Search (245 results, page 2 of 13)

0.010940583 = product of:
  0.051056053 = sum of:
    0.013444485 = weight(_text_:system in 30) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013444485 = score(doc=30,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 30, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=30)
    0.0072343214 = weight(_text_:information in 30) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0072343214 = score(doc=30,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 30, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=30)
    0.030377246 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 30) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030377246 = score(doc=30,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.40932083 = fieldWeight in 30, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=30)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

The growth in availability of multi-lingual data in all areas of the public and private sector is driving an increasing need for systems that facilitate access to multi-lingual resources. Cross-language Retrieval (CLR) technology is a means of addressing this need. A CLR system must address two main hurdles to effective cross-language retrieval. First, it must address the ambiguity that arises when trying to map the meaning of text across languages. That is, it must address both within-language ambiguity and cross-language ambiguity. Second, it has to incorporate multilingual resources that will enable it to perform the mapping across languages. The difficulty here is that there is a limited number of lexical resources and virtually none for some pairs of languages. This work focuses on a dictionary approach to addressing the problem of limited lexical resources. A dictionary approach is taken since bilingual dictionaries are more prevalent and simpler to apply than other resources. We show that a transitive translation approach, where a third language is employed as an interlingua between the source and target languages, is a viable means of performing CLR between languages for which no bilingual dictionary is available

Series

The Kluwer international series on information retrieval; 7

Source

Advances in information retrieval: Recent research from the Center for Intelligent Information Retrieval. Ed.: W.B. Croft

0.0109178955 = product of:
  0.050950177 = sum of:
    0.022816047 = weight(_text_:system in 2506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022816047 = score(doc=2506,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.29527056 = fieldWeight in 2506, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2506)
    0.0070881573 = weight(_text_:information in 2506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0070881573 = score(doc=2506,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 2506, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2506)
    0.021045974 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021045974 = score(doc=2506,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 2506, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2506)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

This report presents a case study of the development of an interface for a novel and complex form of document retrieval: searching for texts written in foreign languages based on native language queries. Although the underlying technology for achieving such a search is relatively weIl understood, the appropriate interface design is not. A study involving users from the beginning of the design process is described, and it covers initial examination of user needs and tasks, preliminary design and testing of interface components, building, testing, and refining the interface, and, finally, conducting usability tests of the system. Lessons are learned at every stage of the process, leading to a much more informed view of how such an interface should be built.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 55(2004) no.10, S.923-934

0.010899522 = product of:
  0.050864436 = sum of:
    0.010755588 = weight(_text_:system in 2753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010755588 = score(doc=2753,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.13919188 = fieldWeight in 2753, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2753)
    0.012047551 = weight(_text_:information in 2753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012047551 = score(doc=2753,freq=26.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.2797255 = fieldWeight in 2753, product of:
          5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
            26.0 = termFreq=26.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2753)
    0.028061297 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028061297 = score(doc=2753,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.37811437 = fieldWeight in 2753, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2753)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

The existence of huge amounts of information available in information systems and networks worldwide imposes the creation of adequate tools able to efficiently organize it and allow its retrieval across geographical, linguistic and cultural boundaries. An indexing language covering all areas of knowledge and converting the language-independent structure of a classification system like the Universal Decimal Classification into a thesaurus structure in more than one language seems to be a solution. Among the key attributes of the indexing language thus obtained we can mention: consistency in indexing, control an terms, user-friendliness. The paper presents the great potential in information retrieval of the combined retrieval method by means of a case study. 1. Introduction Among the consequences of the rapid development of the global information society a major one is the existence of huge amounts of information stored in information systems and networks across geographical, linguistic and cultural boundaries. The need was imposed to create tools and technologies able to efficiently organize and allow retrieval of information in this universal context. Information professionals had to cope not only with the multitude of knowledge organisation and representation systems but also with the multitude of languages the available information is stored in order to provide the users with effective information retrieval tools. For this purpose a real language industry has been developed, theoreticians and researchers making considerable efforts to find feasible solutions to problems of multilingual access by way of natural language processing and machine translation methodologies. Such corporate efforts belong to the CoBRA+ working group for multilingual access to subjects (MACS) or to the cross-language information retrieval (CLIR) tracks of the Text Retrieval Conferences that annually report the progress made in multilingual information access and retrieval. The encouraging results they have obtained so far are still confined to discipline/domain restrictions and most of their achievements are based an language pairs rather than multiple language combinations.

