Search (337 results, page 2 of 17)

  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalalgorithmen"
  1. Bar-Ilan, J.; Levene, M.: ¬The hw-rank : an h-index variant for ranking web pages (2015) 0.02 
    0.016053839 = product of:
  0.07491791 = sum of:
    0.034870304 = weight(_text_:web in 1694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034870304 = score(doc=1694,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.36057037 = fieldWeight in 1694, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1694)
    0.010089659 = weight(_text_:information in 1694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010089659 = score(doc=1694,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 1694, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1694)
    0.029957948 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029957948 = score(doc=1694,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 1694, 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=1694)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einem Special Issue "Combining bibliometrics and information retrieval"
  2. Jindal, V.; Bawa, S.; Batra, S.: ¬A review of ranking approaches for semantic search on Web (2014) 0.02 
    0.015912503 = product of:
  0.07425835 = sum of:
    0.029588435 = weight(_text_:web in 2799) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029588435 = score(doc=2799,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 2799, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2799)
    0.013536699 = weight(_text_:information in 2799) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013536699 = score(doc=2799,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 2799, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2799)
    0.031133216 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2799) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031133216 = score(doc=2799,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.34732026 = fieldWeight in 2799, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2799)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    With ever increasing information being available to the end users, search engines have become the most powerful tools for obtaining useful information scattered on the Web. However, it is very common that even most renowned search engines return result sets with not so useful pages to the user. Research on semantic search aims to improve traditional information search and retrieval methods where the basic relevance criteria rely primarily on the presence of query keywords within the returned pages. This work is an attempt to explore different relevancy ranking approaches based on semantics which are considered appropriate for the retrieval of relevant information. In this paper, various pilot projects and their corresponding outcomes have been investigated based on methodologies adopted and their most distinctive characteristics towards ranking. An overview of selected approaches and their comparison by means of the classification criteria has been presented. With the help of this comparison, some common concepts and outstanding features have been identified.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 50(2014) no.2, S.416-425
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  3. Ning, X.; Jin, H.; Jia, W.; Yuan, P.: Practical and effective IR-style keyword search over semantic web (2009) 0.02 
    0.0152656 = product of:
  0.071239464 = sum of:
    0.034519844 = weight(_text_:web in 4213) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034519844 = score(doc=4213,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.35694647 = fieldWeight in 4213, 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=4213)
    0.0070627616 = weight(_text_:information in 4213) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0070627616 = score(doc=4213,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 4213, 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=4213)
    0.029656855 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4213) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029656855 = score(doc=4213,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 4213, 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=4213)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    This paper presents a novel IR-style keyword search model for semantic web data retrieval, distinguished from current retrieval methods. In this model, an answer to a keyword query is a connected subgraph that contains all the query keywords. In addition, the answer is minimal because any proper subgraph can not be an answer to the query. We provide an approximation algorithm to retrieve these answers efficiently. A special ranking strategy is also proposed so that answers can be appropriately ordered. The experimental results over real datasets show that our model outperforms existing possible solutions with respect to effectiveness and efficiency.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 45(2009) no.2, S.263-271
  4. Thelwall, M.: Can Google's PageRank be used to find the most important academic Web pages? (2003) 0.02 
    0.015173998 = product of:
  0.07081199 = sum of:
    0.046783425 = weight(_text_:web in 4457) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046783425 = score(doc=4457,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.48375595 = fieldWeight in 4457, 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=4457)
    0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 4457) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060537956 = score(doc=4457,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4457, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4457)
    0.01797477 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4457) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01797477 = score(doc=4457,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 4457, 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=4457)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    Google's PageRank is an influential algorithm that uses a model of Web use that is dominated by its link structure in order to rank pages by their estimated value to the Web community. This paper reports on the outcome of applying the algorithm to the Web sites of three national university systems in order to test whether it is capable of identifying the most important Web pages. The results are also compared with simple inlink counts. It was discovered that the highest inlinked pages do not always have the highest PageRank, indicating that the two metrics are genuinely different, even for the top pages. More significantly, however, internal links dominated external links for the high ranks in either method and superficial reasons accounted for high scores in both cases. It is concluded that PageRank is not useful for identifying the top pages in a site and that it must be combined with a powerful text matching techniques in order to get the quality of information retrieval results provided by Google.
