-
¬The Fifth Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-5) (1997)
0.02
0.01654065 = product of:
0.05789227 = sum of:
0.03826187 = product of:
0.09565468 = sum of:
0.05074066 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3087) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05074066 = score(doc=3087,freq=6.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.46309367 = fieldWeight in 3087, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3087)
0.044914022 = weight(_text_:system in 3087) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044914022 = score(doc=3087,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.3936941 = fieldWeight in 3087, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3087)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
0.0196304 = product of:
0.0392608 = sum of:
0.0392608 = weight(_text_:22 in 3087) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0392608 = score(doc=3087,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3087, 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=3087)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Abstract
- Proceedings of the 5th TREC-confrerence held in Gaithersburgh, Maryland, Nov 20-22, 1996. Aim of the conference was discussion on retrieval techniques for large test collections. Different research groups used different techniques, such as automated thesauri, term weighting, natural language techniques, relevance feedback and advanced pattern matching, for information retrieval from the same large database. This procedure makes it possible to compare the results. The proceedings include papers, tables of the system results, and brief system descriptions including timing and storage information
-
Losee, R.M.: Determining information retrieval and filtering performance without experimentation (1995)
0.01
0.014634092 = product of:
0.05121932 = sum of:
0.034042723 = product of:
0.085106805 = sum of:
0.05731767 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05731767 = score(doc=3368,freq=10.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.5231199 = fieldWeight in 3368, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3368)
0.027789133 = weight(_text_:system in 3368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027789133 = score(doc=3368,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 3368, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3368)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
0.0171766 = product of:
0.0343532 = sum of:
0.0343532 = weight(_text_:22 in 3368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0343532 = score(doc=3368,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3368, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3368)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Abstract
- The performance of an information retrieval or text and media filtering system may be determined through analytic methods as well as by traditional simulation or experimental methods. These analytic methods can provide precise statements about expected performance. They can thus determine which of 2 similarly performing systems is superior. For both a single query terms and for a multiple query term retrieval model, a model for comparing the performance of different probabilistic retrieval methods is developed. This method may be used in computing the average search length for a query, given only knowledge of database parameter values. Describes predictive models for inverse document frequency, binary independence, and relevance feedback based retrieval and filtering. Simulation illustrate how the single term model performs and sample performance predictions are given for single term and multiple term problems
- Date
- 22. 2.1996 13:14:10
-
Tomaiuolo, N.G.; Parker, J.: Maximizing relevant retrieval : keyword and natural language searching (1998)
0.01
0.0127447145 = product of:
0.0446065 = sum of:
0.010253297 = product of:
0.051266484 = sum of:
0.051266484 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.051266484 = score(doc=6418,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.46789268 = fieldWeight in 6418, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6418)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.0343532 = product of:
0.0687064 = sum of:
0.0687064 = weight(_text_:22 in 6418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0687064 = score(doc=6418,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6418, 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=6418)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Source
- Online. 22(1998) no.6, S.57-58
-
Dalrymple, P.W.: Retrieval by reformulation in two library catalogs : toward a cognitive model of searching behavior (1990)
0.01
0.0127447145 = product of:
0.0446065 = sum of:
0.010253297 = product of:
0.051266484 = sum of:
0.051266484 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.051266484 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.46789268 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.0343532 = product of:
0.0687064 = sum of:
0.0687064 = weight(_text_:22 in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0687064 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 5089, 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=5089)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 18:43:54
-
Ellis, D.: Progress and problems in information retrieval (1996)
0.01
0.010343495 = product of:
0.03620223 = sum of:
0.01657183 = product of:
0.08285914 = sum of:
0.08285914 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08285914 = score(doc=789,freq=16.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.75622874 = fieldWeight in 789, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=789)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.0196304 = product of:
0.0392608 = sum of:
0.0392608 = weight(_text_:22 in 789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0392608 = score(doc=789,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 789, 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=789)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Abstract
- An introduction to the principal generic approaches to information retrieval research with their associated concepts, models and systems, this text is designed to keep the information professional up to date with the major themes and developments that have preoccupied researchers in recent month in relation to textual and documentary retrieval systems.
