Search (61 results, page 1 of 4)

  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalalgorithmen"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Mayr, P.: Bradfordizing als Re-Ranking-Ansatz in Literaturinformationssystemen (2011) 0.03 
    0.032352157 = product of:
  0.16715282 = sum of:
    0.017084125 = weight(_text_:und in 4292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017084125 = score(doc=4292,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.35989314 = fieldWeight in 4292, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4292)
    0.056427326 = weight(_text_:literatur in 4292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056427326 = score(doc=4292,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.102594726 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7901325 = idf(docFreq=998, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.5500022 = fieldWeight in 4292, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.7901325 = idf(docFreq=998, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4292)
    0.056427326 = weight(_text_:literatur in 4292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056427326 = score(doc=4292,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.102594726 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7901325 = idf(docFreq=998, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.5500022 = fieldWeight in 4292, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.7901325 = idf(docFreq=998, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4292)
    0.011345398 = weight(_text_:im in 4292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011345398 = score(doc=4292,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.060543913 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.18739122 = fieldWeight in 4292, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4292)
    0.008784524 = product of:
      0.017569048 = sum of:
        0.017569048 = weight(_text_:29 in 4292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017569048 = score(doc=4292,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07534158 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02141793 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 4292, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4292)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.017084125 = weight(_text_:und in 4292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017084125 = score(doc=4292,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.35989314 = fieldWeight in 4292, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4292)
  0.19354838 = coord(6/31)
    Abstract
    In diesem Artikel wird ein Re-Ranking-Ansatz für Suchsysteme vorgestellt, der die Recherche nach wissenschaftlicher Literatur messbar verbessern kann. Das nichttextorientierte Rankingverfahren Bradfordizing wird eingeführt und anschließend im empirischen Teil des Artikels bzgl. der Effektivität für typische fachbezogene Recherche-Topics evaluiert. Dem Bradford Law of Scattering (BLS), auf dem Bradfordizing basiert, liegt zugrunde, dass sich die Literatur zu einem beliebigen Fachgebiet bzw. -thema in Zonen unterschiedlicher Dokumentenkonzentration verteilt. Dem Kernbereich mit hoher Konzentration der Literatur folgen Bereiche mit mittlerer und geringer Konzentration. Bradfordizing sortiert bzw. rankt eine Dokumentmenge damit nach den sogenannten Kernzeitschriften. Der Retrievaltest mit 164 intellektuell bewerteten Fragestellungen in Fachdatenbanken aus den Bereichen Sozial- und Politikwissenschaften, Wirtschaftswissenschaften, Psychologie und Medizin zeigt, dass die Dokumente der Kernzeitschriften signifikant häufiger relevant bewertet werden als Dokumente der zweiten Dokumentzone bzw. den Peripherie-Zeitschriften. Die Implementierung von Bradfordizing und weiteren Re-Rankingverfahren liefert unmittelbare Mehrwerte für den Nutzer.
