Search (217 results, page 1 of 11)

  • × year_i:[1990 TO 2000}
  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalstudien"
  1. Saracevic, T.: Individual differences in organizing, searching and retrieving information (1991) 0.09
    0.08855388 = product of:
      0.1475898 = sum of:
        0.00770594 = weight(_text_:a in 3692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00770594 = score(doc=3692,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 3692, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3692)
        0.12725374 = weight(_text_:91 in 3692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12725374 = score(doc=3692,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25837386 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.49251786 = fieldWeight in 3692, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3692)
        0.012630116 = product of:
          0.025260232 = sum of:
            0.025260232 = weight(_text_:information in 3692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.025260232 = score(doc=3692,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 3692, 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=3692)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6 = coord(3/5)
    
    Abstract
    Synthesises the major findings of several decades of research into the magnitude of individual deffirences in information retrieval related tasks and suggests implications for practice and design. The study is related to a series of studies of human aspects and cognitive decision making in information seeking, searching and retrieving
    Imprint
    Medford : Learned Information Inc.
    Source
    ASIS'91: systems understanding people. Proc. of the 54th Annual Meeting of the ASIS, vol.28, Washington, DC, 27.-31.10.1991. Ed.: J.-M. Griffiths
    Type
    a
  2. Wildemuth, B.M.; Jacob, E.K.; Fullington, A.;; Bliek, R. de; Friedman, C.P.: ¬A detailed analysis of end-user search behaviours (1991) 0.06
    0.055494484 = product of:
      0.0924908 = sum of:
        0.009010308 = weight(_text_:a in 2423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009010308 = score(doc=2423,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 2423, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2423)
        0.079533584 = weight(_text_:91 in 2423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.079533584 = score(doc=2423,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25837386 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.30782366 = fieldWeight in 2423, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2423)
        0.003946911 = product of:
          0.007893822 = sum of:
            0.007893822 = weight(_text_:information in 2423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007893822 = score(doc=2423,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2423, 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=2423)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6 = coord(3/5)
    
    Abstract
    Search statements in this revision process can be viewed as a 'move' in the overall search strategy. Very little is known about how end users develop and revise their search strategies. A study was conducted to analyse the moves made in 244 data base searches conducted by 26 medical students at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Students search INQUIRER, a data base of facts and concepts in microbiology. The searches were conducted during a 3-week period in spring 1990 and were recorded by the INQUIRER system. Each search statement was categorised, using Fidel's online searching moves (S. Online review 9(1985) S.61-74) and Bates' search tactics (s. JASIS 30(1979) S.205-214). Further analyses indicated that the most common moves were Browse/Specity, Select Exhaust, Intersect, and Vary, and that selection of moves varied by student and by problem. Analysis of search tactics (combinations of moves) identified 5 common search approaches. The results of this study have implcations for future research on search behaviours, for thedesign of system interfaces and data base structures, and for the training of end users
    Imprint
    Medford : Learned Information Inc.
    Source
    ASIS'91: systems understanding people. Proc. of the 54th Annual Meeting of the ASIS, vol.28, Washington, DC, 27.-31.10.1991. Ed.: J.-M. Griffiths
    Type
    a
  3. Keen, E.M.: Aspects of computer-based indexing languages (1991) 0.05
    0.053983875 = product of:
      0.13495968 = sum of:
        0.00770594 = weight(_text_:a in 5072) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00770594 = score(doc=5072,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 5072, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5072)
        0.12725374 = weight(_text_:91 in 5072) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12725374 = score(doc=5072,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25837386 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.49251786 = fieldWeight in 5072, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5072)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Comments on the relative rarity of research articles on theoretical aspects of subject indexing in computerised retrieval systems and the predominance of articles on software packages and hardware. Concludes that controlled indexing still has a future but points to major differences from the past
    Source
    Computers in libraries international 91. Proceedings of the 5th Annual Conference on Computers in Libraries, London, February 1991
    Type
    a
  4. Dalrymple, P.W.: Retrieval by reformulation in two library catalogs : toward a cognitive model of searching behavior (1990) 0.05
    0.049415957 = product of:
      0.123539895 = sum of:
        0.013485395 = weight(_text_:a in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013485395 = score(doc=5089,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.25222903 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
        0.1100545 = sum of:
          0.022102704 = weight(_text_:information in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.022102704 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
          0.087951794 = weight(_text_:22 in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.087951794 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 5089, 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=5089)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2006 18:43:54
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 41(1990) no.4, S.272-281
    Type
    a
  5. Smithson, S.: Information retrieval evaluation in practice : a case study approach (1994) 0.03
    0.030245686 = product of:
      0.075614214 = sum of:
        0.009535614 = weight(_text_:a in 7302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009535614 = score(doc=7302,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 7302, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7302)
        0.0660786 = sum of:
          0.022102704 = weight(_text_:information in 7302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.022102704 = score(doc=7302,freq=8.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 7302, product of:
                2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                  8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7302)
          0.043975897 = weight(_text_:22 in 7302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.043975897 = score(doc=7302,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7302, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7302)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    The evaluation of information retrieval systems is an important yet difficult operation. This paper describes an exploratory evaluation study that takes an interpretive approach to evaluation. The longitudinal study examines evaluation through the information-seeking behaviour of 22 case studies of 'real' users. The eclectic approach to data collection produced behavioral data that is compared with relevance judgements and satisfaction ratings. The study demonstrates considerable variations among the cases, among different evaluation measures within the same case, and among the same measures at different stages within a single case. It is argued that those involved in evaluation should be aware of the difficulties, and base any evaluation on a good understanding of the cases in question
    Source
    Information processing and management. 30(1994) no.2, S.205-221
    Type
    a
  6. Losee, R.M.: Determining information retrieval and filtering performance without experimentation (1995) 0.03
    0.029511416 = product of:
      0.07377854 = sum of:
        0.010661141 = weight(_text_:a in 3368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010661141 = score(doc=3368,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 3368, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3368)
        0.0631174 = sum of:
          0.019141505 = weight(_text_:information in 3368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.019141505 = score(doc=3368,freq=6.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 3368, product of:
                2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                  6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3368)
          0.043975897 = weight(_text_:22 in 3368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.043975897 = score(doc=3368,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3368, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3368)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    The performance of an information retrieval or text and media filtering system may be determined through analytic methods as well as by traditional simulation or experimental methods. These analytic methods can provide precise statements about expected performance. They can thus determine which of 2 similarly performing systems is superior. For both a single query terms and for a multiple query term retrieval model, a model for comparing the performance of different probabilistic retrieval methods is developed. This method may be used in computing the average search length for a query, given only knowledge of database parameter values. Describes predictive models for inverse document frequency, binary independence, and relevance feedback based retrieval and filtering. Simulation illustrate how the single term model performs and sample performance predictions are given for single term and multiple term problems
    Date
    22. 2.1996 13:14:10
    Source
    Information processing and management. 31(1995) no.4, S.555-572
    Type
    a
  7. Sanderson, M.: ¬The Reuters test collection (1996) 0.03
    0.029427508 = product of:
      0.07356877 = sum of:
        0.005448922 = weight(_text_:a in 6971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005448922 = score(doc=6971,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 6971, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6971)
        0.06811985 = sum of:
          0.017861681 = weight(_text_:information in 6971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.017861681 = score(doc=6971,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 6971, 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=6971)
          0.050258167 = weight(_text_:22 in 6971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.050258167 = score(doc=6971,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6971, 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=6971)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Source
    Information retrieval: new systems and current research. Proceedings of the 16th Research Colloquium of the British Computer Society Information Retrieval Specialist Group, Drymen, Scotland, 22-23 Mar 94. Ed.: R. Leon
    Type
    a
  8. Lespinasse, K.: TREC: une conference pour l'evaluation des systemes de recherche d'information (1997) 0.03
    0.029427508 = product of:
      0.07356877 = sum of:
        0.005448922 = weight(_text_:a in 744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005448922 = score(doc=744,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 744, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=744)
        0.06811985 = sum of:
          0.017861681 = weight(_text_:information in 744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.017861681 = score(doc=744,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 744, 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=744)
          0.050258167 = weight(_text_:22 in 744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.050258167 = score(doc=744,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 744, 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=744)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    TREC ia an annual conference held in the USA devoted to electronic systems for large full text information searching. The conference deals with evaluation and comparison techniques developed since 1992 by participants from the research and industrial fields. The work of the conference is destined for designers (rather than users) of systems which access full text information. Describes the context, objectives, organization, evaluation methods and limits of TREC
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
    Type
    a
  9. Crestani, F.; Rijsbergen, C.J. van: Information retrieval by imaging (1996) 0.03
    0.027205238 = product of:
      0.068013094 = sum of:
        0.009138121 = weight(_text_:a in 6967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009138121 = score(doc=6967,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 6967, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6967)
        0.058874972 = sum of:
          0.02118135 = weight(_text_:information in 6967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.02118135 = score(doc=6967,freq=10.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 6967, 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=6967)
          0.037693623 = weight(_text_:22 in 6967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037693623 = score(doc=6967,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 6967, 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=6967)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Explains briefly what constitutes the imaging process and explains how imaging can be used in information retrieval. Proposes an approach based on the concept of: 'a term is a possible world'; which enables the exploitation of term to term relationships which are estimated using an information theoretic measure. Reports results of an evaluation exercise to compare the performance of imaging retrieval, using possible world semantics, with a benchmark and using the Cranfield 2 document collection to measure precision and recall. Initially, the performance imaging retrieval was seen to be better but statistical analysis proved that the difference was not significant. The problem with imaging retrieval lies in the amount of computations needed to be performed at run time and a later experiement investigated the possibility of reducing this amount. Notes lines of further investigation
    Source
    Information retrieval: new systems and current research. Proceedings of the 16th Research Colloquium of the British Computer Society Information Retrieval Specialist Group, Drymen, Scotland, 22-23 Mar 94. Ed.: R. Leon
    Type
    a
  10. Blair, D.C.: STAIRS Redux : thoughts on the STAIRS evaluation, ten years after (1996) 0.03
    0.02574907 = product of:
      0.06437267 = sum of:
        0.004767807 = weight(_text_:a in 3002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004767807 = score(doc=3002,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 3002, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3002)
        0.05960487 = sum of:
          0.015628971 = weight(_text_:information in 3002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.015628971 = score(doc=3002,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 3002, 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=3002)
          0.043975897 = weight(_text_:22 in 3002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.043975897 = score(doc=3002,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3002, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3002)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    The test of retrieval effectiveness performed on IBM's STAIRS and reported in 'Communications of the ACM' 10 years ago, continues to be cited frequently in the information retrieval literature. The reasons for the study's continuing pertinence to today's research are discussed, and the political, legal, and commercial aspects of the study are presented. In addition, the method of calculating recall that was used in the STAIRS study is discussed in some detail, especially how it reduces the 5 major types of uncertainty in recall estimations. It is also suggested that this method of recall estimation may serve as the basis for recall estimations that might be truly comparable between systems
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 47(1996) no.1, S.4-22
    Type
    a
  11. Brown, M.E.: By any other name : accounting for failure in the naming of subject categories (1995) 0.02
    0.024707979 = product of:
      0.061769947 = sum of:
        0.0067426977 = weight(_text_:a in 5598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0067426977 = score(doc=5598,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 5598, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5598)
        0.05502725 = sum of:
          0.011051352 = weight(_text_:information in 5598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.011051352 = score(doc=5598,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 5598, 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=5598)
          0.043975897 = weight(_text_:22 in 5598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.043975897 = score(doc=5598,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5598, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5598)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Research shows that 65-80% of subject search terms fail to match the appropriate subject heading and one third to one half of subject searches result in no references being retrieved. Examines the subject search terms geberated by 82 school and college students in Princeton, NJ, evaluated the match between the named terms and the expected subject headings, proposes an explanation for match failures in relation to 3 invariant properties common to all search terms: concreteness, complexity, and syndeticity. Suggests that match failure is a consequence of developmental naming patterns and that these patterns can be overcome through the use of metacognitive naming skills
    Date
    2.11.1996 13:08:22
    Source
    Library and information science research. 17(1995) no.4, S.347-385
    Type
    a
  12. Belkin, N.J.: ¬An overview of results from Rutgers' investigations of interactive information retrieval (1998) 0.02
    0.02447601 = product of:
      0.061190024 = sum of:
        0.0048162127 = weight(_text_:a in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0048162127 = score(doc=2339,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.090081796 = fieldWeight in 2339, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2339)
        0.056373812 = sum of:
          0.02496246 = weight(_text_:information in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.02496246 = score(doc=2339,freq=20.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.30666938 = fieldWeight in 2339, product of:
                4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                  20.0 = termFreq=20.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2339)
          0.031411353 = weight(_text_:22 in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.031411353 = score(doc=2339,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2339, 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=2339)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Over the last 4 years, the Information Interaction Laboratory at Rutgers' School of communication, Information and Library Studies has performed a series of investigations concerned with various aspects of people's interactions with advanced information retrieval (IR) systems. We have benn especially concerned with understanding not just what people do, and why, and with what effect, but also with what they would like to do, and how they attempt to accomplish it, and with what difficulties. These investigations have led to some quite interesting conclusions about the nature and structure of people's interactions with information, about support for cooperative human-computer interaction in query reformulation, and about the value of visualization of search results for supporting various forms of interaction with information. In this discussion, I give an overview of the research program and its projects, present representative results from the projects, and discuss some implications of these results for support of subject searching in information retrieval systems
    Date
    22. 9.1997 19:16:05
    Imprint
    Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science
    Source
    Visualizing subject access for 21st century information resources: Papers presented at the 1997 Clinic on Library Applications of Data Processing, 2-4 Mar 1997, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Ed.: P.A. Cochrane et al
    Type
    a
  13. Wood, F.; Ford, N.; Miller, D.; Sobczyk, G.; Duffin, R.: Information skills, searching behaviour and cognitive styles for student-centred learning : a computer-assisted learning approach (1996) 0.02
    0.024471594 = product of:
      0.061178982 = sum of:
        0.007078358 = weight(_text_:a in 4341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007078358 = score(doc=4341,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 4341, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4341)
        0.054100625 = sum of:
          0.016407004 = weight(_text_:information in 4341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.016407004 = score(doc=4341,freq=6.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 4341, 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=4341)
          0.037693623 = weight(_text_:22 in 4341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037693623 = score(doc=4341,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4341, 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=4341)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Undergraduates were tested to establish how they searched databases, the effectiveness of their searches and their satisfaction with them. The students' cognitive and learning styles were determined by the Lancaster Approaches to Studying Inventory and Riding's Cognitive Styles Analysis tests. There were significant differences in the searching behaviour and the effectiveness of the searches carried out by students with different learning and cognitive styles. Computer-assisted learning (CAL) packages were developed for three departments. The effectiveness of the packages were evaluated. Significant differences were found in the ways students with different learning styles used the packages. Based on the experience gained, guidelines for the teaching of information skills and the production and use of packages were prepared. About 2/3 of the searches had serious weaknesses, indicating a need for effective training. It appears that choice of searching strategies, search effectiveness and use of CAL packages are all affected by the cognitive and learning styles of the searcher. Therefore, students should be made aware of their own styles and, if appropriate, how to adopt more effective strategies
    Source
    Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.2, S.79-92
    Type
    a
  14. Iivonen, M.: Consistency in the selection of search concepts and search terms (1995) 0.02
    0.022135837 = product of:
      0.055339593 = sum of:
        0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008173384 = score(doc=1757,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 1757, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1757)
        0.04716621 = sum of:
          0.009472587 = weight(_text_:information in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.009472587 = score(doc=1757,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1757, 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=1757)
          0.037693623 = weight(_text_:22 in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037693623 = score(doc=1757,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1757, 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=1757)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Considers intersearcher and intrasearcher consistency in the selection of search terms. Based on an empirical study where 22 searchers from 4 different types of search environments analyzed altogether 12 search requests of 4 different types in 2 separate test situations between which 2 months elapsed. Statistically very significant differences in consistency were found according to the types of search environments and search requests. Consistency was also considered according to the extent of the scope of search concept. At level I search terms were compared character by character. At level II different search terms were accepted as the same search concept with a rather simple evaluation of linguistic expressions. At level III, in addition to level II, the hierarchical approach of the search request was also controlled. At level IV different search terms were accepted as the same search concept with a broad interpretation of the search concept. Both intersearcher and intrasearcher consistency grew most immediately after a rather simple evaluation of linguistic impressions
    Source
    Information processing and management. 31(1995) no.2, S.173-190
    Type
    a
  15. Tomaiuolo, N.G.; Parker, J.: Maximizing relevant retrieval : keyword and natural language searching (1998) 0.02
    0.021404605 = product of:
      0.05351151 = sum of:
        0.009535614 = weight(_text_:a in 6418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009535614 = score(doc=6418,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 6418, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6418)
        0.043975897 = product of:
          0.087951794 = sum of:
            0.087951794 = weight(_text_:22 in 6418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.087951794 = score(doc=6418,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6418, 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=6418)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Source
    Online. 22(1998) no.6, S.57-58
    Type
    a
  16. Ellis, D.: Progress and problems in information retrieval (1996) 0.02
    0.017629704 = product of:
      0.08814852 = sum of:
        0.08814852 = sum of:
          0.03789035 = weight(_text_:information in 789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03789035 = score(doc=789,freq=18.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.46549135 = fieldWeight in 789, product of:
                4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                  18.0 = termFreq=18.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=789)
          0.050258167 = weight(_text_:22 in 789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.050258167 = score(doc=789,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 789, 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=789)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    An introduction to the principal generic approaches to information retrieval research with their associated concepts, models and systems, this text is designed to keep the information professional up to date with the major themes and developments that have preoccupied researchers in recent month in relation to textual and documentary retrieval systems.
    COMPASS
    Information retrieval
    Content
    First published 1991 as New horizons in information retrieval
    Date
    26. 7.2002 20:22:46
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Managing information 3(1996) no.10, S.49 (D. Bawden); Program 32(1998) no.2, S.190-192 (C. Revie)
    LCSH
    Information retrieval
    Subject
    Information retrieval
    Information retrieval
  17. Allan, J.; Callan, J.P.; Croft, W.B.; Ballesteros, L.; Broglio, J.; Xu, J.; Shu, H.: INQUERY at TREC-5 (1997) 0.02
    0.015289003 = product of:
      0.038222507 = sum of:
        0.0068111527 = weight(_text_:a in 3103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0068111527 = score(doc=3103,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 3103, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3103)
        0.031411353 = product of:
          0.06282271 = sum of:
            0.06282271 = weight(_text_:22 in 3103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06282271 = score(doc=3103,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3103, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3103)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Date
    27. 2.1999 20:55:22
    Type
    a
  18. Ng, K.B.; Loewenstern, D.; Basu, C.; Hirsh, H.; Kantor, P.B.: Data fusion of machine-learning methods for the TREC5 routing tak (and other work) (1997) 0.02
    0.015289003 = product of:
      0.038222507 = sum of:
        0.0068111527 = weight(_text_:a in 3107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0068111527 = score(doc=3107,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 3107, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3107)
        0.031411353 = product of:
          0.06282271 = sum of:
            0.06282271 = weight(_text_:22 in 3107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06282271 = score(doc=3107,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3107, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3107)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Date
    27. 2.1999 20:59:22
    Type
    a
  19. Pemberton, J.K.; Ojala, M.; Garman, N.: Head to head : searching the Web versus traditional services (1998) 0.01
    0.013826758 = product of:
      0.034566894 = sum of:
        0.009437811 = weight(_text_:a in 3572) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009437811 = score(doc=3572,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 3572, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3572)
        0.025129084 = product of:
          0.050258167 = sum of:
            0.050258167 = weight(_text_:22 in 3572) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.050258167 = score(doc=3572,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3572, 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=3572)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Describes of 3 searches on the topic of virtual communities done on the WWW using HotBot and traditional databases using LEXIS-NEXIS and ABI/Inform. Concludes that the WWW is a good starting place for a broad concept search but the traditional services are better for more precise topics
    Source
    Online. 22(1998) no.3, S.24-26,28
    Type
    a
  20. ¬The Fifth Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-5) (1997) 0.01
    0.01362397 = product of:
      0.06811985 = sum of:
        0.06811985 = sum of:
          0.017861681 = weight(_text_:information in 3087) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.017861681 = score(doc=3087,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 3087, 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=3087)
          0.050258167 = weight(_text_:22 in 3087) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.050258167 = score(doc=3087,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3087, 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=3087)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    Proceedings of the 5th TREC-confrerence held in Gaithersburgh, Maryland, Nov 20-22, 1996. Aim of the conference was discussion on retrieval techniques for large test collections. Different research groups used different techniques, such as automated thesauri, term weighting, natural language techniques, relevance feedback and advanced pattern matching, for information retrieval from the same large database. This procedure makes it possible to compare the results. The proceedings include papers, tables of the system results, and brief system descriptions including timing and storage information

Languages

Types

  • a 205
  • s 6
  • m 3
  • r 3
  • el 1
  • More… Less…