- COMPASS
- Information retrieval
- Content
- First published 1991 as New horizons in information retrieval
- Date
- 26. 7.2002 20:22:46
- LCSH
- Information retrieval
- Subject
- Information retrieval
Information retrieval
-
Allan, J.; Callan, J.P.; Croft, W.B.; Ballesteros, L.; Broglio, J.; Xu, J.; Shu, H.: INQUERY at TREC-5 (1997)
0.01
0.009103368 = product of:
0.031861786 = sum of:
0.007323784 = product of:
0.03661892 = sum of:
0.03661892 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03661892 = score(doc=3103,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 3103, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3103)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.024538001 = product of:
0.049076002 = sum of:
0.049076002 = weight(_text_:22 in 3103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049076002 = score(doc=3103,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3103, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3103)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Date
- 27. 2.1999 20:55:22
- Source
- The Fifth Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-5). Ed.: E.M. Voorhees u. D.K. Harman
-
Ng, K.B.; Loewenstern, D.; Basu, C.; Hirsh, H.; Kantor, P.B.: Data fusion of machine-learning methods for the TREC5 routing tak (and other work) (1997)
0.01
0.009103368 = product of:
0.031861786 = sum of:
0.007323784 = product of:
0.03661892 = sum of:
0.03661892 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03661892 = score(doc=3107,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 3107, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3107)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.024538001 = product of:
0.049076002 = sum of:
0.049076002 = weight(_text_:22 in 3107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049076002 = score(doc=3107,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3107, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3107)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Date
- 27. 2.1999 20:59:22
- Source
- The Fifth Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-5). Ed.: E.M. Voorhees u. D.K. Harman
-
Sanderson, M.: ¬The Reuters test collection (1996)
0.01
0.008956701 = product of:
0.031348452 = sum of:
0.011718053 = product of:
0.058590267 = sum of:
0.058590267 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.058590267 = score(doc=6971,freq=8.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.5347345 = fieldWeight in 6971, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6971)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.0196304 = product of:
0.0392608 = sum of:
0.0392608 = weight(_text_:22 in 6971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0392608 = score(doc=6971,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6971, 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=6971)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Abstract
- Describes the Reuters test collection, which at 22.173 references is significantly larger than most traditional test collections. In addition, Reuters has none of the recall calculation problems normally associated with some of the larger test collections available. Explains the method derived by D.D. Lewis to perform retrieval experiments on the Reuters collection and illustrates the use of the Reuters collection using some simple retrieval experiments that compare the performance of stemming algorithms
- Source
- Information retrieval: new systems and current research. Proceedings of the 16th Research Colloquium of the British Computer Society Information Retrieval Specialist Group, Drymen, Scotland, 22-23 Mar 94. Ed.: R. Leon
-
Crestani, F.; Rijsbergen, C.J. van: Information retrieval by imaging (1996)
0.01
0.00752827 = product of:
0.026348945 = sum of:
0.011626146 = product of:
0.058130726 = sum of:
0.058130726 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.058130726 = score(doc=6967,freq=14.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.5305404 = fieldWeight in 6967, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6967)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.0147228 = product of:
0.0294456 = sum of:
0.0294456 = weight(_text_:22 in 6967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0294456 = score(doc=6967,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 6967, 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=6967)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Abstract
- Explains briefly what constitutes the imaging process and explains how imaging can be used in information retrieval. Proposes an approach based on the concept of: 'a term is a possible world'; which enables the exploitation of term to term relationships which are estimated using an information theoretic measure. Reports results of an evaluation exercise to compare the performance of imaging retrieval, using possible world semantics, with a benchmark and using the Cranfield 2 document collection to measure precision and recall. Initially, the performance imaging retrieval was seen to be better but statistical analysis proved that the difference was not significant. The problem with imaging retrieval lies in the amount of computations needed to be performed at run time and a later experiement investigated the possibility of reducing this amount. Notes lines of further investigation
- Source
- Information retrieval: new systems and current research. Proceedings of the 16th Research Colloquium of the British Computer Society Information Retrieval Specialist Group, Drymen, Scotland, 22-23 Mar 94. Ed.: R. Leon
-
Lespinasse, K.: TREC: une conference pour l'evaluation des systemes de recherche d'information (1997)
0.01
0.007282694 = product of:
0.025489427 = sum of:
0.0058590267 = product of:
0.029295133 = sum of:
0.029295133 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029295133 = score(doc=744,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 744, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=744)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.0196304 = product of:
0.0392608 = sum of:
0.0392608 = weight(_text_:22 in 744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0392608 = score(doc=744,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 744, 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=744)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
- Footnote
- Übers. d. Titels: TREC: the Text REtrieval Conference
-
Smithson, S.: Information retrieval evaluation in practice : a case study approach (1994)
0.01
0.006979079 = product of:
0.024426775 = sum of:
0.007250175 = product of:
0.036250874 = sum of:
0.036250874 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 7302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036250874 = score(doc=7302,freq=4.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 7302, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7302)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.0171766 = product of:
0.0343532 = sum of:
0.0343532 = weight(_text_:22 in 7302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0343532 = score(doc=7302,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7302, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7302)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Abstract
- The evaluation of information retrieval systems is an important yet difficult operation. This paper describes an exploratory evaluation study that takes an interpretive approach to evaluation. The longitudinal study examines evaluation through the information-seeking behaviour of 22 case studies of 'real' users. The eclectic approach to data collection produced behavioral data that is compared with relevance judgements and satisfaction ratings. The study demonstrates considerable variations among the cases, among different evaluation measures within the same case, and among the same measures at different stages within a single case. It is argued that those involved in evaluation should be aware of the difficulties, and base any evaluation on a good understanding of the cases in question
-
Blair, D.C.: STAIRS Redux : thoughts on the STAIRS evaluation, ten years after (1996)
0.01
0.006979079 = product of:
0.024426775 = sum of:
0.007250175 = product of:
0.036250874 = sum of:
0.036250874 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036250874 = score(doc=3002,freq=4.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 3002, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3002)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.0171766 = product of:
0.0343532 = sum of:
0.0343532 = weight(_text_:22 in 3002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0343532 = score(doc=3002,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3002, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3002)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Abstract
- The test of retrieval effectiveness performed on IBM's STAIRS and reported in 'Communications of the ACM' 10 years ago, continues to be cited frequently in the information retrieval literature. The reasons for the study's continuing pertinence to today's research are discussed, and the political, legal, and commercial aspects of the study are presented. In addition, the method of calculating recall that was used in the STAIRS study is discussed in some detail, especially how it reduces the 5 major types of uncertainty in recall estimations. It is also suggested that this method of recall estimation may serve as the basis for recall estimations that might be truly comparable between systems
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 47(1996) no.1, S.4-22
-
Chen, H.; Dhar, V.: Cognitive process as a basis for intelligent retrieval system design (1991)
0.01
0.006886522 = product of:
0.04820565 = sum of:
0.04820565 = product of:
0.120514125 = sum of:
0.06550591 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06550591 = score(doc=3845,freq=10.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.59785134 = fieldWeight in 3845, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3845)
0.055008218 = weight(_text_:system in 3845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055008218 = score(doc=3845,freq=6.0), product of:
0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.48217484 = fieldWeight in 3845, 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=3845)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Abstract
- 2 studies were conducted to investigate the cognitive processes involved in online document-based information retrieval. These studies led to the development of 5 computerised models of online document retrieval. These models were incorporated into a design of an 'intelligent' document-based retrieval system. Following a discussion of this system, discusses the broader implications of the research for the design of information retrieval sysems
-
Huang, M.-H.: ¬The evaluation of information retrieval systems (1997)
0.01
0.0068324776 = product of:
0.04782734 = sum of:
0.04782734 = product of:
0.11956835 = sum of:
0.063425824 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1827) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.063425824 = score(doc=1827,freq=6.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.5788671 = fieldWeight in 1827, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1827)
0.056142528 = weight(_text_:system in 1827) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056142528 = score(doc=1827,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.49211764 = fieldWeight in 1827, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1827)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Abstract
- Describes the current status of retrieval system evaluation and predicts its future development. discusses various performance measures and 'utility' concepts from a historical perspective. Also addresses the current status of search evaluation and dicusses the empirical findings of retrieval system evaluation
-
Wolfram, D.; Volz, A.; Dimitroff, A.: ¬The effect of linkage structure on retrieval performance in a hypertext-based bibliographic retrieval system (1996)
0.01
0.0067638075 = product of:
0.04734665 = sum of:
0.04734665 = product of:
0.11836663 = sum of:
0.06278836 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6622) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06278836 = score(doc=6622,freq=12.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.5730491 = fieldWeight in 6622, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6622)
0.055578265 = weight(_text_:system in 6622) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055578265 = score(doc=6622,freq=8.0), product of:
0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.4871716 = fieldWeight in 6622, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6622)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Abstract
- Investigates how linkage environments in a hypertext based bibliographic retrieval system affect retrieval performance for novice and experienced searchers, 2 systems, 1 with inter record linkages to authors and descriptors and 1 that also included title and abstract keywords, were tested. No significant differences in retrieval performance and system usage were found for most search tests. The enhanced system did provide better performance where title and abstract keywords provided the most direct access to relevant records. The findings have implications for the design of bilbiographic information retrieval systems using hypertext linkages
-
Wan, T.-L.; Evens, M.; Wan, Y.-W.; Pao, Y.-Y.: Experiments with automatic indexing and a relational thesaurus in a Chinese information retrieval system (1997)
0.01
0.0064511965 = product of:
0.045158375 = sum of:
0.045158375 = product of:
0.112895936 = sum of:
0.05731767 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 956) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05731767 = score(doc=956,freq=10.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.5231199 = fieldWeight in 956, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=956)