  5. Kleinberg, J.M.: Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment (1998) 0.01 
    0.014994139 = product of:
  0.06997265 = sum of:
    0.03856498 = weight(_text_:wide in 5) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03856498 = score(doc=5,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.29372054 = fieldWeight in 5, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5)
    0.020922182 = weight(_text_:web in 5) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020922182 = score(doc=5,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 5, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5)
    0.0104854815 = weight(_text_:information in 5) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0104854815 = score(doc=5,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 5, 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=5)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The network structure of a hyperlinked environment can be a rich source of information about the content of the environment, provided we have effective means for understanding it. We develop a set of algorithmic tools for extracting information from the link structures of such environments, and report on experiments that demonstrate their effectiveness in a variety of contexts on the World Wide Web. The central issue we address within our framework is the distillation of broad search topics, through the discovery of "authoritative" information sources on such topics. We propose and test an algorithmic formulation of the notion of authority, based on the relationship between a set of relevant authoritative pages and the set of "hub pages" that join them together in the link structure. Our formulation has connections to the eigenvectors of certain matrices associated with the link graph; these connections in turn motivate additional heuristics for link-based analysis.
  6. Chen, H.; Lally, A.M.; Zhu, B.; Chau, M.: HelpfulMed : Intelligent searching for medical information over the Internet (2003) 0.01 
    0.014904119 = product of:
  0.069552556 = sum of:
    0.034870304 = weight(_text_:web in 1615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034870304 = score(doc=1615,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.36057037 = fieldWeight in 1615, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1615)
    0.008737902 = weight(_text_:information in 1615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008737902 = score(doc=1615,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 1615, 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=1615)
    0.025944345 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025944345 = score(doc=1615,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.28943354 = fieldWeight in 1615, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1615)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The Medical professionals and researchers need information from reputable sources to accomplish their work. Unfortunately, the Web has a large number of documents that are irrelevant to their work, even those documents that purport to be "medically-related." This paper describes an architecture designed to integrate advanced searching and indexing algorithms, an automatic thesaurus, or "concept space," and Kohonen-based Self-Organizing Map (SOM) technologies to provide searchers with finegrained results. Initial results indicate that these systems provide complementary retrieval functionalities. HelpfulMed not only allows users to search Web pages and other online databases, but also allows them to build searches through the use of an automatic thesaurus and browse a graphical display of medical-related topics. Evaluation results for each of the different components are included. Our spidering algorithm outperformed both breadth-first search and PageRank spiders an a test collection of 100,000 Web pages. The automatically generated thesaurus performed as well as both MeSH and UMLS-systems which require human mediation for currency. Lastly, a variant of the Kohonen SOM was comparable to MeSH terms in perceived cluster precision and significantly better at perceived cluster recall.
    Footnote
    Teil eines Themenheftes: "Web retrieval and mining: A machine learning perspective"
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.7, S.683-694
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  7. Losada, D.E.; Barreiro, A.: Emebedding term similarity and inverse document frequency into a logical model of information retrieval (2003) 0.01 
    0.01464875 = product of:
  0.068360835 = sum of:
    0.016143454 = weight(_text_:information in 1422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016143454 = score(doc=1422,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 1422, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1422)
    0.041510954 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041510954 = score(doc=1422,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.46309367 = fieldWeight in 1422, 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=1422)
    0.010706427 = product of:
      0.032119278 = sum of:
        0.032119278 = weight(_text_:22 in 1422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032119278 = score(doc=1422,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1422, 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=1422)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    We propose a novel approach to incorporate term similarity and inverse document frequency into a logical model of information retrieval. The ability of the logic to handle expressive representations along with the use of such classical notions are promising characteristics for IR systems. The approach proposed here has been efficiently implemented and experiments against test collections are presented.
