doc=5108,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1728227 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049352113 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5108, 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=5108)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

20. 1.2007 18:30:22