Search (1757 results, page 1 of 88)

0.20744473 = product of:
  0.27659297 = sum of:
    0.07805218 = weight(_text_:web in 104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07805218 = score(doc=104,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.48375595 = fieldWeight in 104, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=104)
    0.104750924 = weight(_text_:search in 104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.104750924 = score(doc=104,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.6095997 = fieldWeight in 104, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=104)
    0.09378988 = product of:
      0.18757977 = sum of:
        0.18757977 = weight(_text_:engine in 104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18757977 = score(doc=104,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.7092499 = fieldWeight in 104, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=104)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

Exploiting context information in a web search engine helps fine-tuning web services and applications to deliver custom-made information to end users. While context, including user and environment information, cannot be exploited efficiently in the wired Internet interaction type, it is becoming accessible with the mobile web where users have an intimate relationship with their handsets. In this type of interaction, context plays a significant role enhancing information search and therefore, allowing a search engine to detect relevant content in all digital forms and formats. This chapter proposes a context model and an architecture that promote integration of context information for individuals and social communities to add value to their interaction with the mobile web. The architecture relies on efficient knowledge management of multimedia resources for a wide range of applications and web services. The research is illustrated with a corporate case study showing how efficient context integration improves usability of a mobile search engine.

Footnote

Vgl.: http://www.igi-global.com/book/next-generation-search-engines/64433.

Source

Next generation search engines: advanced models for information retrieval. Eds.: C. Jouis, u.a

0.20717825 = product of:
  0.27623767 = sum of:
    0.06981198 = weight(_text_:web in 102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06981198 = score(doc=102,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 102, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=102)
    0.12520128 = weight(_text_:search in 102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12520128 = score(doc=102,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.72861093 = fieldWeight in 102, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=102)
    0.08122443 = product of:
      0.16244885 = sum of:
        0.16244885 = weight(_text_:engine in 102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16244885 = score(doc=102,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.6142285 = fieldWeight in 102, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=102)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

People commonly experience difficulties when searching the Web, arising from an incomplete knowledge regarding their information needs, an inability to formulate accurate queries, and a low tolerance for considering the relevance of the search results. While simple and easy to use interfaces have made Web search universally accessible, they provide little assistance for people to overcome the difficulties they experience when their information needs are more complex than simple fact-verification. In human-centred Web search, the purpose of the search engine expands from a simple information retrieval engine to a decision support system. People are empowered to take an active role in the search process, with the search engine supporting them in developing a deeper understanding of their information needs, assisting them in crafting and refining their queries, and aiding them in evaluating and exploring the search results. In this chapter, recent research in this domain is outlined and discussed.

Footnote

Vgl.: http://www.igi-global.com/book/next-generation-search-engines/64427.

Source

Next generation search engines: advanced models for information retrieval. Eds.: C. Jouis, u.a

0.19575962 = product of:
  0.26101282 = sum of:
    0.050382458 = weight(_text_:web in 5493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050382458 = score(doc=5493,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 5493, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5493)
    0.09898031 = weight(_text_:search in 5493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09898031 = score(doc=5493,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.5760175 = fieldWeight in 5493, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5493)
    0.11165006 = sum of:
      0.07815824 = weight(_text_:engine in 5493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07815824 = score(doc=5493,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049439456 = queryNorm
          0.29552078 = fieldWeight in 5493, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5493)
      0.03349182 = weight(_text_:22 in 5493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03349182 = score(doc=5493,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049439456 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5493, 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=5493)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

