Search (32 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalstudien"
  1. Dresel, R.; Hörnig, D.; Kaluza, H.; Peter, A.; Roßmann, A.; Sieber, W.: Evaluation deutscher Web-Suchwerkzeuge : Ein vergleichender Retrievaltest (2001) 0.01
    0.007891018 = product of:
      0.03550958 = sum of:
        0.019573662 = product of:
          0.039147325 = sum of:
            0.039147325 = weight(_text_:web in 261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.039147325 = score(doc=261,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.4079388 = fieldWeight in 261, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=261)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.015935918 = product of:
          0.031871837 = sum of:
            0.031871837 = weight(_text_:22 in 261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031871837 = score(doc=261,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = 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)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    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
  2. Kluck, M.; Mandl, T.; Womser-Hacker, C.: Cross-Language Evaluation Forum (CLEF) : Europäische Initiative zur Bewertung sprachübergreifender Retrievalverfahren (2002) 0.01
    0.0071299747 = product of:
      0.06416977 = sum of:
        0.06416977 = product of:
          0.12833954 = sum of:
            0.12833954 = weight(_text_:bewertung in 266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.12833954 = score(doc=266,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.18575147 = queryWeight, product of:
                  6.31699 = idf(docFreq=216, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.69092077 = fieldWeight in 266, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  6.31699 = idf(docFreq=216, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=266)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    Seit einigen Jahren hat sich in Europa eine Initiative zur Bewertung von Information Retrieval in mehrsprachigen Kontexten etabliert. Das Cross Language Evaluation forum (CLEF) wird von der EU gefördert und kooperiert mit Evaluierungsprojekten in den USA (TREC) und in Japan (NTCIR). Dieser Artikel stellt das CLEF in den Rahmen der anderen internationalen Initiativen. Neue Entwicklungen sowohl bei den Information Retrieval Systemen als auch bei den Evaluierungsmethoden werden aufgezeit. Die hohe Anzahl von Teilnehmern aus Forschungsinstitutionen und der Industrie beweist die steigende Bedeutung des sprachübergreifenden Retrievals
  3. ¬The Eleventh Text Retrieval Conference, TREC 2002 (2003) 0.01
    0.0066170194 = product of:
      0.029776588 = sum of:
        0.013840669 = product of:
          0.027681338 = sum of:
            0.027681338 = weight(_text_:web in 4049) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027681338 = score(doc=4049,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.2884563 = fieldWeight in 4049, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4049)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.015935918 = product of:
          0.031871837 = sum of:
            0.031871837 = weight(_text_:22 in 4049) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031871837 = score(doc=4049,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4049, 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=4049)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Proceedings of the llth TREC-conference held in Gaithersburg, Maryland (USA), November 19-22, 2002. Aim of the conference was discussion an retrieval and related information-seeking tasks for large test collection. 93 research groups used different techniques, for information retrieval from the same large database. This procedure makes it possible to compare the results. The tasks are: Cross-language searching, filtering, interactive searching, searching for novelty, question answering, searching for video shots, and Web searching.
  4. Kaizik, A.; Gödert, W.; Oßwald, A.: Evaluation von Subject Gateways des Internet (EJECT) : Projektbericht (2001) 0.01
    0.006111407 = product of:
      0.055002663 = sum of:
        0.055002663 = product of:
          0.11000533 = sum of:
            0.11000533 = weight(_text_:bewertung in 1476) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11000533 = score(doc=1476,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.18575147 = queryWeight, product of:
                  6.31699 = idf(docFreq=216, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.5922178 = fieldWeight in 1476, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  6.31699 = idf(docFreq=216, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1476)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    Der Umfang und die Heterogenität des Informationsangebotes erfordert immer differenzierte Methoden und Hilfsmittel für das gezielte und möglichst ballastfreie Auffinden von Informationsquellen im Kontext eines bestimmten Fachgebietes oder einer wissenschaftlichen Disziplin. Um dieses Ziel zu errei-chen, wurden in der letzten Zeit eine Reihe sog. Subject Gateways entwickelt. Bislang liegen weder viele Untersuchungen zur Qualität derartiger Hilfsmittel vor noch ist eine differenzierte Methodik für solche Bewertungen entwickelt worden. Das Projekt Evaluation von Subject Gateways des Internet (EJECT) verfolgte daher die Ziele:· Durch Analyse bereits realisierter Subject Gateways die Verwendungsvielfalt des Begriffes aufzuzeigen und zu einer Präzisierung der Begriffsbildung beizutragen; Einen methodischen Weg zur qualitativen Bewertung von Subject Gateways aufzuzeigen;· Diesen Weg anhand einer Evaluation des Subject Gateways EULER zu testen, das im Rahmen eines EU-Projektes für das Fachgebiet Mathematik entwickelt wurde. Die Resultate der Evaluation werden in dieser Studie ausführlich vorgestellt und es wird aufgezeigt, inwieweit eine Übertragung auf die Bewertung anderer Gateways möglich ist.