0.010886654 = product of:
  0.050804388 = sum of:
    0.021511177 = weight(_text_:system in 6979) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021511177 = score(doc=6979,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 6979, 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=6979)
    0.009450877 = weight(_text_:information in 6979) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009450877 = score(doc=6979,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 6979, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6979)
    0.019842334 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6979) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019842334 = score(doc=6979,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 6979, 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=6979)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

The goals of the CLEF (Cross-Language Evaluation Forum) series of evaluation campaigns for information retrieval systems operating on European languages are described. The difficulties of organizing an activity which aims at an objective evaluation of systems running on and over a number' of different languages are examined. The discussion includes an analysis of the first results and proposals for possible developments in the future.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.12, S.1067-1072

0.010886654 = product of:
  0.050804388 = sum of:
    0.021511177 = weight(_text_:system in 1233) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021511177 = score(doc=1233,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 1233, 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=1233)
    0.009450877 = weight(_text_:information in 1233) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009450877 = score(doc=1233,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 1233, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1233)
    0.019842334 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1233) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019842334 = score(doc=1233,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 1233, 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=1233)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

With the recent rapid diffusion over the international computer networks of world-wide distributed document bases, the question of multilingual access and multilingual information retrieval is becoming increasingly relevant. We briefly discuss just some of the issues that must be addressed in order to implement a multilingual interface for a Digital Library system and describe our own approach to this problem.

Theme

Information Gateway

0.010861087 = product of:
  0.05068507 = sum of:
    0.024050226 = weight(_text_:system in 1742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024050226 = score(doc=1742,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.31124252 = fieldWeight in 1742, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1742)
    0.009450877 = weight(_text_:information in 1742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009450877 = score(doc=1742,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 1742, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1742)
    0.017183965 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017183965 = score(doc=1742,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.23154683 = fieldWeight in 1742, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1742)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

While being theoretically so widely available, information can be restricted from a more general use by linguistic barriers. The linguistic aspects of the information languages and particularly the chances of an enhanced access to information by means of multilingual access facilities will make the substance of this thesis. The main problem of this research is thus to demonstrate that information retrieval can be improved by using multilingual thesaurus terms based on an intermediate or switching language to search with. Universal classification systems in general can play the role of switching languages for reasons dealt with in the forthcoming pages. The Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) in particular is the classification system used as example of a switching language for our objectives. The question may arise: why a universal classification system and not another thesaurus? Because the UDC like most of the classification systems uses symbols. Therefore, it is language independent and the problems of compatibility between such a thesaurus and different other thesauri in different languages are avoided. Another question may still arise? Why not then, assign running numbers to the descriptors in a thesaurus and make a switching language out of the resulting enumerative system? Because of some other characteristics of the UDC: hierarchical structure and terminological richness, consistency and control. One big problem to find an answer to is: can a thesaurus be made having as a basis a classification system in any and all its parts? To what extent this question can be given an affirmative answer? This depends much on the attributes of the universal classification system which can be favourably used to this purpose. Examples of different situations will be given and discussed upon beginning with those classes of UDC which are best fitted for building a thesaurus structure out of them (classes which are both hierarchical and faceted)...

Content

Inhalt: INFORMATION LANGUAGES: A LINGUISTIC APPROACH MULTILINGUAL ASPECTS IN INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL COMPATIBILITY AND CONVERTIBILITY OF INFORMATION LANGUAGES CURRENT TRENDS IN MULTILINGUAL ACCESS BUILDING UDC-BASED MULTILINGUAL THESAURI ONLINE APPLICATIONS OF THE UDC-BASED MULTILINGUAL THESAURI THE IMPACT OF SPECIFICITY ON THE RETRIEVAL POWER OF A UDC-BASED MULTILINGUAL THESAURUS FINAL REMARKS AND GENERAL CONCLUSIONS Proefschrift voorgelegd tot het behalen van de graad van doctor in de Taal- en Letterkunde aan de Universiteit Antwerpen. - Vgl.: http://dlist.sir.arizona.edu/1862/.

0.010733546 = product of:
  0.037567407 = sum of:
    0.015210699 = weight(_text_:system in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015210699 = score(doc=2656,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.19684705 = fieldWeight in 2656, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2656)
    0.005787457 = weight(_text_:information in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005787457 = score(doc=2656,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.1343758 = fieldWeight in 2656, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2656)
    0.009921167 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009921167 = score(doc=2656,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.13368362 = fieldWeight in 2656, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2656)
    0.0066480828 = product of:
      0.0132961655 = sum of:
        0.0132961655 = weight(_text_:22 in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0132961655 = score(doc=2656,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.085914485 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2656, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2656)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)