Purpose Web search is more and more moving into mobile contexts. However, screen size of mobile devices is limited and search engine result pages face a trade-off between offering informative snippets and optimal use of space. One factor clearly influencing this trade-off is snippet length. The purpose of this paper is to find out what snippet size to use in mobile web search. Design/methodology/approach For this purpose, an eye-tracking experiment was conducted showing participants search interfaces with snippets of one, three or five lines on a mobile device to analyze 17 dependent variables. In total, 31 participants took part in the study. Each of the participants solved informational and navigational tasks. Findings Results indicate a strong influence of page fold on scrolling behavior and attention distribution across search results. Regardless of query type, short snippets seem to provide too little information about the result, so that search performance and subjective measures are negatively affected. Long snippets of five lines lead to better performance than medium snippets for navigational queries, but to worse performance for informational queries. Originality/value Although space in mobile search is limited, this study shows that longer snippets improve usability and user experience. It further emphasizes that page fold plays a stronger role in mobile than in desktop search for attention distribution.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.18253812 = product of:
  0.24338417 = sum of:
    0.06981198 = weight(_text_:web in 4560) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06981198 = score(doc=4560,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 4560, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4560)
    0.03959212 = weight(_text_:search in 4560) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03959212 = score(doc=4560,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.230407 = fieldWeight in 4560, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4560)
    0.13398007 = sum of:
      0.09378988 = weight(_text_:engine in 4560) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09378988 = score(doc=4560,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049439456 = queryNorm
          0.35462496 = fieldWeight in 4560, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4560)
      0.04019018 = weight(_text_:22 in 4560) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04019018 = score(doc=4560,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049439456 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4560, 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=4560)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

In this article, several procedures (e.g., measurements, information retrieval analyses, power law, association rules, hierarchical clustering) are introduced which were made on a pilot digital library. Information retrievals of web users from 01/01/2003 to 01/01/2006 on the internal search engine of the pilot digital library have been analyzed. With the power law method of data processing, a constant information retrieval pattern has been established, stable over a longer period of time. After this, the data have been analyzed. On the basis of the accomplished measurements and analyses, a series of mental models of web users for global (educational) purposes have been developed (e.g., the metamodel of thought hierarchy of web users, the segmentation model of web users), and the users were profiled in four different groups (adventurers, observers, applicable, and know-alls). The article concludes with the construction of a new knowledge management solution called multidimensional rank thesaurus.

Date

13. 7.2011 14:47:22

0.1756793 = product of:
  0.23423907 = sum of:
    0.029088326 = weight(_text_:web in 3752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029088326 = score(doc=3752,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 3752, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3752)
    0.10942685 = weight(_text_:search in 3752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10942685 = score(doc=3752,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.6368113 = fieldWeight in 3752, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3752)
    0.095723905 = product of:
      0.19144781 = sum of:
        0.19144781 = weight(_text_:engine in 3752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19144781 = score(doc=3752,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.72387516 = fieldWeight in 3752, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3752)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

Web search engines act as gatekeepers when people search for information online. Research has shown that search engine users seem to trust the search engines' ranking uncritically and mostly select top-ranked results. This study further examines search engine users' selection behavior. Drawing from the credibility and information research literature, we test whether the presence or absence of certain credibility cues influences the selection probability of search engine results. In an observational study, participants (N?=?247) completed two information research tasks on preset search engine results pages, on which three credibility cues (source reputation, message neutrality, and social recommendations) as well as the search result ranking were systematically varied. The results of our study confirm the significance of the ranking. Of the three credibility cues, only reputation had an additional effect on selection probabilities. Personal characteristics (prior knowledge about the researched issues, search engine usage patterns, etc.) did not influence the preference for search results linked with certain credibility cues. These findings are discussed in light of situational and contextual characteristics (e.g., involvement, low-cost scenarios).

0.16609338 = product of:
  0.22145784 = sum of:
    0.06981198 = weight(_text_:web in 1233) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06981198 = score(doc=1233,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 1233, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1233)
    0.104750924 = weight(_text_:search in 1233) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.104750924 = score(doc=1233,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.6095997 = fieldWeight in 1233, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1233)
    0.04689494 = product of:
      0.09378988 = sum of:
        0.09378988 = weight(_text_:engine in 1233) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09378988 = score(doc=1233,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.35462496 = fieldWeight in 1233, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1233)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

Searches conducted on web search engines reflect the interests of users and society. Google Trends, which provides information about the queries searched by users of the Google web search engine, is a rich data source from which a wealth of information can be mined. We investigated the possibility of using web search volume data from Google Trends to predict academic fame. As queries are language-dependent, we studied universities from two countries with different languages, the United States and Spain. We found a significant correlation between the search volume of a university name and the university's academic reputation or fame. We also examined the effect of some Google Trends features, namely, limiting the search to a specific country or topic category on the search volume data. Finally, we examined the effect of university sizes on the correlations found to gain a deeper understanding of the nature of the relationships.