    Date
    9. 2.2011 17:47:29
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 62(2011) H.1, S.3-10
  2. Walz, J.: Analyse der Übertragbarkeit allgemeiner Rankingfaktoren von Web-Suchmaschinen auf Discovery-Systeme (2018) 0.02 
    0.021183498 = product of:
  0.13133769 = sum of:
    0.038282767 = weight(_text_:sprache in 5744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038282767 = score(doc=5744,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11121472 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.192599 = idf(docFreq=667, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.34422392 = fieldWeight in 5744, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.192599 = idf(docFreq=667, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5744)
    0.013949131 = weight(_text_:und in 5744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013949131 = score(doc=5744,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.29385152 = fieldWeight in 5744, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5744)
    0.03257833 = weight(_text_:literatur in 5744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03257833 = score(doc=5744,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.102594726 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7901325 = idf(docFreq=998, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.31754392 = fieldWeight in 5744, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.7901325 = idf(docFreq=998, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5744)
    0.03257833 = weight(_text_:literatur in 5744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03257833 = score(doc=5744,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.102594726 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7901325 = idf(docFreq=998, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.31754392 = fieldWeight in 5744, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.7901325 = idf(docFreq=998, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5744)
    0.013949131 = weight(_text_:und in 5744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013949131 = score(doc=5744,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.29385152 = fieldWeight in 5744, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5744)
  0.16129032 = coord(5/31)
    Abstract
    Ziel: Ziel dieser Bachelorarbeit war es, die Übertragbarkeit der allgemeinen Rankingfaktoren, wie sie von Web-Suchmaschinen verwendet werden, auf Discovery-Systeme zu analysieren. Dadurch könnte das bisher hauptsächlich auf dem textuellen Abgleich zwischen Suchanfrage und Dokumenten basierende bibliothekarische Ranking verbessert werden. Methode: Hierfür wurden Faktoren aus den Gruppen Popularität, Aktualität, Lokalität, Technische Faktoren, sowie dem personalisierten Ranking diskutiert. Die entsprechenden Rankingfaktoren wurden nach ihrer Vorkommenshäufigkeit in der analysierten Literatur und der daraus abgeleiteten Wichtigkeit, ausgewählt. Ergebnis: Von den 23 untersuchten Rankingfaktoren sind 14 (61 %) direkt vom Ranking der Web-Suchmaschinen auf das Ranking der Discovery-Systeme übertragbar. Zu diesen zählen unter anderem das Klickverhalten, das Erstellungsdatum, der Nutzerstandort, sowie die Sprache. Sechs (26%) der untersuchten Faktoren sind dagegen nicht übertragbar (z.B. Aktualisierungsfrequenz und Ladegeschwindigkeit). Die Linktopologie, die Nutzungshäufigkeit, sowie die Aktualisierungsfrequenz sind mit entsprechenden Modifikationen übertragbar.
    Imprint
    Köln : Fakultät für Informations- und Kommunikationswissenschaften
  3. Oberhauser, O.: Relevance Ranking in den Online-Katalogen der "nächsten Generation" (2010) 0.01 
    0.010952737 = product of:
  0.08488371 = sum of:
    0.009863526 = weight(_text_:und in 4308) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009863526 = score(doc=4308,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.20778441 = fieldWeight in 4308, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4308)
    0.03257833 = weight(_text_:literatur in 4308) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03257833 = score(doc=4308,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.102594726 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7901325 = idf(docFreq=998, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.31754392 = fieldWeight in 4308, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.7901325 = idf(docFreq=998, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4308)
    0.03257833 = weight(_text_:literatur in 4308) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03257833 = score(doc=4308,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.102594726 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7901325 = idf(docFreq=998, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.31754392 = fieldWeight in 4308, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.7901325 = idf(docFreq=998, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4308)
    0.009863526 = weight(_text_:und in 4308) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009863526 = score(doc=4308,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.20778441 = fieldWeight in 4308, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4308)
  0.12903225 = coord(4/31)
    Abstract
    Relevance Ranking in Online-Katalogen ist zwar kein neues Thema, doch liegt dazu nicht allzu viel Literatur vor, die das Prädikat "ernstzunehmen" verdient. Dies ist zum einen darin begründet, dass das Interesse an der Ausgabe ranggereihter Ergebnislisten auf Seiten aller Beteiligter (Bibliothekare, Softwarehersteller, Benutzer) traditionell gering war. Zum anderen ging die seit einigen Jahren populär gewordene Kritik an den bestehenden OPACs vielfach von einer unzureichenden Wissensbasis aus und produzierte oft nur polemische oder emotional gefärbte Beiträge, die zum Thema Ranking wenig beitrugen. ... Der hier beschriebene Test ist natürlich in keiner Weise erschöpfend oder repräsentativ. Dennoch gibt er, wie ich glaube, Anlass zu einiger Hoffnung. Er lässt vermuten, dass die "neuen" OPACs - zumindest was das Relevance Ranking betrifft - auf dem Weg in die richtige Richtung sind. Wie gut es wirklich gelingen wird, die Rankingleistung von Suchmaschinen wie Google, die unter völlig anderen Voraussetzungen arbeiten, einzuholen, wird aber erst die Zukunft zeigen.