Abstract

This poster explores the customization of DSpace to allow the use of the AGRIS Application Profile metadata standard and the AGROVOC thesaurus. The objective is the adaptation of DSpace, through the least invasive code changes either in the form of plug-ins or add-ons, to the specific needs of the Agricultural Sciences and Technology community. Metadata standards such as AGRIS AP, and Knowledge Organization Systems such as the AGROVOC thesaurus, provide mechanisms for sharing information in a standardized manner by recommending the use of common semantics and interoperable syntax (Subirats et al., 2007). AGRIS AP was created to enhance the description, exchange and subsequent retrieval of agricultural Document-like Information Objects (DLIOs). It is a metadata schema which draws from Metadata standards such as Dublin Core (DC), the Australian Government Locator Service Metadata (AGLS) and the Agricultural Metadata Element Set (AgMES) namespaces. It allows sharing of information across dispersed bibliographic systems (FAO, 2005). AGROVOC68 is a multilingual structured thesaurus covering agricultural and related domains. Its main role is to standardize the indexing process in order to make searching simpler and more efficient. AGROVOC is developed by FAO (Lauser et al., 2006). The customization of the DSpace is taking place in several phases. First, the AGRIS AP metadata schema was mapped onto the metadata DSpace model, with several enhancements implemented to support AGRIS AP elements. Next, AGROVOC will be integrated as a controlled vocabulary accessed through a local SKOS or OWL file. Eventually the system will be configurable to access AGROVOC through local files or remotely via webservices. Finally, spell checking and tooltips will be incorporated in the user interface to support metadata editing. Adapting DSpace to support AGRIS AP and annotation using the semantically-rich AGROVOC thesaurus transform DSpace into a powerful, domain-specific system for annotation and exchange of bibliographic metadata in the agricultural domain.

Source

Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas

0.010624981 = product of:
  0.04958324 = sum of:
    0.014228307 = weight(_text_:system in 5973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014228307 = score(doc=5973,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.18413356 = fieldWeight in 5973, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=5973)
    0.008184699 = weight(_text_:information in 5973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008184699 = score(doc=5973,freq=48.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.19003606 = fieldWeight in 5973, product of:
          6.928203 = tf(freq=48.0), with freq of:
            48.0 = termFreq=48.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=5973)
    0.027170235 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027170235 = score(doc=5973,freq=60.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.36610767 = fieldWeight in 5973, product of:
          7.745967 = tf(freq=60.0), with freq of:
            60.0 = termFreq=60.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=5973)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

Information Retrieval hat sich zu einer Schlüsseltechnologie in der Wissensgesellschaft entwickelt. Die Anzahl der täglichen Anfragen an Internet-Suchmaschinen bildet nur einen Indikator für die große Bedeutung dieses Themas. Der Sammelbandband informiert über Themen wie Information Retrieval-Grundlagen, Retrieval Systeme, Digitale Bibliotheken, Evaluierung und Multilinguale Systeme, beschreibt Anwendungsszenarien und setzt sich mit neuen Herausforderungen an das Information Retrieval auseinander. Die Beiträge behandeln aktuelle Themen und neue Herausforderungen an das Information Retrieval. Die intensive Beteiligung der Informationswissenschaft der Universität Hildesheim am Cross Language Evaluation Forum (CLEF), einer europäischen Evaluierungsinitiative zur Erforschung mehrsprachiger Retrieval Systeme, berührt mehrere der Beiträge. Ebenso spielen Anwendungsszenarien und die Auseinandersetzung mit aktuellen und praktischen Fragestellungen eine große Rolle.

Content

Inhalt: Jan-Hendrik Scheufen: RECOIN: Modell offener Schnittstellen für Information-Retrieval-Systeme und -Komponenten Markus Nick, Klaus-Dieter Althoff: Designing Maintainable Experience-based Information Systems Gesine Quint, Steffen Weichert: Die benutzerzentrierte Entwicklung des Produkt- Retrieval-Systems EIKON der Blaupunkt GmbH Claus-Peter Klas, Sascha Kriewel, André Schaefer, Gudrun Fischer: Das DAFFODIL System - Strategische Literaturrecherche in Digitalen Bibliotheken Matthias Meiert: Entwicklung eines Modells zur Integration digitaler Dokumente in die Universitätsbibliothek Hildesheim Daniel Harbig, René Schneider: Ontology Learning im Rahmen von MyShelf Michael Kluck, Marco Winter: Topic-Entwicklung und Relevanzbewertung bei GIRT: ein Werkstattbericht Thomas Mandl: Neue Entwicklungen bei den Evaluierungsinitiativen im Information Retrieval Joachim Pfister: Clustering von Patent-Dokumenten am Beispiel der Datenbanken des Fachinformationszentrums Karlsruhe Ralph Kölle, Glenn Langemeier, Wolfgang Semar: Programmieren lernen in kollaborativen Lernumgebungen Olga Tartakovski, Margaryta Shramko: Implementierung eines Werkzeugs zur Sprachidentifikation in mono- und multilingualen Texten Nina Kummer: Indexierungstechniken für das japanische Retrieval Suriya Na Nhongkai, Hans-Joachim Bentz: Bilinguale Suche mittels Konzeptnetzen Robert Strötgen, Thomas Mandl, René Schneider: Entwicklung und Evaluierung eines Question Answering Systems im Rahmen des Cross Language Evaluation Forum (CLEF) Niels Jensen: Evaluierung von mehrsprachigem Web-Retrieval: Experimente mit dem EuroGOV-Korpus im Rahmen des Cross Language Evaluation Forum (CLEF)

