Search (36 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalstudien"
  1. Iivonen, M.: Consistency in the selection of search concepts and search terms (1995) 0.03
    0.027563075 = product of:
      0.09647076 = sum of:
        0.081282035 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.081282035 = score(doc=1757,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.37972826 = fieldWeight in 1757, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1757)
        0.015188723 = product of:
          0.030377446 = sum of:
            0.030377446 = weight(_text_:22 in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030377446 = score(doc=1757,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.037368443 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1757, 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=1757)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Considers intersearcher and intrasearcher consistency in the selection of search terms. Based on an empirical study where 22 searchers from 4 different types of search environments analyzed altogether 12 search requests of 4 different types in 2 separate test situations between which 2 months elapsed. Statistically very significant differences in consistency were found according to the types of search environments and search requests. Consistency was also considered according to the extent of the scope of search concept. At level I search terms were compared character by character. At level II different search terms were accepted as the same search concept with a rather simple evaluation of linguistic expressions. At level III, in addition to level II, the hierarchical approach of the search request was also controlled. At level IV different search terms were accepted as the same search concept with a broad interpretation of the search concept. Both intersearcher and intrasearcher consistency grew most immediately after a rather simple evaluation of linguistic impressions
  2. Larsen, B.; Ingwersen, P.; Lund, B.: Data fusion according to the principle of polyrepresentation (2009) 0.02
    0.018375382 = product of:
      0.06431384 = sum of:
        0.05418802 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 2752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05418802 = score(doc=2752,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.25315216 = fieldWeight in 2752, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2752)
        0.010125816 = product of:
          0.020251632 = sum of:
            0.020251632 = weight(_text_:22 in 2752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020251632 = score(doc=2752,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.037368443 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2752, 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=2752)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    We report data fusion experiments carried out on the four best-performing retrieval models from TREC 5. Three were conceptually/algorithmically very different from one another; one was algorithmically similar to one of the former. The objective of the test was to observe the performance of the 11 logical data fusion combinations compared to the performance of the four individual models and their intermediate fusions when following the principle of polyrepresentation. This principle is based on cognitive IR perspective (Ingwersen & Järvelin, 2005) and implies that each retrieval model is regarded as a representation of a unique interpretation of information retrieval (IR). It predicts that only fusions of very different, but equally good, IR models may outperform each constituent as well as their intermediate fusions. Two kinds of experiments were carried out. One tested restricted fusions, which entails that only the inner disjoint overlap documents between fused models are ranked. The second set of experiments was based on traditional data fusion methods. The experiments involved the 30 TREC 5 topics that contain more than 44 relevant documents. In all tests, the Borda and CombSUM scoring methods were used. Performance was measured by precision and recall, with document cutoff values (DCVs) at 100 and 15 documents, respectively. Results show that restricted fusions made of two, three, or four cognitively/algorithmically very different retrieval models perform significantly better than do the individual models at DCV100. At DCV15, however, the results of polyrepresentative fusion were less predictable. The traditional fusion method based on polyrepresentation principles demonstrates a clear picture of performance at both DCV levels and verifies the polyrepresentation predictions for data fusion in IR. Data fusion improves retrieval performance over their constituent IR models only if the models all are quite conceptually/algorithmically dissimilar and equally and well performing, in that order of importance.