0.16088547 = product of:
  0.21451396 = sum of:
    0.029088326 = weight(_text_:web in 2921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029088326 = score(doc=2921,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 2921, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2921)
    0.07377557 = weight(_text_:search in 2921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07377557 = score(doc=2921,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.4293381 = fieldWeight in 2921, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2921)
    0.11165006 = sum of:
      0.07815824 = weight(_text_:engine in 2921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07815824 = score(doc=2921,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049439456 = queryNorm
          0.29552078 = fieldWeight in 2921, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2921)
      0.03349182 = weight(_text_:22 in 2921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03349182 = score(doc=2921,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049439456 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2921, 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=2921)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to improve users' search results relevancy by manipulating their explicit feedback. Design/methodology/approach CoRRe - an explicit feedback model integrating three popular feedback, namely, Comment-Rating-Referral is proposed in this study. The model is further enhanced using case-based reasoning in retrieving the top-5 results. A search engine prototype was developed using Text REtrieval Conference as the document collection, and results were evaluated at three levels (i.e. top-5, 10 and 15). A user evaluation involving 28 students was administered, focussing on 20 queries. Findings Both Mean Average Precision and Normalized Discounted Cumulative Gain results indicate CoRRe to have the highest retrieval precisions at all the three levels compared to the other feedback models. Furthermore, independent t-tests showed the precision differences to be significant. Rating was found to be the most popular technique among the participants, producing the best precision compared to referral and comments. Research limitations/implications The findings suggest that search retrieval relevance can be significantly improved when users' explicit feedback are integrated, therefore web-based systems should find ways to manipulate users' feedback to provide better recommendations or search results to the users. Originality/value The study is novel in the sense that users' comment, rating and referral were taken into consideration to improve their overall search experience.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.15854177 = product of:
  0.21138902 = sum of:
    0.050382458 = weight(_text_:web in 5041) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050382458 = score(doc=5041,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 5041, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5041)
    0.093319535 = weight(_text_:search in 5041) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.093319535 = score(doc=5041,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.54307455 = fieldWeight in 5041, 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=5041)
    0.06768702 = product of:
      0.13537404 = sum of:
        0.13537404 = weight(_text_:engine in 5041) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13537404 = score(doc=5041,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.51185703 = fieldWeight in 5041, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5041)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

Students use general web search engines as their primary source of research while trying to find answers to school-related questions. Although search engines are highly relevant for the general population, they may return results that are out of educational context. Another rising trend; social community question answering websites are the second choice for students who try to get answers from other peers online. We attempt discovering possible improvements in educational search by leveraging both of these information sources. For this purpose, we first implement a classifier for educational questions. This classifier is built by an ensemble method that employs several regular learning algorithms and retrieval based approaches that utilize external resources. We also build a query expander to facilitate classification. We further improve the classification using search engine results and obtain 83.5% accuracy. Although our work is entirely based on the Turkish language, the features could easily be mapped to other languages as well. In order to find out whether search engine ranking can be improved in the education domain using the classification model, we collect and label a set of query results retrieved from a general web search engine. We propose five ad-hoc methods to improve search ranking based on the idea that the query-document category relation is an indicator of relevance. We evaluate these methods for overall performance, varying query length and based on factoid and non-factoid queries. We show that some of the methods significantly improve the rankings in the education domain.

