A framework for long-term learning of topical user preferences in information retrieval

New Library World

Volumn 105, Issue , 2004, Pages 184-195

  Mandl, Thomas ^a   Womser Hacker, Christa ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HILDESHEIM   (Germany)

Author keywords

Data handling; Information retrieval; Learning methods; Lifelong learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 24944521306     PISSN: 03074803     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/03074800410536612     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Baeza-Yates, R. and Ribeiro-Neto, B. (Eds) (1999), Modern Information Retrieval, ACM Press/Addison-Wesley, New York, NY.
2. Bartell, B., Cottrell, G. and Belew, R. (1994), “ Automatic combination of multiple retrieval systems ”, 17th Annual Intl ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Dublin, Ireland, ACM Press, New York, NY, pp. 173-181.
3. Braschler, M., Harman, D., Hess, M., Kluck, M., Peters, C. and Schäuble, P. (2000), “ The evaluation of systems for cross-language information retrieval ”, paper presented at Second International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC), Athens, Greece, pp. 1469-1474.
4. Buckland, M. et al., (1999), “ Mapping entry vocabulary to unfamiliar metadata vocabularies ”, D-Lib Magazine, Vol. 5 No. 1, available at: www.dlib.org/dlib/january99/buckland/01buckland.html.
5. Crestani, F. (1994), “ Comparing neural and probabilistic relevance feedback in an interactive retrieval system ”, in IEEE Intl Conference on Neural Networks, Orlando, Vol. 5, pp. 3426-3430.
6. Deerwester, S., Dumais, S. and Harshman, R. (1990), “ Indexing by latent semantic analysis ”, Journal of the American Society For Information Science, Vol. 41 No. 6, pp. 391 - 407.
7. Fox, E. and Shaw, J. (1994), “ Combination of multiple searches(TREC-2) ”, in The Second Text Retrieval Conference, NIST Special Publication, pp. 243-252.
8. Frommholz, I. (2001), “ Categorizing Web documents in hierarchical catalogues ”, in Proceedings 23rd Colloquium on Information Retrieval Research, Darmstadt, Germany, available at: www.darmstadt.gmd.de/∼frommhol/frommholz_ecir01.pdf.
9. Fuhr, N. and Buckley, C. (1991), “ A probabilistic learning approach for document indexing ”, ACM Transactions on Information Systems, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 223-248.
10. Hackl, R., Kölle, R., Mandl, T. and Womser-Hacker, C. (2002), “ Domain specific retrieval experiments at the University of Hildesheim with the MIMOR system ”, in Cross Language Evaluation Forum: Results of the CLEF 2002 Evaluation Campaign, Working Notes CLEF-Workshop, Rome, pp. 241-244.
11. Ham, F. and Kostanic, I. (2001), Principles of Neurocomputing for Science & Engineering, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
12. Harman, D. (1992), “ Relevance feedback revisited ”, in 15th Annual Intl ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, ACM Press, New York, NY, pp. 1 - 10.
13. Harman, D. (1992), “ Relevance feedback and other query modification techniques ”, in Frakes, W.B. and Baeza-Yates, R. (Eds), Information Retrieval. Data Structures and Algorithms, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 241-263.
14. Harman, D. (1994), “ Overview of the third text retrieval conference (TREC-3) ”, in, The Third Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-3), NIST Special Publication, pp. 1 - 20.
15. Haykin, S. (1999), Neural Networks: A Comprehensive Foundation, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
16. Ingwersen, P. (1994), “ Polyrepresentation of information needs and semantic entities. Elements of a cognitive theory for information retrieval interaction ”, in 17th Annual Intl ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, ACM Press, New York, NY, pp. 101-110.
17. Iyer, R., Lewis, D., Schapire, R., Singer, Y. and Singhal, A. (2000), “ Boosting for document routing ”, in, Ninth ACM Conf. on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM), ACM Press, New York, NY, pp. 70-77.
18. Joachims, T. (2002), Learning to Classify Text Using Support Vector Machine, Kluwer, Dordrecht.
19. Kluck, M. and Gey, F. (2000), “ The domain-specific task of CLEF – specific evaluation strategies in cross-language information retrieval ”, in Cross-language Information Retrieval and Evaluation, Workshop of the Cross-language Information Evaluation Forum (CLEF 2000), Lisbon, Portugal, pp. 48 - 56.
20. Lam, W. and Ho, C.Y. (1998), “ Using a generalized instance set for automatic text categorization ”, in 21st Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Melbourne, Australia, ACM Press, New York, NY, pp. 81-89.
21. Lee, J.H. (1995), “ Combining multiple evidence from different properties of weighting schemes ”, in, 18th Annual Intl ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Seattle, WA, USA, ACM Press, New York, NY, pp. 180-188.
22. Li, Q. (2002), “Anbindung von DB2 an die Implementierung des Fusionsansatzes MIMOR”, Master thesis, Information Science, University of Hildesheim, Hildesheim.
