Search (15 results, page 1 of 1)

0.015088407 = product of:
  0.04526522 = sum of:
    0.04526522 = weight(_text_:on in 2409) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04526522 = score(doc=2409,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.4123903 = fieldWeight in 2409, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2409)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Library classification and its functions. Int. Conf. on ..., 20.-21.6.1989, Edmonton, Alberta. Ed.: A. Nitecki u. T. Fell

0.014225486 = product of:
  0.042676456 = sum of:
    0.042676456 = weight(_text_:on in 2411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042676456 = score(doc=2411,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.3888053 = fieldWeight in 2411, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2411)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

ACM transactions on database systems. 3(1978) no.4, S.321-346

0.014225486 = product of:
  0.042676456 = sum of:
    0.042676456 = weight(_text_:on in 5476) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042676456 = score(doc=5476,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.3888053 = fieldWeight in 5476, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5476)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.014225486 = product of:
  0.042676456 = sum of:
    0.042676456 = weight(_text_:on in 5484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042676456 = score(doc=5484,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.3888053 = fieldWeight in 5484, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5484)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.012573673 = product of:
  0.03772102 = sum of:
    0.03772102 = weight(_text_:on in 1307) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03772102 = score(doc=1307,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.3436586 = fieldWeight in 1307, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1307)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

COMPASS

Information retrieval / Use of / On-line computers

Subject

Information retrieval / Use of / On-line computers

0.0124473 = product of:
  0.0373419 = sum of:
    0.0373419 = weight(_text_:on in 7864) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0373419 = score(doc=7864,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.34020463 = fieldWeight in 7864, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7864)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.012319634 = product of:
  0.0369589 = sum of:
    0.0369589 = weight(_text_:on in 7410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0369589 = score(doc=7410,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.33671528 = fieldWeight in 7410, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7410)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Contribution to an issue devoted to the 6th Annual International Conference of the Special Interest Group on Information Retrieval of the Association for Computing Machinery (USA) held at the National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, Maryland, from 6-8 June 83. The following papers were presented in session 12 which was a panel on key issues in information retrieval: SALTON, G.: Research problems in automatic information retrieval; RIJSBERGEN, C.J. van: Information retrieval: new directions, old solutions; MARON, M.E.: Open problems in information retrieval

0.010058938 = product of:
  0.030176813 = sum of:
    0.030176813 = weight(_text_:on in 4836) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030176813 = score(doc=4836,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.27492687 = fieldWeight in 4836, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4836)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Reports on the experimental evaluation of an adaptive linear model that constructs improved user query vectors from user preference judgements on a sample set of documents. The performance of this method is compared with that of the standard relevance feedback techniques. The experimental results seem to demonstrate the effectiveness of the adaptive method

0.010058938 = product of:
  0.030176813 = sum of:
    0.030176813 = weight(_text_:on in 582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030176813 = score(doc=582,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.27492687 = fieldWeight in 582, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=582)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

From classification to 'knowledge organization': Dorking revisited or 'past is prelude'. A collection of reprints to commemorate the firty year span between the Dorking Conference (First International Study Conference on Classification Research 1957) and the Sixth International Study Conference on Classification Research (London 1997). Ed.: A. Gilchrist

0.008801571 = product of:
  0.026404712 = sum of:
    0.026404712 = weight(_text_:on in 4151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026404712 = score(doc=4151,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.24056101 = fieldWeight in 4151, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4151)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Two widerly used criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of information retrieval systems are, respectively, the recall and the precision. Since the determiniation of these measures is dependent on a distinction between documents which are relevant to a given query and documents which are not relevant to that query, it has sometimes been claimed that an accurate, generally valid evaluation cannot be based on recall and precision measure. A study was made to determine the effect of variations in relevance assesments do not produce significant variations in average recall and precision. It thus appears that properly computed recall and precision data may represent effectiveness indicators which are gemerally valid for many distinct user classes.

0.008801571 = product of:
  0.026404712 = sum of:
    0.026404712 = weight(_text_:on in 145) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026404712 = score(doc=145,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.24056101 = fieldWeight in 145, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=145)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Applies the ideas from the automatic link generation research to automatic text summarisation. Using techniques for inter-document link generation, generates intra-document links between passages of a document. Based on the intra-document linkage pattern of a text, characterises the structure of the text. Applies the knowledge of text structure to do automatic text summarisation by passage extraction. Evaluates a set of 50 summaries generated using these techniques by comparing the to paragraph extracts constructed by humans. The automatic summarisation methods perform well, especially in view of the fact that the summaries generates by 2 humans for the same article are surprisingly dissimilar

Footnote

Contribution to a special issue on methods and tools for the automatic construction of hypertext

0.007112743 = product of:
  0.021338228 = sum of:
    0.021338228 = weight(_text_:on in 3879) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021338228 = score(doc=3879,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 3879, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3879)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

While a number of researchers had experimented during the 1950's on automatic indexing and retrieval in various forms, it was Gerard Salton who brought the information retrieval experimental paradigm to full fruition, with his "SMART" system. His work has been enormously influential.

0.00622365 = product of:
  0.01867095 = sum of:
    0.01867095 = weight(_text_:on in 5467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01867095 = score(doc=5467,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 5467, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5467)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The development of a given discipline in science and technology often depends on the availability of theorie capable of describing the processes which control the field and of modelling the interactions between the processes. The absence of an accepted theory of information retrieval has benn blamed for the relative disorder and the lack of technical advances in the area. The main mathematical approaches to information retrieval are examined in this study, including both algebraic and probabilistic models, and the difficulties which impede the formalization of information retrieval processes are described. A number of developments are covered where new theoretical understandings have directly led to the improvemenet of retrieval techniques and operations

0.00622365 = product of:
  0.01867095 = sum of:
    0.01867095 = weight(_text_:on in 1522) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01867095 = score(doc=1522,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 1522, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1522)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Paper presented at the 30th Annual Conference of the National Federation of Astracting and Information Services, Philadelphia, 28 Feb-2 Mar 88. In recent years, the amount and the variety of available machine-readable data, new technologies have been introduced, such as high density storage devices, and fancy graphic displays useful for information transformation and access. New approaches have also been considered for processing the stored data based on the construction of knowledge bases representing the contents and structure of the information, and the use of expert system techniques to control the user-system interactions. Provides a brief evaluation of the new information processing technologies, and of the software methods proposed for information manipulation.

0.0035563714 = product of:
  0.010669114 = sum of:
    0.010669114 = weight(_text_:on in 3650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010669114 = score(doc=3650,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.097201325 = fieldWeight in 3650, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3650)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The attempt to computerize a process, such as indexing, abstracting, classifying, or retrieving information, begins with an analysis of the process into its intellectual and nonintellectual components. That part of the process which is amenable to computerization is mechanical or algorithmic. What is not is intellectual or creative and requires human intervention. Gerard Salton has been an innovator, experimenter, and promoter in the area of mechanized information systems since the early 1960s. He has been particularly ingenious at analyzing the process of information retrieval into its algorithmic components. He received a doctorate in applied mathematics from Harvard University before moving to the computer science department at Cornell, where he developed a prototype automatic retrieval system called SMART. Working with this system he and his students contributed for over a decade to our theoretical understanding of the retrieval process. On a more practical level, they have contributed design criteria for operating retrieval systems. The following selection presents one of the early descriptions of the SMART system; it is valuable as it shows the direction automatic retrieval methods were to take beyond simple word-matching techniques. These include various word normalization techniques to improve recall, for instance, the separation of words into stems and affixes; the correlation and clustering, using statistical association measures, of related terms; and the identification, using a concept thesaurus, of synonymous, broader, narrower, and sibling terms. They include, as weIl, techniques, both linguistic and statistical, to deal with the thorny problem of how to automatically extract from texts index terms that consist of more than one word. They include weighting techniques and various documentrequest matching algorithms. Significant among the latter are those which produce a retrieval output of citations ranked in relevante order. During the 1970s, Salton and his students went an to further refine these various techniques, particularly the weighting and statistical association measures. Many of their early innovations seem commonplace today. Some of their later techniques are still ahead of their time and await technological developments for implementation. The particular focus of the selection that follows is an the evaluation of a particular component of the SMART system, a multilingual thesaurus. By mapping English language expressions and their German equivalents to a common concept number, the thesaurus permitted the automatic processing of German language documents against English language queries and vice versa. The results of the evaluation, as it turned out, were somewhat inconclusive. However, this SMART experiment suggested in a bold and optimistic way how one might proceed to answer such complex questions as What is meant by retrieval language compatability? How it is to be achieved, and how evaluated?