0.15599944 = product of:
  0.20799924 = sum of:
    0.041137107 = weight(_text_:web in 4042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041137107 = score(doc=4042,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 4042, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4042)
    0.12778303 = weight(_text_:search in 4042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12778303 = score(doc=4042,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.7436354 = fieldWeight in 4042, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4042)
    0.03907912 = product of:
      0.07815824 = sum of:
        0.07815824 = weight(_text_:engine in 4042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07815824 = score(doc=4042,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.29552078 = fieldWeight in 4042, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4042)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

Although technology can often correct spelling errors, the complex tasks of information searching and retrieval in an online public access catalog (OPAC) are made more difficult by these errors in users' input and bibliographic records. This study examines the search behaviors of 38 university students, divided into groups with either easy-to-spell or difficult-to-spell search terms, who were asked to find items in the OPAC with these search terms. Search behaviors and strategy use in the OPAC and on the World Wide Web (WWW) were examined. In general, students used familiar Web resources to check their spelling or discover more about the assigned topic. Students with difficult-to-spell search terms checked spelling more often, changed search strategies to look for the general topic and had fewer successful searches. Students unable to find the correct spelling of a search term were unable to complete their search. Students tended to search the OPAC as they would search a search engine, with few search terms or complex search strategies. The results of this study have implications for spell checking, user-focused OPAC design, and cataloging. Students' search behaviors are discussed by expanding Thatcher's (2006) Information-Seeking Process and Tactics for the WWW model to include OPACs.

0.15437317 = product of:
  0.2058309 = sum of:
    0.100764915 = weight(_text_:web in 3623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.100764915 = score(doc=3623,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.6245262 = fieldWeight in 3623, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3623)
    0.06598687 = weight(_text_:search in 3623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06598687 = score(doc=3623,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.3840117 = fieldWeight in 3623, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3623)
    0.03907912 = product of:
      0.07815824 = sum of:
        0.07815824 = weight(_text_:engine in 3623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07815824 = score(doc=3623,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.29552078 = fieldWeight in 3623, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3623)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims to report findings from an exploratory study investigating the web interactions and technoliteracy of children in the early childhood years. Previous research has studied aspects of older children's technoliteracy and web searching; however, few studies have analyzed web search data from children younger than six years of age. Design/methodology/approach - The study explored the Google web searching and technoliteracy of young children who are enrolled in a "preparatory classroom" or kindergarten (the year before young children begin compulsory schooling in Queensland, Australia). Young children were video- and audio-taped while conducting Google web searches in the classroom. The data were qualitatively analysed to understand the young children's web search behaviour. Findings - The findings show that young children engage in complex web searches, including keyword searching and browsing, query formulation and reformulation, relevance judgments, successive searches, information multitasking and collaborative behaviours. The study results provide significant initial insights into young children's web searching and technoliteracy. Practical implications - The use of web search engines by young children is an important research area with implications for educators and web technologies developers. Originality/value - This is the first study of young children's interaction with a web search engine.

0.15349582 = product of:
  0.2046611 = sum of:
    0.03490599 = weight(_text_:web in 2157) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03490599 = score(doc=2157,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 2157, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2157)
    0.08853068 = weight(_text_:search in 2157) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08853068 = score(doc=2157,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.51520574 = fieldWeight in 2157, 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=2157)
    0.08122443 = product of:
      0.16244885 = sum of:
        0.16244885 = weight(_text_:engine in 2157) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16244885 = score(doc=2157,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.6142285 = fieldWeight in 2157, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2157)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

Search engine retrieval effectiveness studies are usually small scale, using only limited query samples. Furthermore, queries are selected by the researchers. We address these issues by taking a random representative sample of 1,000 informational and 1,000 navigational queries from a major German search engine and comparing Google's and Bing's results based on this sample. Jurors were found through crowdsourcing, and data were collected using specialized software, the Relevance Assessment Tool (RAT). We found that although Google outperforms Bing in both query types, the difference in the performance for informational queries was rather low. However, for navigational queries, Google found the correct answer in 95.3% of cases, whereas Bing only found the correct answer 76.6% of the time. We conclude that search engine performance on navigational queries is of great importance, because users in this case can clearly identify queries that have returned correct results. So, performance on this query type may contribute to explaining user satisfaction with search engines.