Footnote

Rez. in: Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis 57(2006) H.5, S.290-291 (C. Schindler): "Weniger als ein Jahr nach dem "Vierten Hildesheimer Evaluierungs- und Retrievalworkshop" (HIER 2005) im Juli 2005 ist der dazugehörige Tagungsband erschienen. Eingeladen hatte die Hildesheimer Informationswissenschaft um ihre Forschungsergebnisse und die einiger externer Experten zum Thema Information Retrieval einem Fachpublikum zu präsentieren und zur Diskussion zu stellen. Unter dem Titel "Effektive Information Retrieval Verfahren in Theorie und Praxis" sind nahezu sämtliche Beiträge des Workshops in dem nun erschienenen, 15 Beiträge umfassenden Band gesammelt. Mit dem Schwerpunkt Information Retrieval (IR) wird ein Teilgebiet der Informationswissenschaft vorgestellt, das schon immer im Zentrum informationswissenschaftlicher Forschung steht. Ob durch den Leistungsanstieg von Prozessoren und Speichermedien, durch die Verbreitung des Internet über nationale Grenzen hinweg oder durch den stetigen Anstieg der Wissensproduktion, festzuhalten ist, dass in einer zunehmend wechselseitig vernetzten Welt die Orientierung und das Auffinden von Dokumenten in großen Wissensbeständen zu einer zentralen Herausforderung geworden sind. Aktuelle Verfahrensweisen zu diesem Thema, dem Information Retrieval, präsentiert der neue Band anhand von praxisbezogenen Projekten und theoretischen Diskussionen. Das Kernthema Information Retrieval wird in dem Sammelband in die Bereiche Retrieval-Systeme, Digitale Bibliothek, Evaluierung und Multilinguale Systeme untergliedert. Die Artikel der einzelnen Sektionen sind insgesamt recht heterogen und bieten daher keine Überschneidungen inhaltlicher Art. Jedoch ist eine vollkommene thematische Abdeckung der unterschiedlichen Bereiche ebenfalls nicht gegeben, was bei der Präsentation von Forschungsergebnissen eines Institutes und seiner Kooperationspartner auch nur bedingt erwartet werden kann. So lässt sich sowohl in der Gliederung als auch in den einzelnen Beiträgen eine thematische Verdichtung erkennen, die das spezielle Profil und die Besonderheit der Hildesheimer Informationswissenschaft im Feld des Information Retrieval wiedergibt. Teil davon ist die mehrsprachige und interdisziplinäre Ausrichtung, die die Schnittstellen zwischen Informationswissenschaft, Sprachwissenschaft und Informatik in ihrer praxisbezogenen und internationalen Forschung fokussiert.
Im ersten Kapitel "Retrieval-Systeme" werden verschiedene Information RetrievalSysteme präsentiert und Verfahren zu deren Gestaltung diskutiert. Jan-Hendrik Scheufen stellt das Meta-Framework RECOIN zur Information Retrieval Forschung vor, das sich durch eine flexible Handhabung unterschiedlichster Applikationen auszeichnet und dadurch eine zentrierte Protokollierung und Steuerung von Retrieval-Prozessen ermöglicht. Dieses Konzept eines offenen, komponentenbasierten Systems wurde in Form eines Plug-Ins für die javabasierte Open-Source-Plattform Eclipse realisiert. Markus Nick und Klaus-Dieter Althoff erläutern in ihrem Beitrag, der übrigens der einzige englischsprachige Text im Buch ist, das Verfahren DILLEBIS zur Erhaltung und Pflege (Maintenance) von erfahrungsbasierten Informationssystemen. Sie bezeichnen dieses Verfahren als Maintainable Experience-based Information System und plädieren für eine Ausrichtung von erfahrungsbasierten Systemen entsprechend diesem Modell. Gesine Quint und Steffen Weichert stellen dagegen in ihrem Beitrag die benutzerzentrierte Entwicklung des Produkt-Retrieval-Systems EIKON vor, das in Kooperation mit der Blaupunkt GmbH realisiert wurde. In einem iterativen Designzyklus erfolgte die Gestaltung von gruppenspezifischen Interaktionsmöglichkeiten für ein Car-Multimedia-Zubehör-System. Im zweiten Kapitel setzen sich mehrere Autoren dezidierter mit dem Anwendungsgebiet "Digitale Bibliothek" auseinander. Claus-Peter Klas, Sascha Kriewel, Andre Schaefer und Gudrun Fischer von der Universität Duisburg-Essen stellen das System DAFFODIL vor, das durch eine Vielzahl an Werkzeugen zur strategischen Unterstützung bei Literaturrecherchen in digitalen Bibliotheken dient. Zusätzlich ermöglicht die Protokollierung sämtlicher Ereignisse den Einsatz des Systems als Evaluationsplattform. Der Aufsatz von Matthias Meiert erläutert die Implementierung von elektronischen Publikationsprozessen an Hochschulen am Beispiel von Abschlussarbeiten des Studienganges Internationales Informationsmanagement der Universität Hildesheim. Neben Rahmenbedingungen werden sowohl der Ist-Zustand als auch der Soll-Zustand des wissenschaftlichen elektronischen Publizierens in Form von gruppenspezifischen Empfehlungen dargestellt. Daniel Harbig und Rene Schneider beschreiben in ihrem Aufsatz zwei Verfahrensweisen zum maschinellen Erlernen von Ontologien, angewandt am virtuellen Bibliotheksregal MyShelf. Nach der Evaluation dieser beiden Ansätze plädieren die Autoren für ein semi-automatisiertes Verfahren zur Erstellung von Ontologien.