  5. Effektive Information Retrieval Verfahren in Theorie und Praxis : ausgewählte und erweiterte Beiträge des Vierten Hildesheimer Evaluierungs- und Retrievalworkshop (HIER 2005), Hildesheim, 20.7.2005 (2006) 0.01
    0.005161697 = product of:
      0.023227636 = sum of:
        0.0048934156 = product of:
          0.009786831 = sum of:
            0.009786831 = weight(_text_:web in 5973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.009786831 = score(doc=5973,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.1019847 = fieldWeight in 5973, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=5973)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.018334221 = product of:
          0.036668442 = sum of:
            0.036668442 = weight(_text_:bewertung in 5973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.036668442 = score(doc=5973,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.18575147 = queryWeight, product of:
                  6.31699 = idf(docFreq=216, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.19740593 = fieldWeight in 5973, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  6.31699 = idf(docFreq=216, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=5973)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    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
    "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.
  6. Womser-Hacker, C.: Theorie des Information Retrieval III : Evaluierung (2004) 0.00
    0.004989943 = product of:
      0.04490949 = sum of:
        0.04490949 = product of:
          0.08981898 = sum of:
            0.08981898 = weight(_text_:bewertung in 2919) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08981898 = score(doc=2919,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.18575147 = queryWeight, product of:
                  6.31699 = idf(docFreq=216, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.48354384 = fieldWeight in 2919, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  6.31699 = idf(docFreq=216, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2919)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    Information-Retrieval-Systeme wurden bereits sehr früh aus einer bewertenden Perspektive betrachtet. Jede neu entwickelte Komponente sollte effektivitätssteigernd für das gesamte System wirken und musste ihre Funktionalität unter Beweis stellen oder den Vergleich zu existierenden Verfahren antreten (z.B. automatische Indexierung vs. manuelle Erschließung von Informationsobjekten). 1963 fanden die Cranfield-II-Experimente statt und begründeten die Evaluierungsprinzipien im Information Retrieval. Somit haben auch Bewertungsverfahren, -ansätze und -methoden bereits eine lange Tradition. Die von Sparck Jones eingebrachte Feststellung, dass die genauen Gründe für das Verhalten von Information-Retrieval-Systemen oft im Dunklen lägen, führte zu der Forderung nach einer exakten und expliziten Evaluierungsmethodologie und experimentellen Überprüfbarkeit. Als generelle Herangehensweise hat sich ein indirektes Verfahren zur Bewertung von InformationRetrieval-Systemen etabliert, bei welchem das System an sich als black box gesehen und nur der Retrievaloutput als Grundlage für die Bewertung herangezogen wird. In den Experimenten stand die Systemperspektive im Vordergrund, um zu einer bewertenden Aussage zu gelangen. Es wurde gemessen, wie gut die Systeme in der Lage sind, die an sie gestellten Anforderungen zu erfüllen, relevante Dokumente zu liefern und nicht-relevante zurückzuhalten. Durch die zunehmende Komplexität der Systeme sowie die immer stärkere Einbeziehung von Benutzern, die nicht über die Kompetenz und Professionalität von Informationsfachleuten verfügen, wurde es immer schwieriger, Einzeleigenschaften vom Gesamtsystem zu isolieren und experimentell zu bewerten. Erst im Zeitalter der Suchmaschinen ist man zu der Ansicht gelangt, dass den Benutzern der Systeme eine entscheidende Rolle bei der Bewertung zukommt. Die Verfahren der Qualitätsbewertung müssen - wie dieses Beispiel zeigt - ständig weiterentwickelt werden. Die Benutzermerkmale können heterogen sein und sich einer genauen Kenntnis entziehen, was eine vollständige Formalisierung bzw. Quantifizierung erschwert. Neueren Datums sind Studien, die sich auf interaktive Information-Retrieval-Systeme oder auf die Qualitätsbestimmung bestimmter Teilkomponenten spezialisiert haben wie z.B. die Erschließungsoder Visualisierungskomponente, die Gestaltung der Benutzungsschnittstelle aus softwareergonomischer Sicht oder auch die Multilingua-Fähigkeit.