    Date
    22. 3.2009 18:48:28
  3. Pfeifer, U.; Poersch, T.; Fuhr, N.: Retrieval effectiveness of proper name search methods (1996) 0.02
    0.0154822925 = product of:
      0.10837604 = sum of:
        0.10837604 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 6982) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10837604 = score(doc=6982,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.5063043 = fieldWeight in 6982, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6982)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    Reviews similarity measures for searching names. These measures deal with phonetic similarity, typing errors, and plain string similarity. Shows experimentally that all 3 approaches lead to significantly higher retrieval quality than plain identity. Further improvements are possible by combining different methods. Develops a probabilistic interpretation of string similarity that leads to better results than an ad-hoc approach
  4. Lioma, C.; Ounis, I.: ¬A syntactically-based query reformulation technique for information retrieval (2008) 0.01
    0.0077411463 = product of:
      0.05418802 = sum of:
        0.05418802 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 2031) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05418802 = score(doc=2031,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.25315216 = fieldWeight in 2031, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2031)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    Whereas in language words of high frequency are generally associated with low content [Bookstein, A., & Swanson, D. (1974). Probabilistic models for automatic indexing. Journal of the American Society of Information Science, 25(5), 312-318; Damerau, F. J. (1965). An experiment in automatic indexing. American Documentation, 16, 283-289; Harter, S. P. (1974). A probabilistic approach to automatic keyword indexing. PhD thesis, University of Chicago; Sparck-Jones, K. (1972). A statistical interpretation of term specificity and its application in retrieval. Journal of Documentation, 28, 11-21; Yu, C., & Salton, G. (1976). Precision weighting - an effective automatic indexing method. Journal of the Association for Computer Machinery (ACM), 23(1), 76-88], shallow syntactic fragments of high frequency generally correspond to lexical fragments of high content [Lioma, C., & Ounis, I. (2006). Examining the content load of part of speech blocks for information retrieval. In Proceedings of the international committee on computational linguistics and the association for computational linguistics (COLING/ACL 2006), Sydney, Australia]. We implement this finding to Information Retrieval, as follows. We present a novel automatic query reformulation technique, which is based on shallow syntactic evidence induced from various language samples, and used to enhance the performance of an Information Retrieval system. Firstly, we draw shallow syntactic evidence from language samples of varying size, and compare the effect of language sample size upon retrieval performance, when using our syntactically-based query reformulation (SQR) technique. Secondly, we compare SQR to a state-of-the-art probabilistic pseudo-relevance feedback technique. Additionally, we combine both techniques and evaluate their compatibility. We evaluate our proposed technique across two standard Text REtrieval Conference (TREC) English test collections, and three statistically different weighting models. Experimental results suggest that SQR markedly enhances retrieval performance, and is at least comparable to pseudo-relevance feedback. Notably, the combination of SQR and pseudo-relevance feedback further enhances retrieval performance considerably. These collective experimental results confirm the tenet that high frequency shallow syntactic fragments correspond to content-bearing lexical fragments.
  5. Biebricher, P.; Fuhr, N.; Niewelt, B.: ¬Der AIR-Retrievaltest (1986) 0.01
    0.0069125453 = product of:
      0.048387814 = sum of:
        0.048387814 = product of:
          0.09677563 = sum of:
            0.09677563 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 4040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09677563 = score(doc=4040,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1809185 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.037368443 = queryNorm
                0.5349128 = fieldWeight in 4040, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4040)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Source
    Automatische Indexierung zwischen Forschung und Anwendung, Hrsg.: G. Lustig
  6. Fuhr, N.; Niewelt, B.: ¬Ein Retrievaltest mit automatisch indexierten Dokumenten (1984) 0.01
    0.005062908 = product of:
      0.035440356 = sum of:
        0.035440356 = product of:
          0.07088071 = sum of:
            0.07088071 = weight(_text_:22 in 262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07088071 = score(doc=262,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.037368443 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 262, 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=262)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Date
    20.10.2000 12:22:23
  7. Tomaiuolo, N.G.; Parker, J.: Maximizing relevant retrieval : keyword and natural language searching (1998) 0.01
    0.005062908 = product of:
      0.035440356 = sum of:
        0.035440356 = product of:
          0.07088071 = sum of:
            0.07088071 = weight(_text_:22 in 6418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07088071 = score(doc=6418,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.037368443 = 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)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Source
    Online. 22(1998) no.6, S.57-58
  8. Voorhees, E.M.; Harman, D.: Overview of the Sixth Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-6) (2000) 0.01
    0.005062908 = product of:
      0.035440356 = sum of:
        0.035440356 = product of:
          0.07088071 = sum of:
            0.07088071 = weight(_text_:22 in 6438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07088071 = score(doc=6438,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.037368443 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6438, 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=6438)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Date
    11. 8.2001 16:22:19
  9. Dalrymple, P.W.: Retrieval by reformulation in two library catalogs : toward a cognitive model of searching behavior (1990) 0.01
    0.005062908 = product of:
      0.035440356 = sum of:
        0.035440356 = product of:
          0.07088071 = sum of:
            0.07088071 = weight(_text_:22 in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07088071 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.037368443 = 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)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2006 18:43:54