0.15316099 = product of:
  0.20421466 = sum of:
    0.049364526 = weight(_text_:web in 10) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049364526 = score(doc=10,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 10, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=10)
    0.08853068 = weight(_text_:search in 10) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08853068 = score(doc=10,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.51520574 = fieldWeight in 10, 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=10)
    0.06631946 = product of:
      0.13263892 = sum of:
        0.13263892 = weight(_text_:engine in 10) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13263892 = score(doc=10,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.5015154 = fieldWeight in 10, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=10)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

Information Retrieval (IR) research typically evaluates search systems in terms of the standard precision, recall and F-measures to weight the relative importance of precision and recall (e.g. van Rijsbergen, 1979). All of these assess the extent to which the system returns good matches for a query. In contrast, webometric measures are designed specifically for web search engines and are designed to monitor changes in results over time and various aspects of the internal logic of the way in which search engine select the results to be returned. This chapter introduces a range of webometric measurements and illustrates them with case studies of Google, Bing and Yahoo! This is a very fertile area for simple and complex new investigations into search engine results.

0.15254721 = product of:
  0.30509442 = sum of:
    0.07465562 = weight(_text_:search in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07465562 = score(doc=1149,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.43445963 = fieldWeight in 1149, 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=1149)
    0.2304388 = sum of:
      0.1768519 = weight(_text_:engine in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.1768519 = score(doc=1149,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049439456 = queryNorm
          0.6686872 = fieldWeight in 1149, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1149)
      0.053586908 = weight(_text_:22 in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.053586908 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049439456 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1149, 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=1149)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This paper presents a test of the validity of using Google Scholar to evaluate the publications of researchers by comparing the premises on which its search engine, PageRank, is based, to those of Garfield's theory of citation indexing. It finds that the premises are identical and that PageRank and Garfield's theory of citation indexing validate each other.

Date

17.12.2013 11:02:22

0.15173718 = product of:
  0.20231625 = sum of:
    0.050382458 = weight(_text_:web in 3144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050382458 = score(doc=3144,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 3144, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3144)
    0.07377557 = weight(_text_:search in 3144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07377557 = score(doc=3144,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.4293381 = fieldWeight in 3144, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3144)
    0.07815824 = product of:
      0.15631647 = sum of:
        0.15631647 = weight(_text_:engine in 3144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15631647 = score(doc=3144,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.59104156 = fieldWeight in 3144, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3144)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

Users of web search engines are known to mostly focus on the top ranked results of the search engine result page. While many studies support this well known information seeking pattern only few studies concentrate on the question what users are missing by neglecting lower ranked results. To learn more about the relevance distributions in the so-called long tail we conducted a relevance assessment study with the Million Short long-tail web search engine. While we see a clear difference in the content between the head and the tail of the search engine result list we see no statistical significant differences in the binary relevance judgments and weak significant differences when using graded relevance. The tail contains different but still valuable results. We argue that the long tail can be a rich source for the diversification of web search engine result lists but it needs more evaluation to clearly describe the differences.

0.14397183 = product of:
  0.19196245 = sum of:
    0.09106086 = weight(_text_:web in 1571) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09106086 = score(doc=1571,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.5643819 = fieldWeight in 1571, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1571)
    0.046190813 = weight(_text_:search in 1571) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046190813 = score(doc=1571,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 1571, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1571)
    0.05471077 = product of:
      0.10942154 = sum of:
        0.10942154 = weight(_text_:engine in 1571) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10942154 = score(doc=1571,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.41372913 = fieldWeight in 1571, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1571)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

rdfedit is a web application running on Django, rdflib and jQuery DataTables that supports novices in the field of Semantic Web technologies with the creation of RDF instance metadata. By utilizing the Semantic Web search engine Sindice, rdfedit can transform literals into URIs, fetch triples from external resources and import them into the user's local graph. Metadata experts can easily configure these features of rdfedit to fit their preferences regarding metadata schemata, so metadata creators with few knowledge about Semantic Web technologies can create RDF data in a fast and consistent manner while also following the Linked Data principles.