  7. Oberhauser, O.; Labner, J.: OPAC-Erweiterung durch automatische Indexierung : Empirische Untersuchung mit Daten aus dem Österreichischen Verbundkatalog (2002) 0.00
    0.0043214173 = product of:
      0.038892757 = sum of:
        0.038892757 = product of:
          0.077785514 = sum of:
            0.077785514 = weight(_text_:bewertung in 883) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.077785514 = score(doc=883,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18575147 = queryWeight, product of:
                  6.31699 = idf(docFreq=216, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.41876122 = fieldWeight in 883, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  6.31699 = idf(docFreq=216, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=883)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    In Anlehnung an die in den neunziger Jahren durchgeführten Erschließungsprojekte MILOS I und MILOS II, die die Eignung eines Verfahrens zur automatischen Indexierung für Bibliothekskataloge zum Thema hatten, wurde eine empirische Untersuchung anhand einer repräsentativen Stichprobe von Titelsätzen aus dem Österreichischen Verbundkatalog durchgeführt. Ziel war die Prüfung und Bewertung der Einsatzmöglichkeit dieses Verfahrens in den Online-Katalogen des Verbundes. Der Realsituation der OPAC-Benutzung gemäß wurde ausschließlich die Auswirkung auf den automatisch generierten Begriffen angereicherten Basic Index ("Alle Felder") untersucht. Dazu wurden 100 Suchanfragen zunächst im ursprünglichen Basic Index und sodann im angereicherten Basic Index in einem OPAC unter Aleph 500 durchgeführt. Die Tests erbrachten einen Zuwachs an relevanten Treffern bei nur leichten Verlusten an Precision, eine Reduktion der Nulltreffer-Ergebnisse sowie Aufschlüsse über die Auswirkung einer vorhandenen verbalen Sacherschließung.
  8. Bar-Ilan, J.: ¬The Web as an information source on informetrics? : A content analysis (2000) 0.00
    0.003262277 = product of:
      0.029360492 = sum of:
        0.029360492 = product of:
          0.058720984 = sum of:
            0.058720984 = weight(_text_:web in 4587) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.058720984 = score(doc=4587,freq=16.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.6119082 = fieldWeight in 4587, product of:
                  4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                    16.0 = termFreq=16.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4587)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    This article addresses the question of whether the Web can serve as an information source for research. Specifically, it analyzes by way of content analysis the Web pages retrieved by the major search engines on a particular date (June 7, 1998), as a result of the query 'informetrics OR informetric'. In 807 out of the 942 retrieved pages, the search terms were mentioned in the context of information science. Over 70% of the pages contained only indirect information on the topic, in the form of hypertext links and bibliographical references without annotation. The bibliographical references extracted from the Web pages were analyzed, and lists of most productive authors, most cited authors, works, and sources were compiled. The list of reference obtained from the Web was also compared to data retrieved from commercial databases. For most cases, the list of references extracted from the Web outperformed the commercial, bibliographic databases. The results of these comparisons indicate that valuable, freely available data is hidden in the Web waiting to be extracted from the millions of Web pages
  9. Voorhees, E.M.; Harman, D.: Overview of the Sixth Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-6) (2000) 0.00
    0.0030986508 = product of:
      0.027887857 = sum of:
        0.027887857 = product of:
          0.055775713 = sum of:
            0.055775713 = weight(_text_:22 in 6438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.055775713 = score(doc=6438,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = 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)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Date
    11. 8.2001 16:22:19
  10. MacFarlane, A.: Evaluation of web search for the information practitioner (2007) 0.00
    0.0030515809 = product of:
      0.027464228 = sum of:
        0.027464228 = product of:
          0.054928456 = sum of:
            0.054928456 = weight(_text_:web in 817) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054928456 = score(doc=817,freq=14.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.57238775 = fieldWeight in 817, product of:
                  3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                    14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=817)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The aim of the paper is to put forward a structured mechanism for web search evaluation. The paper seeks to point to useful scientific research and show how information practitioners can use these methods in evaluation of search on the web for their users. Design/methodology/approach - The paper puts forward an approach which utilizes traditional laboratory-based evaluation measures such as average precision/precision at N documents, augmented with diagnostic measures such as link broken, etc., which are used to show why precision measures are depressed as well as the quality of the search engines crawling mechanism. Findings - The paper shows how to use diagnostic measures in conjunction with precision in order to evaluate web search. Practical implications - The methodology presented in this paper will be useful to any information professional who regularly uses web search as part of their information seeking and needs to evaluate web search services. Originality/value - The paper argues that the use of diagnostic measures is essential in web search, as precision measures on their own do not allow a searcher to understand why search results differ between search engines.