    Source
    Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 63(2010) H.1/2, S.25-37
  4. Tober, M.; Hennig, L.; Furch, D.: SEO Ranking-Faktoren und Rang-Korrelationen 2014 : Google Deutschland (2014) 0.01 
    0.0088158455 = product of:
  0.06832281 = sum of:
    0.020794136 = weight(_text_:und in 1484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020794136 = score(doc=1484,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.438048 = fieldWeight in 1484, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1484)
    0.015127198 = weight(_text_:im in 1484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015127198 = score(doc=1484,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.060543913 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.24985497 = fieldWeight in 1484, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1484)
    0.020794136 = weight(_text_:und in 1484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020794136 = score(doc=1484,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.438048 = fieldWeight in 1484, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1484)
    0.011607336 = product of:
      0.023214672 = sum of:
        0.023214672 = weight(_text_:22 in 1484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023214672 = score(doc=1484,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07500195 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02141793 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1484, 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=1484)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.12903225 = coord(4/31)
    Abstract
    Dieses Whitepaper beschäftigt sich mit der Definition und Bewertung von Faktoren, die eine hohe Rangkorrelation-Koeffizienz mit organischen Suchergebnissen aufweisen und dient dem Zweck der tieferen Analyse von Suchmaschinen-Algorithmen. Die Datenerhebung samt Auswertung bezieht sich auf Ranking-Faktoren für Google-Deutschland im Jahr 2014. Zusätzlich wurden die Korrelationen und Faktoren unter anderem anhand von Durchschnitts- und Medianwerten sowie Entwicklungstendenzen zu den Vorjahren hinsichtlich ihrer Relevanz für vordere Suchergebnis-Positionen interpretiert.
    Date
    13. 9.2014 14:45:22
  5. Maylein, L.; Langenstein, A.: Neues vom Relevanz-Ranking im HEIDI-Katalog der Universitätsbibliothek Heidelberg : Perspektiven für bibliothekarische Dienstleistungen (2013) 0.01 
    0.0072919503 = product of:
  0.056512617 = sum of:
    0.009299421 = weight(_text_:und in 775) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009299421 = score(doc=775,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.19590102 = fieldWeight in 775, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=775)
    0.026201077 = weight(_text_:im in 775) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026201077 = score(doc=775,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.060543913 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.43276152 = fieldWeight in 775, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=775)
    0.011712699 = product of:
      0.023425398 = sum of:
        0.023425398 = weight(_text_:29 in 775) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023425398 = score(doc=775,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07534158 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02141793 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 775, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=775)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.009299421 = weight(_text_:und in 775) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009299421 = score(doc=775,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.19590102 = fieldWeight in 775, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=775)
  0.12903225 = coord(4/31)
    Abstract
    Das Relevanz-Ranking im Katalog der Universitätsbibliothek Heidelberg HEIDI, bereits 2009 in einem Beitrag in dieser Zeitschrift beschrieben, wurde in den letzten Jahren durch neue Entwicklungen und Methoden stark verbessert. Der Aufsatz beschreibt die Realisierung der bisherigen Rankingmaßnahmen unter der neu eingesetzten Suchmaschinenplattform SOLR. Weiter werden verschiedene neue Möglichkeiten für Rankinganpassungen unter SOLR sowie deren Einsatz im HEIDI-Katalog dargestellt.
    Date
    29. 6.2013 18:06:23
  6. Behnert, C.; Borst, T.: Neue Formen der Relevanz-Sortierung in bibliothekarischen Informationssystemen : das DFG-Projekt LibRank (2015) 0.01 
    0.005488594 = product of:
  0.056715474 = sum of:
    0.020794136 = weight(_text_:und in 5392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020794136 = score(doc=5392,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.438048 = fieldWeight in 5392, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5392)
    0.015127198 = weight(_text_:im in 5392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015127198 = score(doc=5392,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.060543913 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.24985497 = fieldWeight in 5392, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5392)
    0.020794136 = weight(_text_:und in 5392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020794136 = score(doc=5392,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.438048 = fieldWeight in 5392, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5392)
  0.09677419 = coord(3/31)
    Abstract
    Das von der DFG geförderte Projekt LibRank erforscht neue Rankingverfahren für bibliothekarische Informationssysteme, die aufbauend auf Erkenntnissen aus dem Bereich Websuche qualitätsinduzierende Faktoren wie z. B. Aktualität, Popularität und Verfügbarkeit von einzelnen Medien berücksichtigen. Die konzipierten Verfahren werden im Kontext eines in den Wirtschaftswissenschaften häufig genutzten Rechercheportals (EconBiz) entwickelt und in einem Testsystem systematisch evaluiert. Es werden Rankingfaktoren, die für den Bibliotheksbereich von besonderem Interesse sind, vorgestellt und exemplarisch Probleme und Herausforderungen aufgezeigt.