0.14367132 = product of:
  0.19156176 = sum of:
    0.057001244 = weight(_text_:web in 3291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057001244 = score(doc=3291,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.35328537 = fieldWeight in 3291, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3291)
    0.064653665 = weight(_text_:search in 3291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.064653665 = score(doc=3291,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.37625307 = fieldWeight in 3291, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3291)
    0.06990685 = product of:
      0.1398137 = sum of:
        0.1398137 = weight(_text_:engine in 3291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1398137 = score(doc=3291,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.52864367 = fieldWeight in 3291, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3291)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

The web is a network of linked sites whereby each site either forms a physical portal or a standalone page. In the former case, the portal presents an access point to its embedded web pages that coherently present a specific topic. In the latter case, there are millions of standalone web pages, that are scattered throughout the web, having the same topic and could be conceptually linked together to form virtual portals. Search engines have been developed to help users in reaching the adequate pages in an efficient and effective manner. All the known current search engine techniques rely on the web page as the basic atomic search unit. They ignore the conceptual links, that reveal the implicit web related meanings, among the retrieved pages. However, building a semantic model for the whole portal may contain more semantic information than a model of scattered individual pages. In addition, user queries can be poor and contain imprecise terms that do not reflect the real user intention. Consequently, retrieving the standalone individual pages that are directly related to the query may not satisfy the user's need. In this paper, we propose PREFCA, a Portal Retrieval Engine based on Formal Concept Analysis that relies on the portal as the main search unit. PREFCA consists of three phases: First, the information extraction phase that is concerned with extracting portal's semantic data. Second, the formal concept analysis phase that utilizes formal concept analysis to discover the conceptual links among portal and attributes. Finally, the information retrieval phase where we propose a portal ranking method to retrieve ranked pairs of portals and embedded pages. Additionally, we apply the network analysis rules to output some portal characteristics. We evaluated PREFCA using two data sets, namely the Forum for Information Retrieval Evaluation 2010 and ClueWeb09 (category B) test data, for physical and virtual portals respectively. PREFCA proves higher F-measure accuracy, better Mean Average Precision ranking and comparable network analysis and efficiency results than other search engine approaches, namely Term Frequency Inverse Document Frequency (TF-IDF), Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA), and BM25 techniques. As well, it gains high Mean Average Precision in comparison with learning to rank techniques. Moreover, PREFCA also gains better reach time than Carrot as a well-known topic-based search engine.

0.14293148 = product of:
  0.1905753 = sum of:
    0.05817665 = weight(_text_:web in 3148) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05817665 = score(doc=3148,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.36057037 = fieldWeight in 3148, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3148)
    0.093319535 = weight(_text_:search in 3148) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.093319535 = score(doc=3148,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.54307455 = fieldWeight in 3148, 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=3148)
    0.03907912 = product of:
      0.07815824 = sum of:
        0.07815824 = weight(_text_:engine in 3148) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07815824 = score(doc=3148,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.29552078 = fieldWeight in 3148, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3148)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

Compared to the early versions of smart phones, recent mobile devices have bigger screens that can present more web search results. Several previous studies have reported differences in user interaction between conventional desktop computer and mobile device-based web searches, so it is imperative to consider the differences in user behavior for web search engine interface design on mobile devices. However, it is still unknown how the diversification of screen sizes on hand-held devices affects how users search. In this article, we investigate search performance and behavior on three different small screen sizes: early smart phones, recent smart phones, and phablets. We found no significant difference with respect to the efficiency of carrying out tasks, however participants exhibited different search behaviors: less eye movement within top links on the larger screen, fast reading with some hesitation before choosing a link on the medium, and frequent use of scrolling on the small screen. This result suggests that the presentation of web search results for each screen needs to take into account differences in search behavior. We suggest several ideas for presentation design for each screen size.