  11. Lazonder, A.W.; Biemans, H.J.A.; Wopereis, I.G.J.H.: Differences between novice and experienced users in searching information on the World Wide Web (2000) 0.00
    0.0025790567 = product of:
      0.023211509 = sum of:
        0.023211509 = product of:
          0.046423018 = sum of:
            0.046423018 = weight(_text_:web in 4598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.046423018 = score(doc=4598,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.48375595 = fieldWeight in 4598, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4598)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    Searching for information on the WWW basically comes down to locating an appropriate Web site and to retrieving relevant information from that site. This study examined the effect of a user's WWW experience on both phases of the search process. 35 students from 2 schools for Dutch pre-university education were observed while performing 3 search tasks. The results indicate that subjects with WWW-experience are more proficient in locating Web sites than are novice WWW-users. The observed differences were ascribed to the experts' superior skills in operating Web search engines. However, on tasks that required subjects to locate information on specific Web sites, the performance of experienced and novice users was equivalent - a result that is in line with hypertext research. Based on these findings, implications for training and supporting students in searching for information on the WWW are identified. Finally, the role of the subjects' level of domain expertise is discussed and directions for future research are proposed
  12. Hawking, D.; Craswell, N.: ¬The very large collection and Web tracks (2005) 0.00
    0.002306778 = product of:
      0.020761002 = sum of:
        0.020761002 = product of:
          0.041522004 = sum of:
            0.041522004 = weight(_text_:web in 5085) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.041522004 = score(doc=5085,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 5085, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5085)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
  13. Palmquist, R.A.; Kim, K.-S.: Cognitive style and on-line database search experience as predictors of Web search performance (2000) 0.00
    0.0019977288 = product of:
      0.017979559 = sum of:
        0.017979559 = product of:
          0.035959117 = sum of:
            0.035959117 = weight(_text_:web in 4605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.035959117 = score(doc=4605,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.37471575 = fieldWeight in 4605, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4605)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    This study sought to investigate the effects of cognitive style (field dependent and field independent) and on-line database search experience (novice and experienced) on the WWW search performance of undergraduate college students (n=48). It also attempted to find user factors that could be used to predict search efficiency. search performance, the dependent variable was defined in 2 ways: (1) time required for retrieving a relevant information item, and (2) the number of nodes traversed for retrieving a relevant information item. the search tasks required were carried out on a University Web site, and included a factual task and a topical search task of interest to the participant. Results indicated that while cognitive style (FD/FI) significantly influenced the search performance of novice searchers, the influence was greatly reduced in those searchers who had on-line database search experience. Based on the findings, suggestions for possible changes to the design of the current Web interface and to user training programs are provided
  14. Airio, E.: Who benefits from CLIR in web retrieval? (2008) 0.00
    0.0019977288 = product of:
      0.017979559 = sum of:
        0.017979559 = product of:
          0.035959117 = sum of:
            0.035959117 = weight(_text_:web in 2342) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.035959117 = score(doc=2342,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.37471575 = fieldWeight in 2342, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2342)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The aim of the current paper is to test whether query translation is beneficial in web retrieval. Design/methodology/approach - The language pairs were Finnish-Swedish, English-German and Finnish-French. A total of 12-18 participants were recruited for each language pair. Each participant performed four retrieval tasks. The author's aim was to compare the performance of the translated queries with that of the target language queries. Thus, the author asked participants to formulate a source language query and a target language query for each task. The source language queries were translated into the target language utilizing a dictionary-based system. In English-German, also machine translation was utilized. The author used Google as the search engine. Findings - The results differed depending on the language pair. The author concluded that the dictionary coverage had an effect on the results. On average, the results of query-translation were better than in the traditional laboratory tests. Originality/value - This research shows that query translation in web is beneficial especially for users with moderate and non-active language skills. This is valuable information for developers of cross-language information retrieval systems.