"Evaluierung", das Thema des dritten Kapitels, ist in seiner Breite nicht auf das Information Retrieval beschränkt sondern beinhaltet ebenso einzelne Aspekte der Bereiche Mensch-Maschine-Interaktion sowie des E-Learning. Michael Muck und Marco Winter von der Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik sowie dem Informationszentrum Sozialwissenschaften thematisieren in ihrem Beitrag den Einfluss der Fragestellung (Topic) auf die Bewertung von Relevanz und zeigen Verfahrensweisen für die Topic-Erstellung auf, die beim Cross Language Evaluation Forum (CLEF) Anwendung finden. Im darauf folgenden Aufsatz stellt Thomas Mandl verschiedene Evaluierungsinitiativen im Information Retrieval und aktuelle Entwicklungen dar. Joachim Pfister erläutert in seinem Beitrag das automatisierte Gruppieren, das sogenannte Clustering, von Patent-Dokumenten in den Datenbanken des Fachinformationszentrums Karlsruhe und evaluiert unterschiedliche Clusterverfahren auf Basis von Nutzerbewertungen. Ralph Kölle, Glenn Langemeier und Wolfgang Semar widmen sich dem kollaborativen Lernen unter den speziellen Bedingungen des Programmierens. Dabei werden das System VitaminL zur synchronen Bearbeitung von Programmieraufgaben und das Kennzahlensystem K-3 für die Bewertung kollaborativer Zusammenarbeit in einer Lehrveranstaltung angewendet. Der aktuelle Forschungsschwerpunkt der Hildesheimer Informationswissenschaft zeichnet sich im vierten Kapitel unter dem Thema "Multilinguale Systeme" ab. Hier finden sich die meisten Beiträge des Tagungsbandes wieder. Olga Tartakovski und Margaryta Shramko beschreiben und prüfen das System Langldent, das die Sprache von mono- und multilingualen Texten identifiziert. Die Eigenheiten der japanischen Schriftzeichen stellt Nina Kummer dar und vergleicht experimentell die unterschiedlichen Techniken der Indexierung. Suriya Na Nhongkai und Hans-Joachim Bentz präsentieren und prüfen eine bilinguale Suche auf Basis von Konzeptnetzen, wobei die Konzeptstruktur das verbindende Elemente der beiden Textsammlungen darstellt. Das Entwickeln und Evaluieren eines mehrsprachigen Question-Answering-Systems im Rahmen des Cross Language Evaluation Forum (CLEF), das die alltagssprachliche Formulierung von konkreten Fragestellungen ermöglicht, wird im Beitrag von Robert Strötgen, Thomas Mandl und Rene Schneider thematisiert. Den Schluss bildet der Aufsatz von Niels Jensen, der ein mehrsprachiges Web-Retrieval-System ebenfalls im Zusammenhang mit dem CLEF anhand des multilingualen EuroGOVKorpus evaluiert.
Abschließend lässt sich sagen, dass der Tagungsband einen gelungenen Überblick über die Information Retrieval Projekte der Hildesheimer Informationswissenschaft und ihrer Kooperationspartner gibt. Die einzelnen Beiträge sind sehr anregend und auf einem hohen Niveau angesiedelt. Ein kleines Hindernis für den Leser stellt die inhaltliche und strukturelle Orientierung innerhalb des Bandes dar. Der Bezug der einzelnen Artikel zum Thema des Kapitels wird zwar im Vorwort kurz erläutert. Erschwert wird die Orientierung im Buch jedoch durch fehlende Kapitelüberschriften am Anfang der einzelnen Sektionen. Außerdem ist zu erwähnen, dass einer der Artikel einen anderen Titel als im Inhaltsverzeichnis angekündigt trägt. Sieht der Leser von diesen formalen Mängeln ab, wird er reichlich mit praxisbezogenen und theoretisch fundierten Projektdarstellungen und Forschungsergebnissen belohnt. Dies insbesondere, da nicht nur aktuelle Themen der Informationswissenschaft aufgegriffen, sondern ebenso weiterentwickelt und durch die speziellen interdisziplinären und internationalen Bedingungen in Hildesheim geformt werden. Dabei zeigt sich anhand der verschiedenen Projekte, wie gut die Hildesheimer Informationswissenschaft in die Community überregionaler Informationseinrichtungen und anderer deutscher informationswissenschaftlicher Forschungsgruppen eingebunden ist. Damit hat der Workshop bei einer weiteren Öffnung der Expertengruppe das Potential zu einer eigenständigen Institution im Bereich des Information Retrieval zu werden. In diesem Sinne lässt sich auf weitere fruchtbare Workshops und deren Veröffentlichungen hoffen. Ein nächster Workshop der Universität Hildesheim zum Thema Information Retrieval, organisiert mit der Fachgruppe Information Retrieval der Gesellschaft für Informatik, kündigt sich bereits für den 9. bis 13- Oktober 2006 an."

