Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0056170793 = product of:
  0.042128094 = sum of:
    0.03410816 = weight(_text_:software in 845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03410816 = score(doc=845,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12969498 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032692216 = queryNorm
        0.2629875 = fieldWeight in 845, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=845)
    0.008019937 = weight(_text_:in in 845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008019937 = score(doc=845,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.044469737 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032692216 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 845, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=845)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)

Abstract

Intellectual access to a growing number of networked image repositories is but a small part of the much larger problem of intellectual access to new information formats. As more and more information becomes available in digital formats, it is imperative that we understand how people retrieve and use images. Several studies have investigated how users search for images, but there are few evaluation studies of image retrieval systems. Preliminary findings from research in progress indicate a need for improved browsing tools, image manipulation software, feedback mechanisms, and query analysis. Comparisons are made to previous research results from a study of intellectual access to digital art images. This discussion will focus on the problems of image retrieval identified in current research projects, report on an evaluation project in process, and propose a framework for evaluation studies of image retrieval systems that emphasizes the role of user feedback.

2.6733126E-4 = product of:
  0.0040099686 = sum of:
    0.0040099686 = weight(_text_:in in 3186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0040099686 = score(doc=3186,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.044469737 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032692216 = queryNorm
        0.09017298 = fieldWeight in 3186, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3186)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

Describes the nature of intellectual access to digitized art images using qualitatively methodologies. Images of Caribbean paintings were digitized and the process of querying the Caribbean art images observed. The paintings used for the study are part of the Bryant West Indies Collection, Central Florida University. Queries of art historians were analyzed and compared to retrieval parameters and image characteristics. 4 major categories, developed during the coding of the data, were isolated; queries; manipulations; recommendations; and applications. Concepts were identified that relate the complexity of the query, the access points, and the types of computer manipulations needed to retrieve relevant answer sets. Characteristics of the images were analyzed and compared to levels of query complexity. The findings of the investigations are reported in detail