  10. Chen, H.; Martinez, J.; Kirchhoff, A.; Ng, T.D.; Schatz, B.R.: Alleviating search uncertainty through concept associations : automatic indexing, co-occurence analysis, and parallel computing (1998) 0.00
    0.0041475273 = product of:
      0.029032689 = sum of:
        0.029032689 = product of:
          0.058065377 = sum of:
            0.058065377 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 5202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.058065377 = score(doc=5202,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1809185 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.037368443 = queryNorm
                0.3209477 = fieldWeight in 5202, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5202)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  11. Allan, J.; Callan, J.P.; Croft, W.B.; Ballesteros, L.; Broglio, J.; Xu, J.; Shu, H.: INQUERY at TREC-5 (1997) 0.00
    0.003616363 = product of:
      0.02531454 = sum of:
        0.02531454 = product of:
          0.05062908 = sum of:
            0.05062908 = weight(_text_:22 in 3103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05062908 = score(doc=3103,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.037368443 = 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)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Date
    27. 2.1999 20:55:22
  12. 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) 0.00
    0.003616363 = product of:
      0.02531454 = sum of:
        0.02531454 = product of:
          0.05062908 = sum of:
            0.05062908 = weight(_text_:22 in 3107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05062908 = score(doc=3107,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.037368443 = 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)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Date
    27. 2.1999 20:59:22
  13. Saracevic, T.: On a method for studying the structure and nature of requests in information retrieval (1983) 0.00
    0.003616363 = product of:
      0.02531454 = sum of:
        0.02531454 = product of:
          0.05062908 = sum of:
            0.05062908 = weight(_text_:22 in 2417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05062908 = score(doc=2417,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.037368443 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2417, 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=2417)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Pages
    S.22-25
  14. Rijsbergen, C.J. van: ¬A test for the separation of relevant and non-relevant documents in experimental retrieval collections (1973) 0.00
    0.0028930905 = product of:
      0.020251632 = sum of:
        0.020251632 = product of:
          0.040503263 = sum of:
            0.040503263 = weight(_text_:22 in 5002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.040503263 = score(doc=5002,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.037368443 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5002, 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=5002)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Date
    19. 3.1996 11:22:12
  15. Sanderson, M.: ¬The Reuters test collection (1996) 0.00
    0.0028930905 = product of:
      0.020251632 = sum of:
        0.020251632 = product of:
          0.040503263 = sum of:
            0.040503263 = weight(_text_:22 in 6971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.040503263 = score(doc=6971,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.037368443 = 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)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    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
  16. Lespinasse, K.: TREC: une conference pour l'evaluation des systemes de recherche d'information (1997) 0.00
    0.0028930905 = product of:
      0.020251632 = sum of:
        0.020251632 = product of:
          0.040503263 = sum of:
            0.040503263 = weight(_text_:22 in 744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.040503263 = score(doc=744,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.037368443 = 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)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
  17. Pemberton, J.K.; Ojala, M.; Garman, N.: Head to head : searching the Web versus traditional services (1998) 0.00
    0.0028930905 = product of:
      0.020251632 = sum of:
        0.020251632 = product of:
          0.040503263 = sum of:
            0.040503263 = weight(_text_:22 in 3572) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.040503263 = score(doc=3572,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.037368443 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3572, 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=3572)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Source
    Online. 22(1998) no.3, S.24-26,28
  18. Dresel, R.; Hörnig, D.; Kaluza, H.; Peter, A.; Roßmann, A.; Sieber, W.: Evaluation deutscher Web-Suchwerkzeuge : Ein vergleichender Retrievaltest (2001) 0.00
    0.0028930905 = product of:
      0.020251632 = sum of:
        0.020251632 = product of:
          0.040503263 = sum of:
            0.040503263 = weight(_text_:22 in 261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.040503263 = score(doc=261,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.037368443 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 261, 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=261)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    Die deutschen Suchmaschinen, Abacho, Acoon, Fireball und Lycos sowie die Web-Kataloge Web.de und Yahoo! werden einem Qualitätstest nach relativem Recall, Precision und Availability unterzogen. Die Methoden der Retrievaltests werden vorgestellt. Im Durchschnitt werden bei einem Cut-Off-Wert von 25 ein Recall von rund 22%, eine Precision von knapp 19% und eine Verfügbarkeit von 24% erreicht
  19. Blagden, J.F.: How much noise in a role-free and link-free co-ordinate indexing system? (1966) 0.00
    0.002531454 = product of:
      0.017720178 = sum of:
        0.017720178 = product of:
          0.035440356 = sum of:
            0.035440356 = weight(_text_:22 in 2718) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.035440356 = score(doc=2718,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.037368443 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2718, 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=2718)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 22(1966), S.203-209
  20. Smithson, S.: Information retrieval evaluation in practice : a case study approach (1994) 0.00
    0.002531454 = product of:
      0.017720178 = sum of:
        0.017720178 = product of:
          0.035440356 = sum of:
            0.035440356 = weight(_text_:22 in 7302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.035440356 = score(doc=7302,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.037368443 = 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)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    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