    Source
    Bibliothek: Forschung und Praxis. 39(2015) H.3, S.384-393
  7. Fuhr, N.: Modelle im Information Retrieval (2013) 0.01 
    0.005011685 = product of:
  0.051787414 = sum of:
    0.016439209 = weight(_text_:und in 724) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016439209 = score(doc=724,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.34630734 = fieldWeight in 724, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=724)
    0.018908998 = weight(_text_:im in 724) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018908998 = score(doc=724,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.060543913 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.3123187 = fieldWeight in 724, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=724)
    0.016439209 = weight(_text_:und in 724) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016439209 = score(doc=724,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.34630734 = fieldWeight in 724, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=724)
  0.09677419 = coord(3/31)
    Source
    Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation. Handbuch zur Einführung in die Informationswissenschaft und -praxis. 6., völlig neu gefaßte Ausgabe. Hrsg. von R. Kuhlen, W. Semar u. D. Strauch. Begründet von Klaus Laisiepen, Ernst Lutterbeck, Karl-Heinrich Meyer-Uhlenried
  8. White, H. D.: Co-cited author retrieval and relevance theory : examples from the humanities (2015) 0.00 
    0.0023361752 = product of:
  0.036210716 = sum of:
    0.030343922 = weight(_text_:20 in 1687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030343922 = score(doc=1687,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.5154039 = fieldWeight in 1687, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1687)
    0.0058667944 = weight(_text_:e in 1687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0058667944 = score(doc=1687,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.19057012 = fieldWeight in 1687, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1687)
  0.06451613 = coord(2/31)
    Date
    20. 2.2015 17:58:08
    21. 2.2015 14:20:32
    Language
    e
  9. Mayr, P.: Bradfordizing mit Katalogdaten : Alternative Sicht auf Suchergebnisse und Publikationsquellen durch Re-Ranking (2010) 0.00 
    0.0022044033 = product of:
  0.03416825 = sum of:
    0.017084125 = weight(_text_:und in 4301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017084125 = score(doc=4301,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.35989314 = fieldWeight in 4301, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4301)
    0.017084125 = weight(_text_:und in 4301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017084125 = score(doc=4301,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.35989314 = fieldWeight in 4301, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4301)
  0.06451613 = coord(2/31)
    Abstract
    Nutzer erwarten für Literaturrecherchen in wissenschaftlichen Suchsystemen einen möglichst hohen Anteil an relevanten und qualitativen Dokumenten in den Trefferergebnissen. Insbesondere die Reihenfolge und Struktur der gelisteten Ergebnisse (Ranking) spielt, neben dem direkten Volltextzugriff auf die Dokumente, für viele Nutzer inzwischen eine entscheidende Rolle. Abgegrenzt wird Ranking oder Relevance Ranking von sogenannten Sortierungen zum Beispiel nach dem Erscheinungsjahr der Publikation, obwohl hier die Grenze zu »nach inhaltlicher Relevanz« gerankten Listen konzeptuell nicht sauber zu ziehen ist. Das Ranking von Dokumenten führt letztlich dazu, dass sich die Benutzer fokussiert mit den oberen Treffermengen eines Suchergebnisses beschäftigen. Der mittlere und untere Bereich eines Suchergebnisses wird häufig nicht mehr in Betracht gezogen. Aufgrund der Vielzahl an relevanten und verfügbaren Informationsquellen ist es daher notwendig, Kernbereiche in den Suchräumen zu identifizieren und diese anschließend dem Nutzer hervorgehoben zu präsentieren. Phillipp Mayr fasst hier die Ergebnisse seiner Dissertation zum Thema »Re-Ranking auf Basis von Bradfordizing für die verteilte Suche in Digitalen Bibliotheken« zusammen.
