Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalalgorithmen"
  • × theme_ss:"OPAC"
  1. Beaulieu, M.; Jones, S.: Interactive searching and interface issues in the Okapi best match probabilistic retrieval system (1998) 0.02
    0.01707715 = product of:
      0.07969336 = sum of:
        0.032601144 = weight(_text_:system in 430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032601144 = score(doc=430,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.42190298 = fieldWeight in 430, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=430)
        0.008269517 = weight(_text_:information in 430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008269517 = score(doc=430,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 430, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=430)
        0.038822707 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038822707 = score(doc=430,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.5231199 = fieldWeight in 430, 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=430)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    Explores interface design raised by the development and evaluation of Okapi, a highly interactive information retrieval system based on a probabilistic retrieval model with relevance feedback. It uses terms frequency weighting functions to display retrieved items in a best match ranked order; it can also find additional items similar to those marked as relevant by the searcher. Compares the effectiveness of automatic and interactive query expansion in different user interface environments. focuses on the nature of interaction in information retrieval and the interrelationship between functional visibility, the user's cognitive loading and the balance of control between user and system
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  2. Khoo, C.S.G.; Wan, K.-W.: ¬A simple relevancy-ranking strategy for an interface to Boolean OPACs (2004) 0.01
    0.006599714 = product of:
      0.030798664 = sum of:
        0.016300572 = weight(_text_:system in 2509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016300572 = score(doc=2509,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.21095149 = fieldWeight in 2509, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2509)
        0.008681021 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008681021 = score(doc=2509,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.11697317 = fieldWeight in 2509, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2509)
        0.0058170725 = product of:
          0.011634145 = sum of:
            0.011634145 = weight(_text_:22 in 2509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.011634145 = score(doc=2509,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.085914485 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02453417 = queryNorm
                0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 2509, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2509)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Content
    "Most Web search engines accept natural language queries, perform some kind of fuzzy matching and produce ranked output, displaying first the documents that are most likely to be relevant. On the other hand, most library online public access catalogs (OPACs) an the Web are still Boolean retrieval systems that perform exact matching, and require users to express their search requests precisely in a Boolean search language and to refine their search statements to improve the search results. It is well-documented that users have difficulty searching Boolean OPACs effectively (e.g. Borgman, 1996; Ensor, 1992; Wallace, 1993). One approach to making OPACs easier to use is to develop a natural language search interface that acts as a middleware between the user's Web browser and the OPAC system. The search interface can accept a natural language query from the user and reformulate it as a series of Boolean search statements that are then submitted to the OPAC. The records retrieved by the OPAC are ranked by the search interface before forwarding them to the user's Web browser. The user, then, does not need to interact directly with the Boolean OPAC but with the natural language search interface or search intermediary. The search interface interacts with the OPAC system an the user's behalf. The advantage of this approach is that no modification to the OPAC or library system is required. Furthermore, the search interface can access multiple OPACs, acting as a meta search engine, and integrate search results from various OPACs before sending them to the user. The search interface needs to incorporate a method for converting the user's natural language query into a series of Boolean search statements, and for ranking the OPAC records retrieved. The purpose of this study was to develop a relevancyranking algorithm for a search interface to Boolean OPAC systems. This is part of an on-going effort to develop a knowledge-based search interface to OPACs called the E-Referencer (Khoo et al., 1998, 1999; Poo et al., 2000). E-Referencer v. 2 that has been implemented applies a repertoire of initial search strategies and reformulation strategies to retrieve records from OPACs using the Z39.50 protocol, and also assists users in mapping query keywords to the Library of Congress subject headings."
    Source
    Electronic library. 22(2004) no.2, S.112-120
  3. Hancock-Beaulieu, M.; Walker, S.: ¬An evaluation of automatic query expansion in an online library catalogue (1992) 0.01
    0.0051691886 = product of:
      0.03618432 = sum of:
        0.018822279 = weight(_text_:system in 2731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018822279 = score(doc=2731,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 2731, 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=2731)
        0.017362041 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017362041 = score(doc=2731,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 2731, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2731)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    An automatic query expansion (AQE) facility in anonline catalogue was evaluated in an operational library setting. The OKAPI experimental system had other features including: ranked output 'best match' keyword searching, automatic stemming, spelling normalisation and cross referencing as well as relevance feedback. A combination of transaction log analysis, search replays, questionnaires and interviews was used for data collection. Findings show that contrary to previous results, AQE was beneficial in a substantial number of searches. Use intentions, the effectiveness of the 'best match' search and user interaction were identified as the main factors affecting the take-up of the query expansion facility
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  4. Tseng, Y.H.; Lin, Y.I.: Evaluation of fuzzy search, term suggestion, and term relevance feedback in an OPAC system (1998) 0.00
    0.0023047691 = product of:
      0.032266766 = sum of:
        0.032266766 = weight(_text_:system in 6430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032266766 = score(doc=6430,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.41757566 = fieldWeight in 6430, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6430)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
  5. Archuby, C.G.: Interfaces se recuperacion para catalogos en linea con salidas ordenadas por probable relevancia (2000) 0.00
    0.001771637 = product of:
      0.024802918 = sum of:
        0.024802918 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5727) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024802918 = score(doc=5727,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 5727, 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=5727)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Footnote
    Übers. d. Titels: Interface for retrieval from online access catalogues with ranked results according to their relevance
  6. Oberhauser, O.; Labner, J.: Relevance Ranking in Online-Katalogen : Informationsstand und Perspektiven (2003) 0.00
    0.0013444485 = product of:
      0.018822279 = sum of:
        0.018822279 = weight(_text_:system in 2188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018822279 = score(doc=2188,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 2188, 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=2188)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Abstract
    Bekanntlich führen Suchmaschinen wie Google &Co. beider Auflistung der Suchergebnisse ein "Ranking" nach "Relevanz" durch, d.h. die Dokumente werden in absteigender Reihenfolge entsprechend ihrer Erfüllung von Relevanzkriterien ausgeben. In Online-Katalogen (OPACs) ist derlei noch nicht allgemein übliche Praxis, doch bietet etwa das im Österreichischen Bibliothekenverbund eingesetzte System Aleph 500 tatsächlich eine solche Ranking-Option an (die im Verbundkatalog auch implementiert ist). Bislang liegen allerdings kaum Informationen zur Funktionsweise dieses Features, insbesondere auch im Hinblick auf eine Hilfestellung für Benutzer, vor. Daher möchten wir mit diesem Beitrag versuchen, den in unserem Verbund bestehenden Informationsstand zum Thema "Relevance Ranking" zu erweitern. Sowohl die Verwendung einer Ranking-Option in OPACs generell als auch die sich unter Aleph 500 konkret bietenden Möglichkeiten sollen im folgenden näher betrachtet werden.