  15. Wolff, C.: Leistungsvergleich der Retrievaloberflächen zwischen Web und klassischen Expertensystemen (2001) 0.00
    0.001902995 = product of:
      0.017126955 = sum of:
        0.017126955 = product of:
          0.03425391 = sum of:
            0.03425391 = weight(_text_:web in 5870) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03425391 = score(doc=5870,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.35694647 = fieldWeight in 5870, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5870)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    Die meisten Web-Auftritte der Hosts waren bisher für den Retrieval-Laien gedacht. Im Hintergrund steht dabei das Ziel: mehr Nutzung durch einfacheres Retrieval. Dieser Ansatz steht aber im Konflikt mit der wachsenden Datenmenge und Dokumentgröße, die eigentlich ein immer ausgefeilteres Retrieval verlangen. Häufig wird von Information Professionals die Kritik geäußert, dass die Webanwendungen einen Verlust an Relevanz bringen. Wie weit der Nutzer tatsächlich einen Kompromiss zwischen Relevanz und Vollständigkeit eingehen muss, soll in diesem Beitrag anhand verschiedener Host-Rechner quantifiziert werden
  16. Mansourian, Y.; Ford, N.: Search persistence and failure on the web : a "bounded rationality" and "satisficing" analysis (2007) 0.00
    0.0018834766 = product of:
      0.016951289 = sum of:
        0.016951289 = product of:
          0.033902578 = sum of:
            0.033902578 = weight(_text_:web in 841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.033902578 = score(doc=841,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.35328537 = fieldWeight in 841, product of:
                  3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                    12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=841)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - This paper aims to examine our current knowledge of how searchers perceive and react to the possibility of missing potentially important information whilst searching the web is limited. The study reported here seeks to investigate such perceptions and reactions, and to explore the extent to which Simon's "bounded rationality" theory is useful in illuminating these issues. Design/methodology/approach - Totally 37 academic staff, research staff and research students in three university departments were interviewed about their web searching. The open-ended, semi-structured interviews were inductively analysed. Emergence of the concept of "good enough" searching prompted a further analysis to explore the extent to which the data could be interpreted in terms of Simon's concepts of "bounded rationality" and "satisficing". Findings - The results indicate that the risk of missing potentially important information was a matter of concern to the interviewees. Their estimations of the likely extent and importance of missed information affected decisions by individuals as to when to stop searching - decisions based on very different criteria, which map well onto Simon's concepts. On the basis of the interview data, the authors propose tentative categorizations of perceptions of the risk of missing information including "inconsequential" "tolerable" "damaging" and "disastrous" and search strategies including "perfunctory" "minimalist" "nervous" and "extensive". It is concluded that there is at least a prima facie case for bounded rationality and satisficing being considered as potentially useful concepts in our quest better to understand aspects of human information behaviour. Research limitations/implications - Although the findings are based on a relatively small sample and an exploratory qualitative analysis, it is argued that the study raises a number of interesting questions, and has implications for both the development of theory and practice in the areas of web searching and information literacy. Originality/value - The paper focuses on an aspect of web searching which has not to date been well explored. Whilst research has done much to illuminate searchers' perceptions of what they find on the web, we know relatively little of their perceptions of, and reactions to information that they fail to find. The study reported here provides some tentative models, based on empirical evidence, of these phenomena.