  10. Hora, M.: Methoden für das Ranking in Discovery-Systemen (2018) 0.00 
    0.002099869 = product of:
  0.032547973 = sum of:
    0.016273987 = weight(_text_:und in 4968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016273987 = score(doc=4968,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.34282678 = fieldWeight in 4968, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4968)
    0.016273987 = weight(_text_:und in 4968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016273987 = score(doc=4968,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.34282678 = fieldWeight in 4968, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4968)
  0.06451613 = coord(2/31)
    Abstract
    Discovery-Systeme bieten meist als Standardeinstellung eine Sortierung nach Relevanz an. Wie die Relevanz ermittelt wird, ist häufig intransparent. Dabei wären Kenntnisse darüber aus Nutzersicht ein wichtiger Faktor in der Informationskompetenz, während Bibliotheken sicherstellen sollten, dass das Ranking zum eigenen Bestand und Publikum passt. In diesem Aufsatz wird dargestellt, wie Discovery-Systeme Treffer auswählen und bewerten. Dazu gehören Indexierung, Prozessierung, Text-Matching und weitere Relevanzkriterien, z. B. Popularität oder Verfügbarkeit. Schließlich müssen alle betrachteten Kriterien zu einem zentralen Score zusammengefasst werden. Ein besonderer Fokus wird auf das Ranking von EBSCO Discovery Service, Primo und Summon gelegt.
  11. Behnert, C.; Plassmeier, K.; Borst, T.; Lewandowski, D.: Evaluierung von Rankingverfahren für bibliothekarische Informationssysteme (2019) 0.00 
    0.002099869 = product of:
  0.032547973 = sum of:
    0.016273987 = weight(_text_:und in 5023) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016273987 = score(doc=5023,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.34282678 = fieldWeight in 5023, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5023)
    0.016273987 = weight(_text_:und in 5023) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016273987 = score(doc=5023,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.34282678 = fieldWeight in 5023, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5023)
  0.06451613 = coord(2/31)
    Abstract
    Dieser Beitrag beschreibt eine Studie zur Entwicklung und Evaluierung von Rankingverfahren für bibliothekarische Informationssysteme. Dazu wurden mögliche Faktoren für das Relevanzranking ausgehend von den Verfahren in Websuchmaschinen identifiziert, auf den Bibliothekskontext übertragen und systematisch evaluiert. Mithilfe eines Testsystems, das auf dem ZBW-Informationsportal EconBiz und einer web-basierten Software zur Evaluierung von Suchsystemen aufsetzt, wurden verschiedene Relevanzfaktoren (z. B. Popularität in Verbindung mit Aktualität) getestet. Obwohl die getesteten Rankingverfahren auf einer theoretischen Ebene divers sind, konnten keine einheitlichen Verbesserungen gegenüber den Baseline-Rankings gemessen werden. Die Ergebnisse deuten darauf hin, dass eine Adaptierung des Rankings auf individuelle Nutzer bzw. Nutzungskontexte notwendig sein könnte, um eine höhere Performance zu erzielen.