0.010611707 = product of:
  0.0495213 = sum of:
    0.02688897 = weight(_text_:system in 2748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02688897 = score(doc=2748,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.3479797 = fieldWeight in 2748, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2748)
    0.010230875 = weight(_text_:information in 2748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010230875 = score(doc=2748,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.23754507 = fieldWeight in 2748, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2748)
    0.012401459 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012401459 = score(doc=2748,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 2748, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2748)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

In this paper we are concerned with the type of services that send periodic news selections to subscribers of a digital newspaper by means of electronic mail. The aims are to study the influence of categorisation in information retrieval and in digital newspapers, different models to solve problems of bilingualism in digital information services and to analyse the evaluation in information filtering and personalisation in information agents. Hermes is a multilingual system for the personalisation of news services which allows integration and categorisation of information in two languages. In order to customise information for each user, Hermes provides the means for representing a user interests homogeneously across the operating languages of the system. A simple system is applied to train automatically a dynamic news item classifier for both languages, by taking the Yahoo set of categories as reference framework and using the web pages classified under them as training collection. Traditional evaluation methods have been applied and their shortcomings for the present endeavour have been noted.

0.01054786 = product of:
  0.049223345 = sum of:
    0.018822279 = weight(_text_:system in 995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018822279 = score(doc=995,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 995, 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=995)
    0.0058474317 = weight(_text_:information in 995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0058474317 = score(doc=995,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 995, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=995)
    0.024553634 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024553634 = score(doc=995,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 995, 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=995)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

Wie Übersetzer sollten Bibliothekare den Dialog zwischen Autoren, die bereits Werke verfasst haben, und zumeist solchen, die an neuen Werken arbeiten, vermitteln. Sie bedienen sich einer so stark reduzierten "Übersetzungssprache", dass der Dialog oft nicht mehr ausreichend gelingt. Seit zehn Jahren erweitern deshalb im deutschen und amerikanischen Bereich Bibliotheken zunehmend den Terminologieraum ihrer Kataloge durch die wichtigsten, originalsprachlichen Fachbegriffe der Autoren. Dadurch ergeben sich in der Recherche "Docking-Stellen" für terminologische Netze, die zur Query-Expansion statt Dokument-Reduktion genutzt werden können. Die sich daraus ergebende Optimierung des Recalls kann im Dialog mit einem modernen Retrieval-System mittels Facettierungstechnik hinsichtlich Precision verfeinert werden, wobei die ursprünglich oft schwer zugängliche Fachterminologie des Bibliothekars dann auch ohne ungeliebtes Vortraining entschlüsselt werden kann.

