-
Jascó, P.: Savvy searching (2000)
0.06
0.06495745 = product of:
0.1299149 = sum of:
0.1299149 = product of:
0.2598298 = sum of:
0.2598298 = weight(_text_:90 in 4881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.2598298 = score(doc=4881,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.9503726 = fieldWeight in 4881, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4881)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Online information review. 24(2000) no.1, S.90-93
-
Li, L.; Shang, Y.; Zhang, W.: Improvement of HITS-based algorithms on Web documents
0.04
0.04038491 = product of:
0.08076982 = sum of:
0.08076982 = product of:
0.24230945 = sum of:
0.24230945 = weight(_text_:3a in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.24230945 = score(doc=2514,freq=2.0), product of:
0.43114176 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fdelab.csd.auth.gr%2F~dimitris%2Fcourses%2Fir_spring06%2Fpage_rank_computing%2Fp527-li.pdf. Vgl. auch: http://www2002.org/CDROM/refereed/643/.
-
Mejer, J.J.; Conkling, T.W.: Google Scholar's coverage of the engineering literature : an empirical study (2008)
0.03
0.032478724 = product of:
0.06495745 = sum of:
0.06495745 = product of:
0.1299149 = sum of:
0.1299149 = weight(_text_:90 in 3226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1299149 = score(doc=3226,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.4751863 = fieldWeight in 3226, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3226)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Google Scholar's coverage of the engineering literature is analyzed by comparing its contents with those of Compendex, the premier engineering database. Records retrieved from Compendex were searched in Google Scholar, and a decade by decade comparison was done from the 1950s through 2007. The results show that the percentage of records appearing in Google Scholar increased over time, approaching a 90 percent matching rate for materials published after 1990.
-
Kopp, O.: Google Hummingbird-Algorithmus-Update : Infos & Hintergründe (2013)
0.03
0.028418882 = product of:
0.056837764 = sum of:
0.056837764 = product of:
0.11367553 = sum of:
0.11367553 = weight(_text_:90 in 2522) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11367553 = score(doc=2522,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.415788 = fieldWeight in 2522, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2522)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Pünktlich zum 15. Geburtstag der Google Suche verkündete Google gestern auf einer Pressekonferenz in der "Gründungs-Garage", dass das bedeutendste Google Update seit dem Caffeine Update im Jahr 2010 und größte Algorithmus-Update seit 2001 schon seit ca. einem Monat aktiv ist. Das aktuelle Update heißt Hummingbird zu deutsch Kollibri. Es soll ca. 90% aller Suchanfragen betreffen und soll im Vergleich zu Caffeine ein echtes Algorithmus-Update sein. Es soll dabei helfen komplexere Suchanfragen besser zu deuten und noch besser die eigentliche Suchintention bzw. Fragestellung hinter einer Suchanfrage zu erkennen sowie passende Dokumente dazu anzubieten. Auch auf Dokumentenebene soll die eigentliche Intention hinter dem Content besser mit der Suchanfrage gematcht werden.
-
MacLeod, R.: Promoting a subject gateway : a case study from EEVL (Edinburgh Engineering Virtual Library) (2000)
0.02
0.024359938 = product of:
0.048719876 = sum of:
0.048719876 = product of:
0.09743975 = sum of:
0.09743975 = weight(_text_:22 in 4872) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09743975 = score(doc=4872,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 4872, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4872)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 6.2002 19:40:22
-
Vidinli, I.B.; Ozcan, R.: New query suggestion framework and algorithms : a case study for an educational search engine (2016)
0.02
0.02435904 = product of:
0.04871808 = sum of:
0.04871808 = product of:
0.09743616 = sum of:
0.09743616 = weight(_text_:90 in 3185) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09743616 = score(doc=3185,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.3563897 = fieldWeight in 3185, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3185)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Query suggestion is generally an integrated part of web search engines. In this study, we first redefine and reduce the query suggestion problem as "comparison of queries". We then propose a general modular framework for query suggestion algorithm development. We also develop new query suggestion algorithms which are used in our proposed framework, exploiting query, session and user features. As a case study, we use query logs of a real educational search engine that targets K-12 students in Turkey. We also exploit educational features (course, grade) in our query suggestion algorithms. We test our framework and algorithms over a set of queries by an experiment and demonstrate a 66-90% statistically significant increase in relevance of query suggestions compared to a baseline method.
-
Vidmar, D.J.: Darwin on the Web : the evolution of search tools (1999)
0.02
0.024115108 = product of:
0.048230216 = sum of:
0.048230216 = product of:
0.09646043 = sum of:
0.09646043 = weight(_text_:22 in 3175) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09646043 = score(doc=3175,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3175, 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=3175)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Computers in libraries. 19(1999) no.5, S.22-28
-
Back, J.: ¬An evaluation of relevancy ranking techniques used by Internet search engines (2000)
0.02
0.024115108 = product of:
0.048230216 = sum of:
0.048230216 = product of:
0.09646043 = sum of:
0.09646043 = weight(_text_:22 in 3445) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09646043 = score(doc=3445,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3445, 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=3445)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 25. 8.2005 17:42:22
-
Dunning, A.: Do we still need search engines? (1999)
0.02
0.024115108 = product of:
0.048230216 = sum of:
0.048230216 = product of:
0.09646043 = sum of:
0.09646043 = weight(_text_:22 in 6021) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09646043 = score(doc=6021,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6021, 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=6021)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Ariadne. 1999, no.22
-
Bawden, D.: Google and the universe of knowledge (2008)
0.02
0.024115108 = product of:
0.048230216 = sum of:
0.048230216 = product of:
0.09646043 = sum of:
0.09646043 = weight(_text_:22 in 844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09646043 = score(doc=844,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 844, 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=844)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 7. 6.2008 16:22:20
-
Birmingham, J.: Internet search engines (1996)
0.02
0.020670092 = product of:
0.041340183 = sum of:
0.041340183 = product of:
0.08268037 = sum of:
0.08268037 = weight(_text_:22 in 5664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08268037 = score(doc=5664,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 5664, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5664)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 10.11.1996 16:36:22
-
Watters, C.; Amoudi, A.: Geosearcher : location-based ranking of search engine results (2003)
0.02
0.020299202 = product of:
0.040598404 = sum of:
0.040598404 = product of:
0.08119681 = sum of:
0.08119681 = weight(_text_:90 in 5152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08119681 = score(doc=5152,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.29699144 = fieldWeight in 5152, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5152)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Waters and Amoudi describe GeoSearcher, a prototype ranking program that arranges search engine results along a geo-spatial dimension without the provision of geo-spatial meta-tags or the use of geo-spatial feature extraction. GeoSearcher uses URL analysis, IptoLL, Whois, and the Getty Thesaurus of Geographic Names to determine site location. It accepts the first 200 sites returned by a search engine, identifies the coordinates, calculates their distance from a reference point and ranks in ascending order by this value. For any retrieved site the system checks if it has already been located in the current session, then sends the domain name to Whois to generate a return of a two letter country code and an area code. With no success the name is stripped one level and resent. If this fails the top level domain is tested for being a country code. Any remaining unmatched names go to IptoLL. Distance is calculated using the center point of the geographic area and a provided reference location. A test run on a set of 100 URLs from a search was successful in locating 90 sites. Eighty three pages could be manually found and 68 had sufficient information to verify location determination. Of these 65 ( 95%) had been assigned reasonably correct geographic locations. A random set of URLs used instead of a search result, yielded 80% success.
-
Radev, D.R.; Libner, K.; Fan, W.: Getting answers to natural language questions on the Web (2002)
0.02
0.020299202 = product of:
0.040598404 = sum of:
0.040598404 = product of:
0.08119681 = sum of:
0.08119681 = weight(_text_:90 in 5204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08119681 = score(doc=5204,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.29699144 = fieldWeight in 5204, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5204)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Seven hundred natural language questions from TREC-8 and TREC-9 were sent by Radev, Libner, and Fan to each of nine web search engines. The top 40 sites returned by each system were stored for evaluation of their productivity of correct answers. Each question per engine was scored as the sum of the reciprocal ranks of identified correct answers. The large number of zero scores gave a positive skew violating the normality assumption for ANOVA, so values were transformed to zero for no hit and one for one or more hits. The non-zero values were then square-root transformed to remove the remaining positive skew. Interactions were observed between search engine and answer type (name, place, date, et cetera), search engine and number of proper nouns in the query, search engine and the need for time limitation, and search engine and total query words. All effects were significant. Shortest queries had the highest mean scores. One or more proper nouns present provides a significant advantage. Non-time dependent queries have an advantage. Place, name, person, and text description had mean scores between .85 and .9 with date at .81 and number at .59. There were significant differences in score by search engine. Search engines found at least one correct answer in between 87.7 and 75.45 of the cases. Google and Northern Light were just short of a 90% hit rate. No evidence indicated that a particular engine was better at answering any particular sort of question.