  17. Mandl, T.: Web- und Multimedia-Dokumente : Neuere Entwicklungen bei der Evaluierung von Information Retrieval Systemen (2003) 0.00
    0.0015378521 = product of:
      0.013840669 = sum of:
        0.013840669 = product of:
          0.027681338 = sum of:
            0.027681338 = weight(_text_:web in 1734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027681338 = score(doc=1734,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.2884563 = fieldWeight in 1734, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1734)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
  18. Mansourian, Y.; Ford, N.: Web searchers' attributions of success and failure: an empirical study (2007) 0.00
    0.0015378521 = product of:
      0.013840669 = sum of:
        0.013840669 = product of:
          0.027681338 = sum of:
            0.027681338 = weight(_text_:web in 840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027681338 = score(doc=840,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.2884563 = fieldWeight in 840, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=840)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - This paper reports the findings of a study designed to explore web searchers' perceptions of the causes of their search failure and success. In particular, it seeks to discover the extent to which the constructs locus of control and attribution theory might provide useful frameworks for understanding searchers' perceptions. Design/methodology/approach - A combination of inductive and deductive approaches were employed. Perceptions of failed and successful searches were derived from the inductive analysis of using open-ended qualitative interviews with a sample of 37 biologists at the University of Sheffield. These perceptions were classified into "internal" and "external" attributions, and the relationships between these categories and "successful" and "failed" searches were analysed deductively to test the extent to which they might be explainable using locus of control and attribution theory interpretive frameworks. Findings - All searchers were readily able to recall "successful" and "unsuccessful" searches. In a large majority of cases (82.4 per cent), they clearly attributed each search to either internal (e.g. ability or effort) or external (e.g. luck or information not being available) factors. The pattern of such relationships was analysed, and mapped onto those that would be predicted by locus of control and attribution theory. The authors conclude that the potential of these theoretical frameworks to illuminate one's understanding of web searching, and associated training, merits further systematic study. Research limitations/implications - The findings are based on a relatively small sample of academic and research staff in a particular subject area. Importantly, also, the study can at best provide a prima facie case for further systematic study since, although the patterns of attribution behaviour accord with those predictable by locus of control and attribution theory, data relating to the predictive elements of these theories (e.g. levels of confidence and achievement) were not available. This issue is discussed, and recommendations made for further work. Originality/value - The findings provide some empirical support for the notion that locus of control and attribution theory might - subject to the limitations noted above - be potentially useful theoretical frameworks for helping us better understand web-based information seeking. If so, they could have implications particularly for better understanding of searchers' motivations, and for the design and development of more effective search training programmes.
  19. Radev, D.R.; Libner, K.; Fan, W.: Getting answers to natural language questions on the Web (2002) 0.00
    0.0013592821 = product of:
      0.012233539 = sum of:
        0.012233539 = product of:
          0.024467077 = sum of:
            0.024467077 = weight(_text_:web in 5204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.024467077 = score(doc=5204,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 5204, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5204)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    Seven hundred natural language questions from TREC-8 and TREC-9 were sent by Radev, Libner, and Fan to each of nine web search engines. The top 40 sites returned by each system were stored for evaluation of their productivity of correct answers. Each question per engine was scored as the sum of the reciprocal ranks of identified correct answers. The large number of zero scores gave a positive skew violating the normality assumption for ANOVA, so values were transformed to zero for no hit and one for one or more hits. The non-zero values were then square-root transformed to remove the remaining positive skew. Interactions were observed between search engine and answer type (name, place, date, et cetera), search engine and number of proper nouns in the query, search engine and the need for time limitation, and search engine and total query words. All effects were significant. Shortest queries had the highest mean scores. One or more proper nouns present provides a significant advantage. Non-time dependent queries have an advantage. Place, name, person, and text description had mean scores between .85 and .9 with date at .81 and number at .59. There were significant differences in score by search engine. Search engines found at least one correct answer in between 87.7 and 75.45 of the cases. Google and Northern Light were just short of a 90% hit rate. No evidence indicated that a particular engine was better at answering any particular sort of question.
  20. Leininger, K.: Interindexer consistency in PsychINFO (2000) 0.00
    0.0013279931 = product of:
      0.011951938 = sum of:
        0.011951938 = product of:
          0.023903877 = sum of:
            0.023903877 = weight(_text_:22 in 2552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023903877 = score(doc=2552,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2552, 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=2552)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Date
    9. 2.1997 18:44:22

Languages

  • e 22
  • d 8
  • m 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 27
  • m 3
  • s 3
  • r 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…