0.14231709 = product of:
  0.18975613 = sum of:
    0.03490599 = weight(_text_:web in 279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03490599 = score(doc=279,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 279, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=279)
    0.08853068 = weight(_text_:search in 279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08853068 = score(doc=279,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.51520574 = fieldWeight in 279, 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=279)
    0.06631946 = product of:
      0.13263892 = sum of:
        0.13263892 = weight(_text_:engine in 279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13263892 = score(doc=279,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.5015154 = fieldWeight in 279, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=279)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

Traffic from search engines is important for most online businesses, with the majority of visitors to many websites being referred by search engines. Therefore, an understanding of this search engine traffic is critical to the success of these websites. Understanding search engine traffic means understanding the underlying intent of the query terms and the corresponding user behaviors of searchers submitting keywords. In this research, using 712,643 query keywords from a popular Spanish music website relying on contextual advertising as its business model, we use a k-means clustering algorithm to categorize the referral keywords with similar characteristics of onsite customer behavior, including attributes such as clickthrough rate and revenue. We identified 6 clusters of consumer keywords. Clusters range from a large number of users who are low impact to a small number of high impact users. We demonstrate how online businesses can leverage this segmentation clustering approach to provide a more tailored consumer experience. Implications are that businesses can effectively segment customers to develop better business models to increase advertising conversion rates.

0.14231709 = product of:
  0.18975613 = sum of:
    0.03490599 = weight(_text_:web in 1129) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03490599 = score(doc=1129,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 1129, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1129)
    0.08853068 = weight(_text_:search in 1129) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08853068 = score(doc=1129,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.51520574 = fieldWeight in 1129, 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=1129)
    0.06631946 = product of:
      0.13263892 = sum of:
        0.13263892 = weight(_text_:engine in 1129) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13263892 = score(doc=1129,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.5015154 = fieldWeight in 1129, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1129)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

In this paper we present results from an investigation of religious information searching based on analyzing log files from a large general-purpose search engine. From approximately 15 million queries, we identified 124,422 that were part of 60,759 user sessions. We present a method for categorizing queries based on related terms and show differences in search patterns between religious searches and web searching more generally. We also investigate the search patterns found in queries related to 5 religions: Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, and Judaism. Different search patterns are found to emerge. Results from this study complement existing studies of religious information searching and provide a level of detailed analysis not reported to date. We show, for example, that sessions involving religion-related queries tend to last longer, that the lengths of religion-related queries are greater, and that the number of unique URLs clicked is higher when compared to all queries. The results of the study can serve to provide information on what this large population of users is actually searching for.

0.1399036 = product of:
  0.18653813 = sum of:
    0.060458954 = weight(_text_:web in 95) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060458954 = score(doc=95,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.37471575 = fieldWeight in 95, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=95)
    0.07918424 = weight(_text_:search in 95) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07918424 = score(doc=95,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.460814 = fieldWeight in 95, 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=95)
    0.04689494 = product of:
      0.09378988 = sum of:
        0.09378988 = weight(_text_:engine in 95) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09378988 = score(doc=95,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.35462496 = fieldWeight in 95, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=95)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

In this chapter, the authors describe the key indexing components of today's web search engines. As the World Wide Web has grown, the systems and methods for indexing have changed significantly. The authors present the data structures used, the features extracted, the infrastructure needed, and the options available for designing a brand new search engine. Techniques are highlighted that improve relevance of results, discuss trade-offs to best utilize machine resources, and cover distributed processing concepts in this context. In particular, the authors delve into the topics of indexing phrases instead of terms, storage in memory vs. on disk, and data partitioning. Some thoughts on information organization for the newly emerging data-forms conclude the chapter.

Footnote

Vgl.: http://www.igi-global.com/book/next-generation-search-engines/64418.

Source

Next generation search engines: advanced models for information retrieval. Eds.: C. Jouis, u.a