23. Ludwig, M. and Mandl, T. (1997), “ Ähnlichkeit von Werkstoffen: Die Anwendung unterschiedlicher Wissensmodellierungstechniken für eine intelligente Komponente von WING ”, in Krause, J. and Womser-Hacker, C. (Eds), Vages Information Re-trie-val und graphische Benutzungsoberflächen. Beispiel Werkstoff-information, Universitätsverlag, Konstanz, pp. 169-184.
24. McCabe, M.C., Chowdhury, A., Grossmann, D. and Frieder, O. (1999), “ A unified framework for fusion of information retrieval approaches ”, paper presented at Eighth ACM Conf. on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM), Kansas City, USA, pp. 330-334.
25. Mandl, T. (2000), “ Tolerant information retrieval with backpropagation networks ”, Neural Computing & Applications, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 280-289.
26. Mandl, T. and Womser-Hacker, C. (2000), “ Ein adaptives Information Retrieval Modell für Digitale Bibliotheken ”, in Informationskompetenz - Basiskompetenz in der Informations–gesellschaft, Proceedings 7. Intl. Symposium für Infor-mations-wissen-schaft (ISI 2000), pp. 1 - 16.
27. Mandl, T. and Womser-Hacker, C. (2001), “ Fusion approaches for mappings between heterogeneous ontologies ”, paper presented at 5th European Conference on Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries (ECDL), Darmstadt, Germany, pp. 83 - 94.
28. Mandl, T. and Womser-Hacker, C. (2001), “ Probability based clustering for document and user properties ”, paper presented at Infotech Oulo International Workshop on Information Retrieval (IR 2001), Oulo, Finland, pp. 100-107.
29. Mandl, T. and Womser-Hacker, C. (2003), “ Linguistic and statistical analysis of CLEF topics ”, in Peters, C., Braschler, M., Gonzalo, J. and Cluck, M. (Eds), Advances in Cross-language Information Retrieval: Third Workshop of the Cross-language Evaluation Forum, CLEF 2002, Rome, Italy, September 2002, (Lecture notes in computer science 2785), Springer, Berlin, pp. 505-511.
30. Naftaly, U., Intrator, N. and Horn, D. (1997), “ Optimal ensemble averaging of neural networks ”, Comput. Neural. Syst., Vol. 8, pp. 283-296.
31. Peters, C. (2002), “Cross-language evaluation forum CLEF 2002”, Working Notes. CLEF Workshop, Rome.
32. Savoy, J. and Rasolofo, Y. (2000), “ Report on the TREC-9 experiment: link-based retrieval and distributed collections ”, paper presented at The Ninth Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-9), pp. 579-588.
33. Tversky, A. (1977), “ Features of similarity ”, Psychological Review, Vol. 84 No. 4, pp. 327-351.
34. Vogt, C. and Cottrell, G. (1998), “ Predicting the performance of linearly combined IR systems ”, in 21st Annual Intl ACM SIGIR Conf. on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Melbourne, Australia, ACM Press, New York, NY, pp. 190-196.
35. Voorhees, E. (2000), “ Variations in relevance judgments and the measurement of retrieval effectiveness ”, 21st Information Processing and Management, No. 36, pp. 679 - 716.
36. Voorhees, E. and Harman, D. (1997), “ Overview of the sixth text retrieval conference (TREC-6) ”, paper presented at The Sixth Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-6), pp. 1 - 24.
37. Voorhees, E. and Harman, D. (1999), The Eighth Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-8), NIST Special Publication, available at: http://trec.nist.gov/pubs/trec8/t8_proceedings.htm.
38. Voorhees, E. and Harman, D. (2001), The Tenth Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-10), NIST Special Publication, available at: http://trec.nist.gov/pubs/trec10/t10_proceedings.htm.
39. Voorhees, E., Gupta, N. and Johnson-Laird, B. (1995), “ Learning collection fusion strategies ”, in 18th Annual Intl ACM SIGIR Conf. on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Seattle, WA, USA, ACM Press, New York, NY, pp. 172-179.
40. Womser-Hacker, C. (1997), “Das MIMOR-Modell. Mehrfachindexierung zur dynamischen Methoden-Objekt-Relationierung im Information Retrieval”, Habilitation thesis, University of Regensburg, Regensburg.
41. Yang, Y. (1995), “ Noise reduction in a statistical approach to text categorization ”, in, 18th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR 95), ACM Press, Seattle, USA, pp. 256-263.
42. Yang, Y. and Liu, X. (1999), “ A re-examination of text categorization methods ”, paper presented at 22nd Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Berkeley, USA, pp. 42-49.
43. Yasdi, R. (2000), “ A literature survey on applications of neural networks for human-computer interaction ”, Neural Computing & Applications, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 245-258.
44. Zimmermann, H.J. (1991), Fuzzy Set Theory and its Applications, Kluwer, Dordrecht.
45. Kluck, M., Mandl, T. and Womser-Hacker, C. (2002), “ Cross-language evaluation forum (CLEF): Europäische Initiative zur Bewertung sprachübergreifender Retrievalverfahren ”, nfd Information – Wissenschaft und Praxis, Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 82-89.