0.010482477 = product of:
  0.048918225 = sum of:
    0.010230875 = weight(_text_:information in 5282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010230875 = score(doc=5282,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.23754507 = fieldWeight in 5282, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5282)
    0.030377246 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030377246 = score(doc=5282,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.40932083 = fieldWeight in 5282, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5282)
    0.008310104 = product of:
      0.016620208 = sum of:
        0.016620208 = weight(_text_:22 in 5282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016620208 = score(doc=5282,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.085914485 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5282, 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=5282)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

The Web has become a large repository of documents (or pages) written in many different languages. In this context, traditional information retrieval (IR) techniques cannot be used whenever the user query and the documents being retrieved are in different languages. To address this problem, new cross-language information retrieval (CLIR) techniques have been proposed. In this work, we describe a method for cross-language retrieval of medical information. This method combines query terms and related medical concepts obtained automatically through a categorization procedure. The medical concepts are used to create a linguistic abstraction that allows retrieval of information in a language-independent way, minimizing linguistic problems such as polysemy. To evaluate our method, we carried out experiments using the OHSUMED test collection, whose documents are written in English, with queries expressed in Portuguese, Spanish, and French. The results indicate that our cross-language retrieval method is as effective as a standard vector space model algorithm operating on queries and documents in the same language. Further, our results are better than previous results in the literature.

Date

22. 7.2006 16:46:36

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.4, S.501-510

0.010415147 = product of:
  0.04860402 = sum of:
    0.02688897 = weight(_text_:system in 4144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02688897 = score(doc=4144,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.3479797 = fieldWeight in 4144, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4144)
    0.004176737 = weight(_text_:information in 4144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004176737 = score(doc=4144,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 4144, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4144)
    0.017538311 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017538311 = score(doc=4144,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 4144, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4144)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

Indexing documents with descriptors from a multilingual thesaurus is an approach to multilingual information retrieval. However, manual indexing is expensive. Automazed indexing methods in general use terms found in the document. Thesaurus descriptors are complex terms that are often not used in documents or have specific meanings within the thesaurus; therefore most weighting schemes of automated indexing methods are not suited to select thesaurus descriptors. In this paper a linear associative system is described that uses similarity values extracted from a large corpus of manually indexed documents to construct a rank ordering of the descriptors for a given document title. The system is adaptive and has to be tuned with a training sample of records for the specific task. The system was tested on a corpus of some 80.000 bibliographic records. The results show a high variability with changing parameter values. This indicated that it is very important to empirically adapt the model to the specific situation it is used in. The overall median of the manually assigned descriptors in the automatically generated ranked list of all 3.631 descriptors is 14 for the set used to adapt the system and 11 for a test set not used in the optimization process. This result shows that the optimization is not a fitting to a specific training set but a real adaptation of the model to the setting

0.010232341 = product of:
  0.07162638 = sum of:
    0.037258454 = weight(_text_:system in 895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037258454 = score(doc=895,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.48217484 = fieldWeight in 895, 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=895)
    0.03436793 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03436793 = score(doc=895,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.46309367 = fieldWeight in 895, 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=895)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Abstract

The Malay language is widely used in Malaysia, Indonesia and brunei. The growth in the number of documents written in Malay justifies the need for a document retrieval system for that language. Describes the implementation of a bilingual Malay and English full text document retrieval systems: SIStem capaian DOkumen Multilingua (SISDOM), by the Kebangsaan University Malaysia. The system incorporates many facilities for users, including the choice of search techniques, browsing of retrieved documents, and ranking of documents

0.009985902 = product of:
  0.04660088 = sum of:
    0.013444485 = weight(_text_:system in 139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013444485 = score(doc=139,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 139, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=139)
    0.008353474 = weight(_text_:information in 139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008353474 = score(doc=139,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 139, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=139)
    0.024802918 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024802918 = score(doc=139,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 139, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=139)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

Information retrieval systems' ability to retrieve highly relevant documents has become more and more important in the age of extremely large collections, such as the World Wide Web (WWW). The authors' aim was to find out how corpus-based cross-language information retrieval (CLIR) manages in retrieving highly relevant documents. They created a Finnish-Swedish comparable corpus from two loosely related document collections and used it as a source of knowledge for query translation. Finnish test queries were translated into Swedish and run against a Swedish test collection. Graded relevance assessments were used in evaluating the results and three relevance criterion levels-liberal, regular, and stringent-were applied. The runs were also evaluated with generalized recall and precision, which weight the retrieved documents according to their relevance level. The performance of the Comparable Corpus Translation system (COCOT) was compared to that of a dictionarybased query translation program; the two translation methods were also combined. The results indicate that corpus-based CUR performs particularly well with highly relevant documents. In average precision, COCOT even matched the monolingual baseline on the highest relevance level. The performance of the different query translation methods was further analyzed by finding out reasons for poor rankings of highly relevant documents.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.3, S.322-334

0.009938354 = product of:
  0.046378985 = sum of:
    0.022816047 = weight(_text_:system in 5050) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022816047 = score(doc=5050,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.29527056 = fieldWeight in 5050, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5050)
    0.008681185 = weight(_text_:information in 5050) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008681185 = score(doc=5050,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 5050, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5050)
    0.014881751 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5050) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014881751 = score(doc=5050,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 5050, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5050)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