    Date
    22. 3.2003 19:27:23
    Footnote
    Beitrag eines Themenheftes: Mathematical, logical, and formal methods in information retrieval
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.4, S.285-301
  8. Tsai, C.-F.; Hu, Y.-H.; Chen, Z.-Y.: Factors affecting rocchio-based pseudorelevance feedback in image retrieval (2015) 0.01 
    0.014387199 = product of:
  0.06714026 = sum of:
    0.032137483 = weight(_text_:wide in 1607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032137483 = score(doc=1607,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 1607, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1607)
    0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 1607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0050448296 = score(doc=1607,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 1607, 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=1607)
    0.029957948 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029957948 = score(doc=1607,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 1607, 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=1607)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    Pseudorelevance feedback (PRF) was proposed to solve the limitation of relevance feedback (RF), which is based on the user-in-the-loop process. In PRF, the top-k retrieved images are regarded as PRF. Although the PRF set contains noise, PRF has proven effective for automatically improving the overall retrieval result. To implement PRF, the Rocchio algorithm has been considered as a reasonable and well-established baseline. However, the performance of Rocchio-based PRF is subject to various representation choices (or factors). In this article, we examine these factors that affect the performance of Rocchio-based PRF, including image-feature representation, the number of top-ranked images, the weighting parameters of Rocchio, and similarity measure. We offer practical insights on how to optimize the performance of Rocchio-based PRF by choosing appropriate representation choices. Our extensive experiments on NUS-WIDE-LITE and Caltech 101 + Corel 5000 data sets show that the optimal feature representation is color moment + wavelet texture in terms of retrieval efficiency and effectiveness. Other representation choices are that using top-20 ranked images as pseudopositive and pseudonegative feedback sets with the equal weight (i.e., 0.5) by the correlation and cosine distance functions can produce the optimal retrieval result.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.1, S.40-57
  9. Crestani, F.; Dominich, S.; Lalmas, M.; Rijsbergen, C.J.K. van: Mathematical, logical, and formal methods in information retrieval : an introduction to the special issue (2003) 0.01 
    0.014333045 = product of:
  0.06688754 = sum of:
    0.01482871 = weight(_text_:information in 1451) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01482871 = score(doc=1451,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.2850541 = fieldWeight in 1451, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1451)
    0.044029012 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1451) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044029012 = score(doc=1451,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.49118498 = fieldWeight in 1451, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1451)
    0.008029819 = product of:
      0.024089456 = sum of:
        0.024089456 = weight(_text_:22 in 1451) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024089456 = score(doc=1451,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1451, 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=1451)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    Research an the use of mathematical, logical, and formal methods, has been central to Information Retrieval research for a long time. Research in this area is important not only because it helps enhancing retrieval effectiveness, but also because it helps clarifying the underlying concepts of Information Retrieval. In this article we outline some of the major aspects of the subject, and summarize the papers of this special issue with respect to how they relate to these aspects. We conclude by highlighting some directions of future research, which are needed to better understand the formal characteristics of Information Retrieval.
    Date
    22. 3.2003 19:27:36
    Footnote
    Einführung zu den Beiträgen eines Themenheftes: Mathematical, logical, and formal methods in information retrieval
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.4, S.281-284
  10. Berry, M.W.; Browne, M.: Understanding search engines : mathematical modeling and text retrieval (2005) 0.01 
    0.013777942 = product of:
  0.064297065 = sum of:
    0.019725623 = weight(_text_:web in 7) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019725623 = score(doc=7,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.2039694 = fieldWeight in 7, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=7)
    0.010677892 = weight(_text_:information in 7) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010677892 = score(doc=7,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.20526241 = fieldWeight in 7, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=7)
    0.033893548 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 7) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033893548 = score(doc=7,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.37811437 = fieldWeight in 7, 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=7)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The second edition of Understanding Search Engines: Mathematical Modeling and Text Retrieval follows the basic premise of the first edition by discussing many of the key design issues for building search engines and emphasizing the important role that applied mathematics can play in improving information retrieval. The authors discuss important data structures, algorithms, and software as well as user-centered issues such as interfaces, manual indexing, and document preparation. Significant changes bring the text up to date on current information retrieval methods: for example the addition of a new chapter on link-structure algorithms used in search engines such as Google. The chapter on user interface has been rewritten to specifically focus on search engine usability. In addition the authors have added new recommendations for further reading and expanded the bibliography, and have updated and streamlined the index to make it more reader friendly.
