-
Strötgen, R.; Mandl, T.; Schneider, R.: Entwicklung und Evaluierung eines Question Answering Systems im Rahmen des Cross Language Evaluation Forum (CLEF) (2006)
0.02
0.016158216 = product of:
0.07540501 = sum of:
0.043931052 = weight(_text_:elektronische in 5981) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043931052 = score(doc=5981,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14013545 = queryWeight, product of:
4.728978 = idf(docFreq=1061, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.3134899 = fieldWeight in 5981, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.728978 = idf(docFreq=1061, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5981)
0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 5981) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0060537956 = score(doc=5981,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 5981, 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=5981)
0.025420163 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5981) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025420163 = score(doc=5981,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 5981, 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=5981)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- Question Answering Systeme versuchen, zu konkreten Fragen eine korrekte Antwort zu liefern. Dazu durchsuchen sie einen Dokumentenbestand und extrahieren einen Bruchteil eines Dokuments. Dieser Beitrag beschreibt die Entwicklung eines modularen Systems zum multilingualen Question Answering. Die Strategie bei der Entwicklung zielte auf eine schnellstmögliche Verwendbarkeit eines modularen Systems, das auf viele frei verfügbare Ressourcen zugreift. Das System integriert Module zur Erkennung von Eigennamen, zu Indexierung und Retrieval, elektronische Wörterbücher, Online-Übersetzungswerkzeuge sowie Textkorpora zu Trainings- und Testzwecken und implementiert eigene Ansätze zu den Bereichen der Frage- und AntwortTaxonomien, zum Passagenretrieval und zum Ranking alternativer Antworten.
- Source
- Effektive Information Retrieval Verfahren in Theorie und Praxis: ausgewählte und erweiterte Beiträge des Vierten Hildesheimer Evaluierungs- und Retrievalworkshop (HIER 2005), Hildesheim, 20.7.2005. Hrsg.: T. Mandl u. C. Womser-Hacker
-
Jensen, N.: Evaluierung von mehrsprachigem Web-Retrieval : Experimente mit dem EuroGOV-Korpus im Rahmen des Cross Language Evaluation Forum (CLEF) (2006)
0.02
0.01573399 = product of:
0.07342529 = sum of:
0.036238287 = weight(_text_:web in 5964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036238287 = score(doc=5964,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.37471575 = fieldWeight in 5964, 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=5964)
0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 5964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0060537956 = score(doc=5964,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 5964, 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=5964)
0.031133216 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031133216 = score(doc=5964,freq=6.0), product of:
0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.34732026 = fieldWeight in 5964, 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=5964)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- Der vorliegende Artikel beschreibt die Experimente der Universität Hildesheim im Rahmen des ersten Web Track der CLEF-Initiative (WebCLEF) im Jahr 2005. Bei der Teilnahme konnten Erfahrungen mit einem multilingualen Web-Korpus (EuroGOV) bei der Vorverarbeitung, der Topic- bzw. Query-Entwicklung, bei sprachunabhängigen Indexierungsmethoden und multilingualen Retrieval-Strategien gesammelt werden. Aufgrund des großen Um-fangs des Korpus und der zeitlichen Einschränkungen wurden multilinguale Indizes aufgebaut. Der Artikel beschreibt die Vorgehensweise bei der Teilnahme der Universität Hildesheim und die Ergebnisse der offiziell eingereichten sowie weiterer Experimente. Für den Multilingual Task konnte das beste Ergebnis in CLEF erzielt werden.