Users' cross-lingual queries to a digital library system might be short and the query terms may not be included in a common translation dictionary (unknown terms). In this article, the authors investigate the feasibility of exploiting the Web as the multilingual corpus source to translate unknown query terms for cross-language information retrieval in digital libraries. They propose a Webbased term translation approach to determine effective translations for unknown query terms by mining bilingual search-result pages obtained from a real Web search engine. This approach can enhance the construction of a domain-specific bilingual lexicon and bring multilingual support to a digital library that only has monolingual document collections. Very promising results have been obtained in generating effective translation equivalents for many unknown terms, including proper nouns, technical terms, and Web query terms, and in assisting bilingual lexicon construction for a real digital library system.

Footnote

Beitrag einer special topic section on multilingual information systems

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.5, S.660-670

0.009844895 = product of:
  0.068914264 = sum of:
    0.01736237 = weight(_text_:information in 6301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01736237 = score(doc=6301,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.40312737 = fieldWeight in 6301, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6301)
    0.051551897 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051551897 = score(doc=6301,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.6946405 = fieldWeight in 6301, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6301)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Series

The Kluwer International series on information retrieval

Source

Cross-language information retrieval. Ed.: G. Grefenstette

0.009844895 = product of:
  0.068914264 = sum of:
    0.01736237 = weight(_text_:information in 6303) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01736237 = score(doc=6303,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.40312737 = fieldWeight in 6303, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6303)
    0.051551897 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6303) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051551897 = score(doc=6303,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.6946405 = fieldWeight in 6303, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6303)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Series

The Kluwer International series on information retrieval

Source

Cross-language information retrieval. Ed.: G. Grefenstette

0.009844895 = product of:
  0.068914264 = sum of:
    0.01736237 = weight(_text_:information in 6306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01736237 = score(doc=6306,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.40312737 = fieldWeight in 6306, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6306)
    0.051551897 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051551897 = score(doc=6306,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.6946405 = fieldWeight in 6306, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6306)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Series

The Kluwer International series on information retrieval

Source

Cross-language information retrieval. Ed.: G. Grefenstette

0.00959699 = product of:
  0.044785954 = sum of:
    0.022816047 = weight(_text_:system in 1020) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022816047 = score(doc=1020,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.29527056 = fieldWeight in 1020, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1020)
    0.0070881573 = weight(_text_:information in 1020) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0070881573 = score(doc=1020,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 1020, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1020)
    0.014881751 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1020) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014881751 = score(doc=1020,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 1020, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1020)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

In this paper, we compile and review several experiments measuring cross-lingual information retrieval (CLIR) performance as a function of the following resources: bilingual term lists, parallel corpora, machine translation (MT), and stemmers. Our CLIR system uses a simple probabilistic language model; the studies used TREC test corpora over Chinese, Spanish and Arabic. Our findings include: One can achieve an acceptable CLIR performance using only a bilingual term list (70-80% on Chinese and Arabic corpora). However, if a bilingual term list and parallel corpora are available, CLIR performance can rival monolingual performance. If no parallel corpus is available, pseudo-parallel texts produced by an MT system can partially overcome the lack of parallel text. While stemming is useful normally, with a very large parallel corpus for Arabic-English, stemming hurt performance in our empirical studies with Arabic, a highly inflected language.

Source

Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.3, S.475-488

0.009485896 = product of:
  0.044267513 = sum of:
    0.016133383 = weight(_text_:system in 4071) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016133383 = score(doc=4071,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.20878783 = fieldWeight in 4071, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4071)
    0.0070881573 = weight(_text_:information in 4071) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0070881573 = score(doc=4071,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 4071, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4071)
    0.021045974 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4071) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021045974 = score(doc=4071,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 4071, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4071)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

Methods and tools for finding documents relevant to a user's needs in a document corpora can be found in the information retrieval, library science, and hypertext communities. Typically, these systems provide retrieval capabilities for fairly static copora, their algorithms are dependent on the language for which they are written, e.g. English, and they do not perform well when presented with misspelled words or text that has been degraded by OCR techniques. In this article, we present experimentation results for the TELLTALE system. TELLTALE is a dynamic hypertext environment that provides full-text search from a hypertext-style user interface for text corpora that may be garbled by OCR or transmission errors, and that may contain languages other than English. TELLTALE uses several techniques based on n-grams (n character sequences of text). With these results we show that the dynamic linkage mechanisms in TELLTALE are tolerant of garbles in up to 30% of the characters in the body of the texts

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 47(1996) no.4, S.263-275