    Content
    Inhalt: Introduction Document File Preparation - Manual Indexing - Information Extraction - Vector Space Modeling - Matrix Decompositions - Query Representations - Ranking and Relevance Feedback - Searching by Link Structure - User Interface - Book Format Document File Preparation Document Purification and Analysis - Text Formatting - Validation - Manual Indexing - Automatic Indexing - Item Normalization - Inverted File Structures - Document File - Dictionary List - Inversion List - Other File Structures Vector Space Models Construction - Term-by-Document Matrices - Simple Query Matching - Design Issues - Term Weighting - Sparse Matrix Storage - Low-Rank Approximations Matrix Decompositions QR Factorization - Singular Value Decomposition - Low-Rank Approximations - Query Matching - Software - Semidiscrete Decomposition - Updating Techniques Query Management Query Binding - Types of Queries - Boolean Queries - Natural Language Queries - Thesaurus Queries - Fuzzy Queries - Term Searches - Probabilistic Queries Ranking and Relevance Feedback Performance Evaluation - Precision - Recall - Average Precision - Genetic Algorithms - Relevance Feedback Searching by Link Structure HITS Method - HITS Implementation - HITS Summary - PageRank Method - PageRank Adjustments - PageRank Implementation - PageRank Summary User Interface Considerations General Guidelines - Search Engine Interfaces - Form Fill-in - Display Considerations - Progress Indication - No Penalties for Error - Results - Test and Retest - Final Considerations Further Reading
    LCSH
    Web search engines
    RSWK
    Suchmaschine / Information Retrieval
    Suchmaschine / Information Retrieval / Mathematisches Modell (HEBIS)
    Subject
    Web search engines
    Suchmaschine / Information Retrieval
    Suchmaschine / Information Retrieval / Mathematisches Modell (HEBIS)
  11. Koumenides, C.L.; Shadbolt, N.R.: Ranking methods for entity-oriented semantic web search (2014) 0.01 
    0.013622135 = product of:
  0.06356996 = sum of:
    0.029588435 = weight(_text_:web in 1280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029588435 = score(doc=1280,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 1280, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1280)
    0.00856136 = weight(_text_:information in 1280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00856136 = score(doc=1280,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 1280, 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=1280)
    0.025420163 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025420163 = score(doc=1280,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 1280, 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=1280)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    This article provides a technical review of semantic search methods used to support text-based search over formal Semantic Web knowledge bases. Our focus is on ranking methods and auxiliary processes explored by existing semantic search systems, outlined within broad areas of classification. We present reflective examples from the literature in some detail, which should appeal to readers interested in a deeper perspective on the various methods and systems implemented in the outlined literature. The presentation covers graph exploration and propagation methods, adaptations of classic probabilistic retrieval models, and query-independent link analysis via flexible extensions to the PageRank algorithm. Future research directions are discussed, including development of more cohesive retrieval models to unlock further potentials and uses, data indexing schemes, integration with user interfaces, and building community consensus for more systematic evaluation and gradual development.