0.055578265 = weight(_text_:system in 956) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055578265 = score(doc=956,freq=8.0), product of:
0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.4871716 = fieldWeight in 956, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=956)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Abstract
- This article describes a series of experiments with an interactive Chinese information retrieval system named CIRS and an interactive relational thesaurus. 2 important issues have been explored: whether thesauri enhance the retrieval effectiveness of Chinese documents, and whether automatic indexing can complete with manual indexing in a Chinese information retrieval system. Recall and precision are used to measure and evaluate the effectiveness of the system. Statistical analysis of the recall and precision measures suggest that the use of the relational thesaurus does improve the retrieval effectiveness both in the automatic indexing environment and in the manual indexing environment and that automatic indexing is at least as good as manual indexing
-
Tonta, Y.: Analysis of search failures in document retrieval systems : a review (1992)
0.01
0.0062438087 = product of:
0.04370666 = sum of:
0.04370666 = product of:
0.109266646 = sum of:
0.07750764 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07750764 = score(doc=4611,freq=14.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.7073872 = fieldWeight in 4611, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4611)
0.03175901 = weight(_text_:system in 4611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03175901 = score(doc=4611,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 4611, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4611)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Abstract
- This paper examines search failures in document retrieval systems. Since search failures are closely related to overall document retrieval system performance, the paper briefly discusses retrieval effectiveness measures such as precision and recall. It examines 4 methods used to study retrieval failures: retrieval effectiveness measures, user satisfaction measures, transaction log analysis, and the critical incident technique. It summarizes the findings of major failure anaylsis studies and identifies the types of failures that usually occur in document retrieval systems
-
Drabenstott, K.M.; Weller, M.S.: ¬A comparative approach to system evaluation : delegating control of retrieval tests to an experimental online system (1996)
0.01
0.0061054146 = product of:
0.0427379 = sum of:
0.0427379 = product of:
0.10684475 = sum of:
0.051266484 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 7435) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.051266484 = score(doc=7435,freq=8.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.46789268 = fieldWeight in 7435, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7435)
0.055578265 = weight(_text_:system in 7435) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055578265 = score(doc=7435,freq=8.0), product of:
0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.4871716 = fieldWeight in 7435, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7435)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Abstract
- Describes the comparative approach to system evaluation used in this research project which delegated the administartion of an online retrieval test to an experimental online catalogue to produce data for evaluating the effectiveness of a new subject access design. Describes the methods enlisted to sort out problem test administration, e.g. to identify out-of-scope queries, incomplete system administration, and suspect post-search questionnaire responses. Covers how w the researchers handled problem search administrations and what actions they would use to reduce or eliminate the occurrence of such administrations in future online retrieval tests that delegate control of retrieval tests to online systems
-
Burgin, R.: ¬The Monte Carlo method and the evaluation of retrieval system performance (1999)
0.01
0.005915265 = product of:
0.041406855 = sum of:
0.041406855 = product of:
0.10351714 = sum of:
0.07175813 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2946) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07175813 = score(doc=2946,freq=12.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.6549133 = fieldWeight in 2946, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2946)
0.03175901 = weight(_text_:system in 2946) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03175901 = score(doc=2946,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 2946, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2946)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Abstract
- The ability to distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable levels of retrieval performance and the ability to distinguish between significant and non-significant differences between retrieval result are important to traditional information retrieval experiments. The Monte Carlo method is shown to represent an attractive alternative to the hypergeometric model for identifying the levels at which random retrieval performance is exceeded in retrieval test collections and for overcoming some of the limitations of the hypergeometric model
-
Hersh, W.R.; Hickam, D.H.: ¬An evaluation of interactive Boolean and natural language searching with an online medical textbook (1995)
0.01
0.005712935 = product of:
0.03999054 = sum of:
0.03999054 = product of:
0.099976346 = sum of:
0.044398077 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044398077 = score(doc=2651,freq=6.0), product of:
0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.40520695 = fieldWeight in 2651, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2651)
0.055578265 = weight(_text_:system in 2651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055578265 = score(doc=2651,freq=8.0), product of:
0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.03622214 = queryNorm
0.4871716 = fieldWeight in 2651, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2651)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Abstract
- Few studies have compared the interactive use of Boolean and natural language search systems. Studies the use of 3 retrieval systems by senior medical students searching on queries generated by actual physicians in a clinical setting. The searchers were randomized to search on 2 or 3 different retrieval systems: a Boolean system, a word-based natural language system, and a concept-based natural language system. Results showed no statistically significant differences in recall or precision among the 3 systems. Likewise, there is no user preference for any system over the other. The study revealed problems with traditional measures of retrieval evaluation when applied to the interactive search setting