- Source
- Effektive Information Retrieval Verfahren in Theorie und Praxis: ausgewählte und erweiterte Beiträge des Vierten Hildesheimer Evaluierungs- und Retrievalworkshop (HIER 2005), Hildesheim, 20.7.2005. Hrsg.: T. Mandl u. C. Womser-Hacker
-
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
-
Kruschwitz, U.; AI-Bakour, H.: Users want more sophisticated search assistants : results of a task-based evaluation (2005)
0.01
0.008026919 = product of:
0.037458956 = sum of:
0.017435152 = weight(_text_:web in 4575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017435152 = score(doc=4575,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 4575, 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=4575)
0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 4575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0050448296 = score(doc=4575,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 4575, 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=4575)
0.014978974 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014978974 = score(doc=4575,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 4575, 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=4575)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- The Web provides a massive knowledge source, as do intranets and other electronic document collections. However, much of that knowledge is encoded implicitly and cannot be applied directly without processing into some more appropriate structures. Searching, browsing, question answering, for example, could all benefit from domain-specific knowledge contained in the documents, and in applications such as simple search we do not actually need very "deep" knowledge structures such as ontologies, but we can get a long way with a model of the domain that consists of term hierarchies. We combine domain knowledge automatically acquired by exploiting the documents' markup structure with knowledge extracted an the fly to assist a user with ad hoc search requests. Such a search system can suggest query modification options derived from the actual data and thus guide a user through the space of documents. This article gives a detailed account of a task-based evaluation that compares a search system that uses the outlined domain knowledge with a standard search system. We found that users do use the query modification suggestions proposed by the system. The main conclusion we can draw from this evaluation, however, is that users prefer a system that can suggest query modifications over a standard search engine, which simply presents a ranked list of documents. Most interestingly, we observe this user preference despite the fact that the baseline system even performs slightly better under certain criteria.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.13, S.1377-1393
- Theme
- Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
-
Voorhees, E.M.: Question answering in TREC (2005)
0.01
0.006865305 = product of:
0.04805713 = sum of:
0.012107591 = weight(_text_:information in 6487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012107591 = score(doc=6487,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 6487, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6487)
0.03594954 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03594954 = score(doc=6487,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 6487, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6487)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Source
- TREC: experiment and evaluation in information retrieval. Ed.: E.M. Voorhees, u. D.K. Harman
-
Lin, J.; Katz, B.: Building a reusable test collection for question answering (2006)
0.01
0.0059455284 = product of:
0.041618697 = sum of:
0.0104854815 = weight(_text_:information in 5045) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0104854815 = score(doc=5045,freq=6.0), product of:
0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 5045, 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=5045)
0.031133216 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5045) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031133216 = score(doc=5045,freq=6.0), product of:
0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.34732026 = fieldWeight in 5045, 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=5045)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- In contrast to traditional information retrieval systems, which return ranked lists of documents that users must manually browse through, a question answering system attempts to directly answer natural language questions posed by the user. Although such systems possess language-processing capabilities, they still rely on traditional document retrieval techniques to generate an initial candidate set of documents. In this article, the authors argue that document retrieval for question answering represents a task different from retrieving documents in response to more general retrospective information needs. Thus, to guide future system development, specialized question answering test collections must be constructed. They show that the current evaluation resources have major shortcomings; to remedy the situation, they have manually created a small, reusable question answering test collection for research purposes. In this article they describe their methodology for building this test collection and discuss issues they encountered regarding the notion of "answer correctness."
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.7, S.851-861
-
Tartakovski, O.; Shramko, M.: Implementierung eines Werkzeugs zur Sprachidentifikation in mono- und multilingualen Texten (2006)
0.01
0.0056635872 = product of:
0.03964511 = sum of:
0.009988253 = weight(_text_:information in 5978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009988253 = score(doc=5978,freq=4.0), product of:
0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 5978, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5978)
0.029656855 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029656855 = score(doc=5978,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 5978, 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=5978)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Die Identifikation der Sprache bzw. der Sprachen in Textdokumenten ist einer der wichtigsten Schritte maschineller Textverarbeitung für das Information Retrieval. Der vorliegende Artikel stellt Langldent vor, ein System zur Sprachidentifikation von mono- und multilingualen elektronischen Textdokumenten. Das System bietet sowohl eine Auswahl von gängigen Algorithmen für die Sprachidentifikation monolingualer Textdokumente als auch einen neuen Algorithmus für die Sprachidentifikation multilingualer Textdokumente.
- Source
- Effektive Information Retrieval Verfahren in Theorie und Praxis: ausgewählte und erweiterte Beiträge des Vierten Hildesheimer Evaluierungs- und Retrievalworkshop (HIER 2005), Hildesheim, 20.7.2005. Hrsg.: T. Mandl u. C. Womser-Hacker
-
Nhongkai, S.N.; Bentz, H.-J.: Bilinguale Suche mittels Konzeptnetzen (2006)
0.00
0.0045768693 = product of:
0.032038085 = sum of:
0.008071727 = weight(_text_:information in 3914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008071727 = score(doc=3914,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 3914, 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=3914)
0.023966359 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023966359 = score(doc=3914,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 3914, 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=3914)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Source
- Effektive Information Retrieval Verfahren in Theorie und Praxis: ausgewählte und erweiterte Beiträge des Vierten Hildesheimer Evaluierungs- und Retrievalworkshop (HIER 2005), Hildesheim, 20.7.2005. Hrsg.: T. Mandl u. C. Womser-Hacker
-
Galitsky, B.: Can many agents answer questions better than one? (2005)
0.00
0.0034326524 = product of:
0.024028566 = sum of:
0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 3094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0060537956 = score(doc=3094,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3094, 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=3094)
0.01797477 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01797477 = score(doc=3094,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 3094, 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=3094)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- The paper addresses the issue of how online natural language question answering, based on deep semantic analysis, may compete with currently popular keyword search, open domain information retrieval systems, covering a horizontal domain. We suggest the multiagent question answering approach, where each domain is represented by an agent which tries to answer questions taking into account its specific knowledge. The meta-agent controls the cooperation between question answering agents and chooses the most relevant answer(s). We argue that multiagent question answering is optimal in terms of access to business and financial knowledge, flexibility in query phrasing, and efficiency and usability of advice. The knowledge and advice encoded in the system are initially prepared by domain experts. We analyze the commercial application of multiagent question answering and the robustness of the meta-agent. The paper suggests that a multiagent architecture is optimal when a real world question answering domain combines a number of vertical ones to form a horizontal domain.