    Series
    Advances in information science
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.6, S.1091-1106
  12. Stock, W.G.: On relevance distributions (2006) 0.01 
    0.013559518 = product of:
  0.06327775 = sum of:
    0.027896244 = weight(_text_:web in 5116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027896244 = score(doc=5116,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.2884563 = fieldWeight in 5116, 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=5116)
    0.011415146 = weight(_text_:information in 5116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011415146 = score(doc=5116,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 5116, 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=5116)
    0.023966359 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023966359 = score(doc=5116,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 5116, 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=5116)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    There are at least three possible ways that documents are distributed by relevance: informetric (power law), inverse logistic, and dichotomous. The nature of the type of distribution has implications for the construction of relevance ranking algorithms for search engines, for automated (blind) relevance feedback, for user behavior when using Web search engines, for combining of outputs of search engines for metasearch, for topic detection and tracking, and for the methodology of evaluation of information retrieval systems.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.8, S.1126-1129
  13. Austin, D.: How Google finds your needle in the Web's haystack : as we'll see, the trick is to ask the web itself to rank the importance of pages... (2006) 0.01 
    0.013528418 = product of:
  0.063132614 = sum of:
    0.022496238 = weight(_text_:wide in 93) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022496238 = score(doc=93,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.171337 = fieldWeight in 93, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=93)
    0.034519844 = weight(_text_:web in 93) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034519844 = score(doc=93,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.35694647 = fieldWeight in 93, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=93)
    0.006116531 = weight(_text_:information in 93) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006116531 = score(doc=93,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.11757882 = fieldWeight in 93, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=93)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    Imagine a library containing 25 billion documents but with no centralized organization and no librarians. In addition, anyone may add a document at any time without telling anyone. You may feel sure that one of the documents contained in the collection has a piece of information that is vitally important to you, and, being impatient like most of us, you'd like to find it in a matter of seconds. How would you go about doing it? Posed in this way, the problem seems impossible. Yet this description is not too different from the World Wide Web, a huge, highly-disorganized collection of documents in many different formats. Of course, we're all familiar with search engines (perhaps you found this article using one) so we know that there is a solution. This article will describe Google's PageRank algorithm and how it returns pages from the web's collection of 25 billion documents that match search criteria so well that "google" has become a widely used verb. Most search engines, including Google, continually run an army of computer programs that retrieve pages from the web, index the words in each document, and store this information in an efficient format. Each time a user asks for a web search using a search phrase, such as "search engine," the search engine determines all the pages on the web that contains the words in the search phrase. (Perhaps additional information such as the distance between the words "search" and "engine" will be noted as well.) Here is the problem: Google now claims to index 25 billion pages. Roughly 95% of the text in web pages is composed from a mere 10,000 words. This means that, for most searches, there will be a huge number of pages containing the words in the search phrase. What is needed is a means of ranking the importance of the pages that fit the search criteria so that the pages can be sorted with the most important pages at the top of the list. One way to determine the importance of pages is to use a human-generated ranking. For instance, you may have seen pages that consist mainly of a large number of links to other resources in a particular area of interest. Assuming the person maintaining this page is reliable, the pages referenced are likely to be useful. Of course, the list may quickly fall out of date, and the person maintaining the list may miss some important pages, either unintentionally or as a result of an unstated bias. Google's PageRank algorithm assesses the importance of web pages without human evaluation of the content. In fact, Google feels that the value of its service is largely in its ability to provide unbiased results to search queries; Google claims, "the heart of our software is PageRank." As we'll see, the trick is to ask the web itself to rank the importance of pages.