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 70(2019) H.1, S.14-23
  12. Ravana, S.D.; Rajagopal, P.; Balakrishnan, V.: Ranking retrieval systems using pseudo relevance judgments (2015) 0.00 
    0.0020945994 = product of:
  0.021644194 = sum of:
    0.008940164 = weight(_text_:20 in 2591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008940164 = score(doc=2591,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.15185234 = fieldWeight in 2591, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2591)
    0.0024444978 = weight(_text_:e in 2591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0024444978 = score(doc=2591,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 2591, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2591)
    0.010259532 = product of:
      0.020519065 = sum of:
        0.020519065 = weight(_text_:22 in 2591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020519065 = score(doc=2591,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.07500195 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02141793 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2591, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2591)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.09677419 = coord(3/31)
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    18. 9.2018 18:22:56
    Language
    e
  13. Silva, R.M.; Gonçalves, M.A.; Veloso, A.: ¬A Two-stage active learning method for learning to rank (2014) 0.00 
    0.001810171 = product of:
  0.0187051 = sum of:
    0.008940164 = weight(_text_:20 in 1184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008940164 = score(doc=1184,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.15185234 = fieldWeight in 1184, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1184)
    0.0024444978 = weight(_text_:e in 1184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0024444978 = score(doc=1184,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 1184, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1184)
    0.007320437 = product of:
      0.014640874 = sum of:
        0.014640874 = weight(_text_:29 in 1184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014640874 = score(doc=1184,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07534158 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02141793 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 1184, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1184)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.09677419 = coord(3/31)
    Date
    26. 1.2014 20:29:57
    Language
    e
  14. Bar-Ilan, J.; Levene, M.: ¬The hw-rank : an h-index variant for ranking web pages (2015) 0.00 
    0.0014689886 = product of:
  0.022769324 = sum of:
    0.017880328 = weight(_text_:20 in 1694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017880328 = score(doc=1694,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.30370468 = fieldWeight in 1694, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1694)
    0.0048889956 = weight(_text_:e in 1694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0048889956 = score(doc=1694,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.15880844 = fieldWeight in 1694, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1694)
  0.06451613 = coord(2/31)
    Date
    20. 2.2015 17:58:08
    Language
    e
  15. Karlsson, A.; Hammarfelt, B.; Steinhauer, H.J.; Falkman, G.; Olson, N.; Nelhans, G.; Nolin, J.: Modeling uncertainty in bibliometrics and information retrieval : an information fusion approach (2015) 0.00 
    0.0014689886 = product of:
  0.022769324 = sum of:
    0.017880328 = weight(_text_:20 in 1696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017880328 = score(doc=1696,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.30370468 = fieldWeight in 1696, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1696)
    0.0048889956 = weight(_text_:e in 1696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0048889956 = score(doc=1696,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.15880844 = fieldWeight in 1696, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1696)
  0.06451613 = coord(2/31)
    Date
    20. 2.2015 17:58:08
    Language
    e
  16. Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.: From P100 to P100' : a new citation-rank approach (2014) 0.00 
    0.0010011956 = product of:
  0.015518532 = sum of:
    0.0039111963 = weight(_text_:e in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0039111963 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.12704675 = fieldWeight in 1431, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1431)
    0.011607336 = product of:
      0.023214672 = sum of:
        0.023214672 = weight(_text_:22 in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023214672 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07500195 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02141793 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1431, 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=1431)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06451613 = coord(2/31)
    Date
    22. 8.2014 17:05:18
    Language
    e
  17. Moura, E.S. de; Fernandes, D.; Ribeiro-Neto, B.; Silva, A.S. da; Gonçalves, M.A.: Using structural information to improve search in Web collections (2010) 0.00 
    8.8139315E-4 = product of:
  0.013661594 = sum of:
    0.010728197 = weight(_text_:20 in 4119) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010728197 = score(doc=4119,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.18222281 = fieldWeight in 4119, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4119)
    0.0029333972 = weight(_text_:e in 4119) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0029333972 = score(doc=4119,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 4119, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4119)
  0.06451613 = coord(2/31)
    Abstract
    In this work, we investigate the problem of using the block structure of Web pages to improve ranking results. Starting with basic intuitions provided by the concepts of term frequency (TF) and inverse document frequency (IDF), we propose nine block-weight functions to distinguish the impact of term occurrences inside page blocks, instead of inside whole pages. These are then used to compute a modified BM25 ranking function. Using four distinct Web collections, we ran extensive experiments to compare our block-weight ranking formulas with two other baselines: (a) a BM25 ranking applied to full pages, and (b) a BM25 ranking that takes into account best blocks. Our methods suggest that our block-weighting ranking method is superior to all baselines across all collections we used and that average gain in precision figures from 5 to 20% are generated.