-
Lewandowski, D.: ¬The retrieval effectiveness of search engines on navigational queries (2011)
0.02
0.020299202 = product of:
0.040598404 = sum of:
0.040598404 = product of:
0.08119681 = sum of:
0.08119681 = weight(_text_:90 in 4537) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08119681 = score(doc=4537,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.29699144 = fieldWeight in 4537, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4537)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to test major web search engines on their performance on navigational queries, i.e. searches for homepages. Design/methodology/approach - In total, 100 user queries are posed to six search engines (Google, Yahoo!, MSN, Ask, Seekport, and Exalead). Users described the desired pages, and the results position of these was recorded. Measured success and mean reciprocal rank are calculated. Findings - The performance of the major search engines Google, Yahoo!, and MSN was found to be the best, with around 90 per cent of queries answered correctly. Ask and Exalead performed worse but received good scores as well. Research limitations/implications - All queries were in German, and the German-language interfaces of the search engines were used. Therefore, the results are only valid for German queries. Practical implications - When designing a search engine to compete with the major search engines, care should be taken on the performance on navigational queries. Users can be influenced easily in their quality ratings of search engines based on this performance. Originality/value - This study systematically compares the major search engines on navigational queries and compares the findings with studies on the retrieval effectiveness of the engines on informational queries.
-
Hock, R.E.: How to do field searching in Web search engines : a field trip (1998)
0.02
0.019487951 = product of:
0.038975902 = sum of:
0.038975902 = product of:
0.077951804 = sum of:
0.077951804 = weight(_text_:22 in 3601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.077951804 = score(doc=3601,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 3601, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3601)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Online. 22(1998) no.3, S.18-22
-
Price, A.: Five new Danish subject gateways under development (2000)
0.02
0.017225077 = product of:
0.034450155 = sum of:
0.034450155 = product of:
0.06890031 = sum of:
0.06890031 = weight(_text_:22 in 4878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06890031 = score(doc=4878,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4878, 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=4878)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 6.2002 19:41:31
-
Conhaim, W.W.: Search tools (1996)
0.01
0.013780061 = product of:
0.027560122 = sum of:
0.027560122 = product of:
0.055120245 = sum of:
0.055120245 = weight(_text_:22 in 4738) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055120245 = score(doc=4738,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4738, 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=4738)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:39:31
-
Fong, W.W.: Searching the World Wide Web (1996)
0.01
0.013780061 = product of:
0.027560122 = sum of:
0.027560122 = product of:
0.055120245 = sum of:
0.055120245 = weight(_text_:22 in 6597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055120245 = score(doc=6597,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6597, 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=6597)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Journal of library and information science. 22(1996) no.1, S.15-36
-
Duval, B.K.; Main, L.: Searching on the Net : general overview (1996)
0.01
0.013780061 = product of:
0.027560122 = sum of:
0.027560122 = product of:
0.055120245 = sum of:
0.055120245 = weight(_text_:22 in 7268) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055120245 = score(doc=7268,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7268, 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=7268)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 6. 3.1997 16:22:15
-
Notess, G.R.: Toward more comprehensive Web searching : single searching versus megasearching (1998)
0.01
0.013780061 = product of:
0.027560122 = sum of:
0.027560122 = product of:
0.055120245 = sum of:
0.055120245 = weight(_text_:22 in 3278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055120245 = score(doc=3278,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050854117 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3278, 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=3278)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Online. 22(1998) no.2, S.73-76