-
Rösener, C.: ¬Die Stecknadel im Heuhaufen : Natürlichsprachlicher Zugang zu Volltextdatenbanken (2005)
0.00
0.003419585 = product of:
0.023937095 = sum of:
0.0069903214 = weight(_text_:information in 548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0069903214 = score(doc=548,freq=6.0), product of:
0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.1343758 = fieldWeight in 548, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=548)
0.016946774 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016946774 = score(doc=548,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.18905719 = fieldWeight in 548, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=548)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Die Möglichkeiten, die der heutigen Informations- und Wissensgesellschaft für die Beschaffung und den Austausch von Information zur Verfügung stehen, haben kurioserweise gleichzeitig ein immer akuter werdendes, neues Problem geschaffen: Es wird für jeden Einzelnen immer schwieriger, aus der gewaltigen Fülle der angebotenen Informationen die tatsächlich relevanten zu selektieren. Diese Arbeit untersucht die Möglichkeit, mit Hilfe von natürlichsprachlichen Schnittstellen den Zugang des Informationssuchenden zu Volltextdatenbanken zu verbessern. Dabei werden zunächst die wissenschaftlichen Fragestellungen ausführlich behandelt. Anschließend beschreibt der Autor verschiedene Lösungsansätze und stellt anhand einer natürlichsprachlichen Schnittstelle für den Brockhaus Multimedial 2004 deren erfolgreiche Implementierung vor
- Content
- Enthält die Kapitel: 2: Wissensrepräsentation 2.1 Deklarative Wissensrepräsentation 2.2 Klassifikationen des BMM 2.3 Thesauri und Ontologien: existierende kommerzielle Software 2.4 Erstellung eines Thesaurus im Rahmen des LeWi-Projektes 3: Analysekomponenten 3.1 Sprachliche Phänomene in der maschinellen Textanalyse 3.2 Analysekomponenten: Lösungen und Forschungsansätze 3.3 Die Analysekomponenten im LeWi-Projekt 4: Information Retrieval 4.1 Grundlagen des Information Retrieval 4.2 Automatische Indexierungsmethoden und -verfahren 4.3 Automatische Indexierung des BMM im Rahmen des LeWi-Projektes 4.4 Suchstrategien und Suchablauf im LeWi-Kontext
-
Schneider, R.: Question answering : das Retrieval der Zukunft? (2007)
0.00
0.002420968 = product of:
0.033893548 = sum of:
0.033893548 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5953) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033893548 = score(doc=5953,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.37811437 = fieldWeight in 5953, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5953)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- Der Artikel geht der Frage nach, ob und inwieweit Informations- und Recherchesysteme von der Technologie natürlich sprachlicher Frage-Antwortsysteme, so genannter Question Answering-Systeme, profitieren können. Nach einer allgemeinen Einführung in die Zielsetzung und die historische Entwicklung dieses Sonderzweigs der maschinellen Sprachverarbeitung werden dessen Abgrenzung von herkömmlichen Retrieval- und Extraktionsverfahren erläutert und die besondere Struktur von Question Answering-Systemen sowie einzelne Evaluierungsinitiativen aufgezeichnet. Zudem werden konkrete Anwendungsfelder im Bibliothekswesen vorgestellt.
-
Pomerantz, J.: ¬A linguistic analysis of question taxonomies (2005)
0.00
5.04483E-4 = product of:
0.0070627616 = sum of:
0.0070627616 = weight(_text_:information in 3465) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0070627616 = score(doc=3465,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3465, 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=3465)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.7, S.715-728
-
Ferret, O.; Grau, B.; Hurault-Plantet, M.; Illouz, G.; Jacquemin, C.; Monceaux, L.; Robba, I.; Vilnat, A.: How NLP can improve question answering (2002)
0.00
4.32414E-4 = product of:
0.0060537956 = sum of:
0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 1850) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0060537956 = score(doc=1850,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.029633347 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1850, 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=1850)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- Answering open-domain factual questions requires Natural Language processing for refining document selection and answer identification. With our system QALC, we have participated in the Question Answering track of the TREC8, TREC9 and TREC10 evaluations. QALC performs an analysis of documents relying an multiword term searches and their linguistic variation both to minimize the number of documents selected and to provide additional clues when comparing question and sentence representations. This comparison process also makes use of the results of a syntactic parsing of the questions and Named Entity recognition functionalities. Answer extraction relies an the application of syntactic patterns chosen according to the kind of information that is sought, and categorized depending an the syntactic form of the question. These patterns allow QALC to handle nicely linguistic variations at the answer level.