    Language
    e
  18. Jiang, X.; Sun, X.; Yang, Z.; Zhuge, H.; Lapshinova-Koltunski, E.; Yao, J.: Exploiting heterogeneous scientific literature networks to combat ranking bias : evidence from the computational linguistics area (2016) 0.00 
    7.998197E-4 = product of:
  0.012397205 = sum of:
    0.008940164 = weight(_text_:20 in 3017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008940164 = score(doc=3017,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.15185234 = fieldWeight in 3017, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3017)
    0.003457042 = weight(_text_:e in 3017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003457042 = score(doc=3017,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.112294525 = fieldWeight in 3017, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3017)
  0.06451613 = coord(2/31)
    Date
    12. 6.2016 20:26:18
    Language
    e
  19. Dang, E.K.F.; Luk, R.W.P.; Allan, J.; Ho, K.S.; Chung, K.F.L.; Lee, D.L.: ¬A new context-dependent term weight computed by boost and discount using relevance information (2010) 0.00 
    7.344943E-4 = product of:
  0.011384662 = sum of:
    0.008940164 = weight(_text_:20 in 4120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008940164 = score(doc=4120,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.15185234 = fieldWeight in 4120, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4120)
    0.0024444978 = weight(_text_:e in 4120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0024444978 = score(doc=4120,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 4120, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4120)
  0.06451613 = coord(2/31)
    Abstract
    We studied the effectiveness of a new class of context-dependent term weights for information retrieval. Unlike the traditional term frequency-inverse document frequency (TF-IDF), the new weighting of a term t in a document d depends not only on the occurrence statistics of t alone but also on the terms found within a text window (or "document-context") centered on t. We introduce a Boost and Discount (B&D) procedure which utilizes partial relevance information to compute the context-dependent term weights of query terms according to a logistic regression model. We investigate the effectiveness of the new term weights compared with the context-independent BM25 weights in the setting of relevance feedback. We performed experiments with title queries of the TREC-6, -7, -8, and 2005 collections, comparing the residual Mean Average Precision (MAP) measures obtained using B&D term weights and those obtained by a baseline using BM25 weights. Given either 10 or 20 relevance judgments of the top retrieved documents, using the new term weights yields improvement over the baseline for all collections tested. The MAP obtained with the new weights has relative improvement over the baseline by 3.3 to 15.2%, with statistical significance at the 95% confidence level across all four collections.
    Language
    e
  20. Dang, E.K.F.; Luk, R.W.P.; Allan, J.: Beyond bag-of-words : bigram-enhanced context-dependent term weights (2014) 0.00 
    7.344943E-4 = product of:
  0.011384662 = sum of:
    0.008940164 = weight(_text_:20 in 1283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008940164 = score(doc=1283,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.15185234 = fieldWeight in 1283, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1283)
    0.0024444978 = weight(_text_:e in 1283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0024444978 = score(doc=1283,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02141793 = queryNorm
        0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 1283, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1283)
  0.06451613 = coord(2/31)
    Abstract
    While term independence is a widely held assumption in most of the established information retrieval approaches, it is clearly not true and various works in the past have investigated a relaxation of the assumption. One approach is to use n-grams in document representation instead of unigrams. However, the majority of early works on n-grams obtained only modest performance improvement. On the other hand, the use of information based on supporting terms or "contexts" of queries has been found to be promising. In particular, recent studies showed that using new context-dependent term weights improved the performance of relevance feedback (RF) retrieval compared with using traditional bag-of-words BM25 term weights. Calculation of the new term weights requires an estimation of the local probability of relevance of each query term occurrence. In previous studies, the estimation of this probability was based on unigrams that occur in the neighborhood of a query term. We explore an integration of the n-gram and context approaches by computing context-dependent term weights based on a mixture of unigrams and bigrams. Extensive experiments are performed using the title queries of the Text Retrieval Conference (TREC)-6, TREC-7, TREC-8, and TREC-2005 collections, for RF with relevance judgment of either the top 10 or top 20 documents of an initial retrieval. We identify some crucial elements needed in the use of bigrams in our methods, such as proper inverse document frequency (IDF) weighting of the bigrams and noise reduction by pruning bigrams with large document frequency values. We show that enhancing context-dependent term weights with bigrams is effective in further improving retrieval performance.
    Language
    e

Authors

Languages

  • e 51
  • d 10

Types

  • a 58
  • el 1
  • r 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Themes