  14. Smeaton, A.F.; Rijsbergen, C.J. van: ¬The retrieval effects of query expansion on a feedback document retrieval system (1983) 0.01 
    0.013054345 = product of:
  0.09138041 = sum of:
    0.07264417 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07264417 = score(doc=2134,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.8104139 = fieldWeight in 2134, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2134)
    0.018736245 = product of:
      0.056208733 = sum of:
        0.056208733 = weight(_text_:22 in 2134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056208733 = score(doc=2134,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2134, 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=2134)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Date
    30. 3.2001 13:32:22
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  15. Kang, I.-H.; Kim, G.C.: Integration of multiple evidences based on a query type for web search (2004) 0.01 
    0.012924007 = product of:
  0.060312033 = sum of:
    0.03019857 = weight(_text_:web in 2568) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03019857 = score(doc=2568,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 2568, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2568)
    0.015134487 = weight(_text_:information in 2568) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015134487 = score(doc=2568,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.2909321 = fieldWeight in 2568, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2568)
    0.014978974 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2568) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014978974 = score(doc=2568,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 2568, 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=2568)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The massive and heterogeneous Web exacerbates IR problems and short user queries make them worse. The contents of web pages are not enough to find answer pages. PageRank compensates for the insufficiencies of content information. The content information and PageRank are combined to get better results. However, static combination of multiple evidences may lower the retrieval performance. We have to use different strategies to meet the need of a user. We can classify user queries as three categories according to users' intent, the topic relevance task, the homepage finding task, and the service finding task. In this paper, we present a user query classification method. The difference of distribution, mutual information, the usage rate as anchor texts and the POS information are used for the classification. After we classified a user query, we apply different algorithms and information for the better results. For the topic relevance task, we emphasize the content information, on the other hand, for the homepage finding task, we emphasize the Link information and the URL information. We could get the best performance when our proposed classification method with the OKAPI scoring algorithm was used.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 40(2004) no.3, S.459-478
  16. Faloutsos, C.: Signature files (1992) 0.01 
    0.012919094 = product of:
  0.060289107 = sum of:
    0.008071727 = weight(_text_:information in 3499) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008071727 = score(doc=3499,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 3499, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3499)
    0.041510954 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3499) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041510954 = score(doc=3499,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.46309367 = fieldWeight in 3499, 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=3499)
    0.010706427 = product of:
      0.032119278 = sum of:
        0.032119278 = weight(_text_:22 in 3499) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032119278 = score(doc=3499,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3499, 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=3499)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    Presents a survey and discussion on signature-based text retrieval methods. It describes the main idea behind the signature approach and its advantages over other text retrieval methods, it provides a classification of the signature methods that have appeared in the literature, it describes the main representatives of each class, together with the relative advantages and drawbacks, and it gives a list of applications as well as commercial or university prototypes that use the signature approach
    Date
    7. 5.1999 15:22:48
    Source
    Information retrieval: data structures and algorithms. Ed.: W.B. Frakes u. R. Baeza-Yates
  17. Radev, D.; Fan, W.; Qu, H.; Wu, H.; Grewal, A.: Probabilistic question answering on the Web (2005) 0.01 
    0.012914326 = product of:
  0.060266852 = sum of:
    0.036238287 = weight(_text_:web in 3455) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036238287 = score(doc=3455,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.37471575 = fieldWeight in 3455, 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=3455)
    0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 3455) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060537956 = score(doc=3455,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3455, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3455)
    0.01797477 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3455) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01797477 = score(doc=3455,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 3455, 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=3455)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    Web-based search engines such as Google and NorthernLight return documents that are relevant to a user query, not answers to user questions. We have developed an architecture that augments existing search engines so that they support natural language question answering. The process entails five steps: query modulation, document retrieval, passage extraction, phrase extraction, and answer ranking. In this article, we describe some probabilistic approaches to the last three of these stages. We show how our techniques apply to a number of existing search engines, and we also present results contrasting three different methods for question answering. Our algorithm, probabilistic phrase reranking (PPR), uses proximity and question type features and achieves a total reciprocal document rank of .20 an the TREC8 corpus. Our techniques have been implemented as a Web-accessible system, called NSIR.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.6, S.571-583
  18. Wan, X.; Yang, J.; Xiao, J.: Towards a unified approach to document similarity search using manifold-ranking of blocks (2008) 0.01 
    0.0127842445 = product of:
  0.05965981 = sum of:
    0.02465703 = weight(_text_:web in 2081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02465703 = score(doc=2081,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 2081, 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=2081)
    0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 2081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0050448296 = score(doc=2081,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2081, 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=2081)
    0.029957948 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029957948 = score(doc=2081,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 2081, 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=2081)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    Document similarity search (i.e. query by example) aims to retrieve a ranked list of documents similar to a query document in a text corpus or on the Web. Most existing approaches to similarity search first compute the pairwise similarity score between each document and the query using a retrieval function or similarity measure (e.g. Cosine), and then rank the documents by the similarity scores. In this paper, we propose a novel retrieval approach based on manifold-ranking of document blocks (i.e. a block of coherent text about a subtopic) to re-rank a small set of documents initially retrieved by some existing retrieval function. The proposed approach can make full use of the intrinsic global manifold structure of the document blocks by propagating the ranking scores between the blocks on a weighted graph. First, the TextTiling algorithm and the VIPS algorithm are respectively employed to segment text documents and web pages into blocks. Then, each block is assigned with a ranking score by the manifold-ranking algorithm. Lastly, a document gets its final ranking score by fusing the scores of its blocks. Experimental results on the TDT data and the ODP data demonstrate that the proposed approach can significantly improve the retrieval performances over baseline approaches. Document block is validated to be a better unit than the whole document in the manifold-ranking process.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 44(2008) no.3, S.1032-1048
  19. Shiri, A.A.; Revie, C.: Query expansion behavior within a thesaurus-enhanced search environment : a user-centered evaluation (2006) 0.01 
    0.012614421 = product of:
  0.04415047 = sum of:
    0.017435152 = weight(_text_:web in 56) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017435152 = score(doc=56,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 56, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=56)
    0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 56) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0050448296 = score(doc=56,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 56, 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=56)
    0.014978974 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 56) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014978974 = score(doc=56,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 56, 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=56)
    0.0066915164 = product of:
      0.020074548 = sum of:
        0.020074548 = weight(_text_:22 in 56) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020074548 = score(doc=56,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 56, 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=56)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
    Abstract
    The study reported here investigated the query expansion behavior of end-users interacting with a thesaurus-enhanced search system on the Web. Two groups, namely academic staff and postgraduate students, were recruited into this study. Data were collected from 90 searches performed by 30 users using the OVID interface to the CAB abstracts database. Data-gathering techniques included questionnaires, screen capturing software, and interviews. The results presented here relate to issues of search-topic and search-term characteristics, number and types of expanded queries, usefulness of thesaurus terms, and behavioral differences between academic staff and postgraduate students in their interaction. The key conclusions drawn were that (a) academic staff chose more narrow and synonymous terms than did postgraduate students, who generally selected broader and related terms; (b) topic complexity affected users' interaction with the thesaurus in that complex topics required more query expansion and search term selection; (c) users' prior topic-search experience appeared to have a significant effect on their selection and evaluation of thesaurus terms; (d) in 50% of the searches where additional terms were suggested from the thesaurus, users stated that they had not been aware of the terms at the beginning of the search; this observation was particularly noticeable in the case of postgraduate students.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 16:32:43
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.4, S.462-478
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  20. Singh, S.; Dey, L.: ¬A rough-fuzzy document grading system for customized text information retrieval (2005) 0.01 
    0.012524987 = product of:
  0.058449935 = sum of:
    0.020922182 = weight(_text_:web in 1007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020922182 = score(doc=1007,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 1007, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1007)
    0.012107591 = weight(_text_:information in 1007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012107591 = score(doc=1007,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 1007, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1007)
    0.025420163 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025420163 = score(doc=1007,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 1007, 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=1007)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    Due to the large repository of documents available on the web, users are usually inundated by a large volume of information, most of which is found to be irrelevant. Since user perspectives vary, a client-side text filtering system that learns the user's perspective can reduce the problem of irrelevant retrieval. In this paper, we have provided the design of a customized text information filtering system which learns user preferences and modifies the initial query to fetch better documents. It uses a rough-fuzzy reasoning scheme. The rough-set based reasoning takes care of natural language nuances, like synonym handling, very elegantly. The fuzzy decider provides qualitative grading to the documents for the user's perusal. We have provided the detailed design of the various modules and some results related to the performance analysis of the system.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.2, S.195-216

Authors

Years

Languages

Types

  • a 310
  • m 12
  • el 7
  • s 5
  • r 4
  • x 3
  • p 2
  • d 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications