-
Hull, D.A.: Stemming algorithms : a case study for detailed evaluation (1996)
0.10
0.10151212 = product of:
0.1353495 = sum of:
0.012739806 = weight(_text_:a in 2999) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012739806 = score(doc=2999,freq=12.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.21843673 = fieldWeight in 2999, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2999)
0.11216935 = weight(_text_:70 in 2999) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11216935 = score(doc=2999,freq=2.0), product of:
0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.41413653 = fieldWeight in 2999, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2999)
0.01044034 = product of:
0.02088068 = sum of:
0.02088068 = weight(_text_:information in 2999) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02088068 = score(doc=2999,freq=6.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 2999, 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=2999)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.75 = coord(3/4)
- Abstract
- The majority of information retrieval experiments are evaluated by measures such as average precision and average recall. Fundamental decisions about the superiority of one retrieval technique over another are made solely on the bases of these measures. We claim that average performance figures need to be validated with a careful statistical analysis and that there is a great deal of additional information that can be uncovered by looking closely at the results of individual queries. This article is a case study of stemming algorithms which describes a number of novel approaches to evaluation and demonstrates their value
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 47(1996) no.1, S.70-84
- Type
- a
-
Spink, A.; Goodrum, A.: ¬A study of search intermediary working notes : implications for IR system design (1996)
0.10
0.10151212 = product of:
0.1353495 = sum of:
0.012739806 = weight(_text_:a in 6981) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012739806 = score(doc=6981,freq=12.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.21843673 = fieldWeight in 6981, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6981)
0.11216935 = weight(_text_:70 in 6981) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11216935 = score(doc=6981,freq=2.0), product of:
0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.41413653 = fieldWeight in 6981, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6981)
0.01044034 = product of:
0.02088068 = sum of:
0.02088068 = weight(_text_:information in 6981) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02088068 = score(doc=6981,freq=6.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 6981, 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=6981)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.75 = coord(3/4)
- Abstract
- Reports findings from an explanatory study investigating working notes created during encoding and external storage (EES) processes, by human search intermediaries using a Boolean information retrieval systems. Analysis of 221 sets of working notes created by human search intermediaries revealed extensive use of EES processes and the creation of working notes of textual, numerical and graphical entities. Nearly 70% of recorded working noted were textual/numerical entities, nearly 30 were graphical entities and 0,73% were indiscernible. Segmentation devices were also used in 48% of the working notes. The creation of working notes during the EES processes was a fundamental element within the mediated, interactive information retrieval process. Discusses implications for the design of interfaces to support users' EES processes and further research
- Source
- Information processing and management. 32(1996) no.6, S.681-695
- Type
- a
-
Wildemuth, B.; Freund, L.; Toms, E.G.: Untangling search task complexity and difficulty in the context of interactive information retrieval studies (2014)
0.10
0.09770939 = product of:
0.13027918 = sum of:
0.003715003 = weight(_text_:a in 1786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003715003 = score(doc=1786,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.06369744 = fieldWeight in 1786, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1786)
0.08012097 = weight(_text_:70 in 1786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08012097 = score(doc=1786,freq=2.0), product of:
0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.29581183 = fieldWeight in 1786, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1786)
0.046443213 = sum of:
0.012177859 = weight(_text_:information in 1786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012177859 = score(doc=1786,freq=4.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 1786, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1786)
0.034265354 = weight(_text_:22 in 1786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034265354 = score(doc=1786,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1786, 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=1786)
0.75 = coord(3/4)
- Abstract
- Purpose - One core element of interactive information retrieval (IIR) experiments is the assignment of search tasks. The purpose of this paper is to provide an analytical review of current practice in developing those search tasks to test, observe or control task complexity and difficulty. Design/methodology/approach - Over 100 prior studies of IIR were examined in terms of how each defined task complexity and/or difficulty (or related concepts) and subsequently interpreted those concepts in the development of the assigned search tasks. Findings - Search task complexity is found to include three dimensions: multiplicity of subtasks or steps, multiplicity of facets, and indeterminability. Search task difficulty is based on an interaction between the search task and the attributes of the searcher or the attributes of the search situation. The paper highlights the anomalies in our use of these two concepts, concluding with suggestions for future methodological research related to search task complexity and difficulty. Originality/value - By analyzing and synthesizing current practices, this paper provides guidance for future experiments in IIR that involve these two constructs.
- Date
- 6. 4.2015 19:31:22
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 70(2014) no.6, S.1118-1140
- Type
- a
-
Bar-Ilan, J.: ¬The Web as an information source on informetrics? : A content analysis (2000)
0.09
0.08746057 = product of:
0.116614096 = sum of:
0.008916007 = weight(_text_:a in 4587) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008916007 = score(doc=4587,freq=8.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 4587, 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=4587)
0.09614516 = weight(_text_:70 in 4587) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09614516 = score(doc=4587,freq=2.0), product of:
0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.35497418 = fieldWeight in 4587, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4587)
0.011552933 = product of:
0.023105865 = sum of:
0.023105865 = weight(_text_:information in 4587) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023105865 = score(doc=4587,freq=10.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 4587, 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=4587)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.75 = coord(3/4)
- Abstract
- This article addresses the question of whether the Web can serve as an information source for research. Specifically, it analyzes by way of content analysis the Web pages retrieved by the major search engines on a particular date (June 7, 1998), as a result of the query 'informetrics OR informetric'. In 807 out of the 942 retrieved pages, the search terms were mentioned in the context of information science. Over 70% of the pages contained only indirect information on the topic, in the form of hypertext links and bibliographical references without annotation. The bibliographical references extracted from the Web pages were analyzed, and lists of most productive authors, most cited authors, works, and sources were compiled. The list of reference obtained from the Web was also compared to data retrieved from commercial databases. For most cases, the list of references extracted from the Web outperformed the commercial, bibliographic databases. The results of these comparisons indicate that valuable, freely available data is hidden in the Web waiting to be extracted from the millions of Web pages
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(2000) no.5, S.432-443
- Type
- a
-
Losada, D.E.; Parapar, J.; Barreiro, A.: When to stop making relevance judgments? : a study of stopping methods for building information retrieval test collections (2019)
0.07
0.074494675 = product of:
0.09932623 = sum of:
0.0117478715 = weight(_text_:a in 4674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0117478715 = score(doc=4674,freq=20.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.20142901 = fieldWeight in 4674, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4674)
0.08012097 = weight(_text_:70 in 4674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08012097 = score(doc=4674,freq=2.0), product of:
0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.29581183 = fieldWeight in 4674, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4674)
0.0074573862 = product of:
0.0149147725 = sum of:
0.0149147725 = weight(_text_:information in 4674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0149147725 = score(doc=4674,freq=6.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 4674, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4674)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.75 = coord(3/4)
- Abstract
- In information retrieval evaluation, pooling is a well-known technique to extract a sample of documents to be assessed for relevance. Given the pooled documents, a number of studies have proposed different prioritization methods to adjudicate documents for judgment. These methods follow different strategies to reduce the assessment effort. However, there is no clear guidance on how many relevance judgments are required for creating a reliable test collection. In this article we investigate and further develop methods to determine when to stop making relevance judgments. We propose a highly diversified set of stopping methods and provide a comprehensive analysis of the usefulness of the resulting test collections. Some of the stopping methods introduced here combine innovative estimates of recall with time series models used in Financial Trading. Experimental results on several representative collections show that some stopping methods can reduce up to 95% of the assessment effort and still produce a robust test collection. We demonstrate that the reduced set of judgments can be reliably employed to compare search systems using disparate effectiveness metrics such as Average Precision, NDCG, P@100, and Rank Biased Precision. With all these measures, the correlations found between full pool rankings and reduced pool rankings is very high.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 70(2019) no.1, S.49-60
- Type
- a
-
Vegt, A. van der; Zuccon, G.; Koopman, B.: Do better search engines really equate to better clinical decisions? : If not, why not? (2021)
0.07
0.07191402 = product of:
0.09588536 = sum of:
0.008307 = weight(_text_:a in 150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008307 = score(doc=150,freq=10.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 150, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=150)
0.08012097 = weight(_text_:70 in 150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08012097 = score(doc=150,freq=2.0), product of:
0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.29581183 = fieldWeight in 150, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=150)
0.0074573862 = product of:
0.0149147725 = sum of:
0.0149147725 = weight(_text_:information in 150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0149147725 = score(doc=150,freq=6.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 150, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=150)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.75 = coord(3/4)
- Abstract
- Previous research has found that improved search engine effectiveness-evaluated using a batch-style approach-does not always translate to significant improvements in user task performance; however, these prior studies focused on simple recall and precision-based search tasks. We investigated the same relationship, but for realistic, complex search tasks required in clinical decision making. One hundred and nine clinicians and final year medical students answered 16 clinical questions. Although the search engine did improve answer accuracy by 20 percentage points, there was no significant difference when participants used a more effective, state-of-the-art search engine. We also found that the search engine effectiveness difference, identified in the lab, was diminished by around 70% when the search engines were used with real users. Despite the aid of the search engine, half of the clinical questions were answered incorrectly. We further identified the relative contribution of search engine effectiveness to the overall end task success. We found that the ability to interpret documents correctly was a much more important factor impacting task success. If these findings are representative, information retrieval research may need to reorient its emphasis towards helping users to better understand information, rather than just finding it for them.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 72(2021) no.2, S.141-155
- Type
- a
-
Ruthven, I.: Relevance behaviour in TREC (2014)
0.07
0.068145804 = product of:
0.090861075 = sum of:
0.0064345747 = weight(_text_:a in 1785) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0064345747 = score(doc=1785,freq=6.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.11032722 = fieldWeight in 1785, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1785)
0.08012097 = weight(_text_:70 in 1785) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08012097 = score(doc=1785,freq=2.0), product of:
0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.29581183 = fieldWeight in 1785, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1785)
0.0043055234 = product of:
0.008611047 = sum of:
0.008611047 = weight(_text_:information in 1785) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008611047 = score(doc=1785,freq=2.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 1785, 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=1785)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.75 = coord(3/4)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine how various types of TREC data can be used to better understand relevance and serve as test-bed for exploring relevance. The author proposes that there are many interesting studies that can be performed on the TREC data collections that are not directly related to evaluating systems but to learning more about human judgements of information and relevance and that these studies can provide useful research questions for other types of investigation. Design/methodology/approach - Through several case studies the author shows how existing data from TREC can be used to learn more about the factors that may affect relevance judgements and interactive search decisions and answer new research questions for exploring relevance. Findings - The paper uncovers factors, such as familiarity, interest and strictness of relevance criteria, that affect the nature of relevance assessments within TREC, contrasting these against findings from user studies of relevance. Research limitations/implications - The research only considers certain uses of TREC data and assessment given by professional relevance assessors but motivates further exploration of the TREC data so that the research community can further exploit the effort involved in the construction of TREC test collections. Originality/value - The paper presents an original viewpoint on relevance investigations and TREC itself by motivating TREC as a source of inspiration on understanding relevance rather than purely as a source of evaluation material.
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 70(2014) no.6, S.1098-1117
- Type
- a
-
Dalrymple, P.W.: Retrieval by reformulation in two library catalogs : toward a cognitive model of searching behavior (1990)
0.07
0.06738229 = product of:
0.13476458 = sum of:
0.014710663 = weight(_text_:a in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014710663 = score(doc=5089,freq=4.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.12005392 = sum of:
0.024110932 = weight(_text_:information in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024110932 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.09594299 = weight(_text_:22 in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09594299 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- 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
-
Wartena, C.; Golub, K.: Evaluierung von Verschlagwortung im Kontext des Information Retrievals (2021)
0.07
0.066106126 = product of:
0.0881415 = sum of:
0.003715003 = weight(_text_:a in 376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003715003 = score(doc=376,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.06369744 = fieldWeight in 376, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=376)
0.08012097 = weight(_text_:70 in 376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08012097 = score(doc=376,freq=2.0), product of:
0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.29581183 = fieldWeight in 376, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=376)
0.0043055234 = product of:
0.008611047 = sum of:
0.008611047 = weight(_text_:information in 376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008611047 = score(doc=376,freq=2.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 376, 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=376)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.75 = coord(3/4)
- Series
- Bibliotheks- und Informationspraxis; 70
- Type
- a
-
Voorhees, E.M.; Harman, D.: Overview of the Sixth Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-6) (2000)
0.07
0.06522796 = product of:
0.13045593 = sum of:
0.010402009 = weight(_text_:a in 6438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010402009 = score(doc=6438,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 6438, 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=6438)
0.12005392 = sum of:
0.024110932 = weight(_text_:information in 6438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024110932 = score(doc=6438,freq=2.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 6438, 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=6438)
0.09594299 = weight(_text_:22 in 6438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09594299 = score(doc=6438,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6438, 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=6438)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Date
- 11. 8.2001 16:22:19
- Source
- Information processing and management. 36(2000) no.1, S.3-36
- Type
- a
-
Saracevic, T.: On a method for studying the structure and nature of requests in information retrieval (1983)
0.05
0.054433934 = product of:
0.10886787 = sum of:
0.010507616 = weight(_text_:a in 2417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010507616 = score(doc=2417,freq=4.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.18016359 = fieldWeight in 2417, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2417)
0.098360255 = sum of:
0.029829545 = weight(_text_:information in 2417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029829545 = score(doc=2417,freq=6.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.3359395 = fieldWeight in 2417, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2417)
0.06853071 = weight(_text_:22 in 2417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06853071 = score(doc=2417,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2417, 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=2417)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Pages
- S.22-25
- Series
- Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science; vol. 20
- Source
- Productivity in the information age : proceedings of the 46th ASIS annual meeting, 1983. Ed.: Raymond F Vondra
- Type
- a
-
Smithson, S.: Information retrieval evaluation in practice : a case study approach (1994)
0.04
0.04124222 = product of:
0.08248444 = sum of:
0.010402009 = weight(_text_:a in 7302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010402009 = score(doc=7302,freq=8.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.07208243 = sum of:
0.024110932 = weight(_text_:information in 7302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024110932 = score(doc=7302,freq=8.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.047971494 = weight(_text_:22 in 7302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047971494 = score(doc=7302,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- 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
-
Losee, R.M.: Determining information retrieval and filtering performance without experimentation (1995)
0.04
0.040240984 = product of:
0.08048197 = sum of:
0.011629799 = weight(_text_:a in 3368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011629799 = score(doc=3368,freq=10.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.06885217 = sum of:
0.02088068 = weight(_text_:information in 3368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02088068 = score(doc=3368,freq=6.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.047971494 = weight(_text_:22 in 3368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047971494 = score(doc=3368,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- 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
-
Sanderson, M.: ¬The Reuters test collection (1996)
0.04
0.040126573 = product of:
0.08025315 = sum of:
0.0059440047 = weight(_text_:a in 6971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0059440047 = score(doc=6971,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.07430914 = sum of:
0.019484574 = weight(_text_:information in 6971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019484574 = score(doc=6971,freq=4.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.054824565 = weight(_text_:22 in 6971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054824565 = score(doc=6971,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- 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
-
Lespinasse, K.: TREC: une conference pour l'evaluation des systemes de recherche d'information (1997)
0.04
0.040126573 = product of:
0.08025315 = sum of:
0.0059440047 = weight(_text_:a in 744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0059440047 = score(doc=744,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.07430914 = sum of:
0.019484574 = weight(_text_:information in 744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019484574 = score(doc=744,freq=4.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.054824565 = weight(_text_:22 in 744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054824565 = score(doc=744,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- 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
-
Dresel, R.; Hörnig, D.; Kaluza, H.; Peter, A.; Roßmann, A.; Sieber, W.: Evaluation deutscher Web-Suchwerkzeuge : Ein vergleichender Retrievaltest (2001)
0.04
0.03944878 = product of:
0.07889756 = sum of:
0.010295319 = weight(_text_:a in 261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010295319 = score(doc=261,freq=6.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 261, 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=261)
0.06860224 = sum of:
0.013777675 = weight(_text_:information in 261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013777675 = score(doc=261,freq=2.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 261, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=261)
0.054824565 = weight(_text_:22 in 261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054824565 = score(doc=261,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 261, 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=261)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Die deutschen Suchmaschinen, Abacho, Acoon, Fireball und Lycos sowie die Web-Kataloge Web.de und Yahoo! werden einem Qualitätstest nach relativem Recall, Precision und Availability unterzogen. Die Methoden der Retrievaltests werden vorgestellt. Im Durchschnitt werden bei einem Cut-Off-Wert von 25 ein Recall von rund 22%, eine Precision von knapp 19% und eine Verfügbarkeit von 24% erreicht
- Source
- nfd Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 52(2001) H.7, S.381-392
- Type
- a
-
Crestani, F.; Rijsbergen, C.J. van: Information retrieval by imaging (1996)
0.04
0.037096344 = product of:
0.07419269 = sum of:
0.0099684 = weight(_text_:a in 6967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0099684 = score(doc=6967,freq=10.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.06422429 = sum of:
0.023105865 = weight(_text_:information in 6967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023105865 = score(doc=6967,freq=10.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.041118424 = weight(_text_:22 in 6967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041118424 = score(doc=6967,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- 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
-
Blagden, J.F.: How much noise in a role-free and link-free co-ordinate indexing system? (1966)
0.04
0.036893763 = product of:
0.073787525 = sum of:
0.013760565 = weight(_text_:a in 2718) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013760565 = score(doc=2718,freq=14.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.23593865 = fieldWeight in 2718, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2718)
0.06002696 = sum of:
0.012055466 = weight(_text_:information in 2718) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012055466 = score(doc=2718,freq=2.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 2718, 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=2718)
0.047971494 = weight(_text_:22 in 2718) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047971494 = score(doc=2718,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2718, 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=2718)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- A study of the number of irrelevant documents retrieved in a co-ordinate indexing system that does not employ eitherr roles or links. These tests were based on one hundred actual inquiries received in the library and therefore an evaluation of recall efficiency is not included. Over half the enquiries produced no noise, but the mean average percentage niose figure was approximately 33 per cent based on a total average retireval figure of eighteen documents per search. Details of the size of the indexed collection, methods of indexing, and an analysis of the reasons for the retrieval of irrelevant documents are discussed, thereby providing information officers who are thinking of installing such a system with some evidence on which to base a decision as to whether or not to utilize these devices
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 22(1966), S.203-209
- Type
- a
-
Hodges, P.R.: Keyword in title indexes : effectiveness of retrieval in computer searches (1983)
0.04
0.036187917 = product of:
0.072375834 = sum of:
0.0073553314 = weight(_text_:a in 5001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0073553314 = score(doc=5001,freq=4.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 5001, 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=5001)
0.0650205 = sum of:
0.017049003 = weight(_text_:information in 5001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017049003 = score(doc=5001,freq=4.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 5001, 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=5001)
0.047971494 = weight(_text_:22 in 5001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047971494 = score(doc=5001,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5001, 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=5001)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- A study was done to test the effectiveness of retrieval using title word searching. It was based on actual search profiles used in the Mechanized Information Center at Ohio State University, in order ro replicate as closely as possible actual searching conditions. Fewer than 50% of the relevant titles were retrieved by keywords in titles. The low rate of retrieval can be attributes to three sources: titles themselves, user and information specialist ignorance of the subject vocabulary in use, and to general language problems. Across fields it was found that the social sciences had the best retrieval rate, with science having the next best, and arts and humanities the lowest. Ways to enhance and supplement keyword in title searching on the computer and in printed indexes are discussed.
- Date
- 14. 3.1996 13:22:21
- Type
- a
-
Blair, D.C.: STAIRS Redux : thoughts on the STAIRS evaluation, ten years after (1996)
0.04
0.035110753 = product of:
0.070221506 = sum of:
0.0052010044 = weight(_text_:a in 3002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0052010044 = score(doc=3002,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.0650205 = sum of:
0.017049003 = weight(_text_:information in 3002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017049003 = score(doc=3002,freq=4.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.047971494 = weight(_text_:22 in 3002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047971494 = score(doc=3002,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = 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)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- 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
