Restricted inflectional form generation in management of morphological keyword variation

Information Retrieval

Volumn 10, Issue 4-5, 2007, Pages 415-444

  Kettunen, Kimmo ^a   Airio, Eija ^a   Järvelin, Kalervo ^a  

^a TAMPERE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Finland)

Author keywords

Best match IR; Frequent case form generation for keywords; Generative methods in management of keyword variation; Inflected indexes

Indexed keywords

EID: 34848862826     PISSN: 13864564     EISSN: 15737659     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10791-007-9030-z     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Ahlgren, P. (2004). The effects of indexing strategy-query term combination on retrieval effectiveness in a Swedish full text database. Department of Library and Information Science/Swedish School of Library and Information Science. University college of Borås/Göteborg University.
2. Ahlgren, P., & Kekäläinen, J. (2007). Indexing strategies for Swedish full, text retrieval under different user scenarios. Information Processing and Management, 43, 81-102.
3. Airio, E. (2006). Word Normalization and decompounding in mono- and bilingual IR. Information Retrieval, 9, 249-271.
4. Baayen, R. H. (1993). Statistical Models for Word Frequency Distribution. Computers and the Humanities, 26, 347-363.
5. Baayen, R. H. (2001). Word frequency distributions. Dordrecht Boston London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
6. Bacchin, M., Ferro, N., & Melucci, M. (2004). A. probabilistic model for stemmer generation. Information Processing and Management, 41(1), 121-137.
7. Baeza-Yates, R., & Ribeiro-Neto, B. (1999). Modern information retrieval. USA: Addison Wesley.
8. Bar-Ilan, J., & Gutman, T. (2005). How do search engines respond to some non-English queries? Journal of Information Science, 31, 13-28.
9. Beard, R. (1996). An interactive on-line Russian reference grammar, http://www.alp.hadictionary.com/rus-grammar/ (visited September 25th, 2006).
10. Braschler, M., & Ripplinger, B. (2004). How effective is stemming and decompounding for German text retrieval? Information Retrieval, 7, 291-316.
11. Broglio, J., Callan, J., & Croft, W. B. (1994). INQUERY System Overview. In Proceedings of the TIPSTER text program (Phase I). San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
12. Canoonet. Free Online German language resources, www.canoo.net (visited August 2006).
13. Comrie, B. (1990). Russian. In B. Comrie (Ed.), The World's Major Languages (pp. 329-347). New York: Oxford University Press.
14. Conover, W. J. (1980). Practical nonparametric statistics (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
15. Deutsche Deklination, http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Deklination (visited June 8th, 2006).
16. Di Nunzio, G. M., Ferro, N., Melucci, M., & Orio, N. (2004). Experiments to evaluate probabilistic models for automatic stemmer generation and query word translation. In C. Peters, et al. (Ed.), Comparative evaluation of multilingual information access systems, LNCS #3237 (pp. 220-235). Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
17. Galvez, C., & de Moya-Anegón, F. (2006). An evaluation of conflation accuracy using finite-state transducers. Journal of Documentation, 62, 328-349.
18. Galvez, C., de Moya-Anegón, F., & Solana, V. H. (2005). Term conflation methods in information retrieval. Non-linguistic and linguistic approaches. Journal of Documentation, 61, 520-547.
19. Gelbukh, A., & Sidorov, G. (2003). Approach to construction of automatic morphological, analysis systems for inflective languages with little effort. In Computational linguistics and intelligent text processing (CICLing-2003, Mexico City) (pp. 215-220). Lecture Notes in Computer Science No. 2588, Springer-Verlag.
20. Gey, F. (2004). Searching a Russian document collection using english, Chinese and Japanese queries. Working Notes for the CLEF 2004 Workshop, 15-17 September, Bath, UK. http://clef.isti.cnr.it/2004/working_notes/ WorkingNotes2004/20a.pdf (visited October 10th, 2006).
21. Gey, F. (2005). Domain-specific Russian retrieval: A baseline approach. Working notes for the CLEF 2005 Workshop, 21-23 September, Vienna, Austria, http://www.clef-campaign.org/2005/working_notes/workingnotes2005/gey05.pdf (visited October 10th, 2006).
22. Grefenstette, G., & Nioche, J. (2000). Estimation of english and non-english language use on the Web. http://arxiv.org/ftp/cs/papers/0006/ 0006032.pdf (visited 28th October, 2006).
23. Grossman, D. A., & Frieder, O. (2004). Information retrieval. Algorithms and heuristics (2nd ed.). Netherlands: Springer.
24. Helbig, G., & Buscha, J. (1981). Deutsche Grammatik. 7. unveränderte Auflage. VEB Verlag Enzyklopädie, Leipzig.
25. Hedlund, T., Pirkola, A., & Järvelin, K. (2001). Aspects of Swedish morphology and semantics from the perspective of mono- and cross-language information retrieval. Information Processing and Management, 37, 147-161.
26. Hollink, V., Kamps, J., Monz, C., & de Rijke, M. (2004). Monolingual document retrieval, for European languages. Information Retrieval, 7, 33-52.
27. Hull, D (1993) Using statistical testing in the evaluation of retrieval experiments. In Proceedings of the 16th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 329-338). New York: ACM.
28. Jansen, B., & Spink, A. (2005). An analysis of Web searching by European Alltheweb.com. users. Information Processing and Management, 41, 361-381.
29. Jansen, B., Spink, A., & Sarasevic, T. (2000). Real life, real users, and real needs: a study and analysis of user queries on the web. Information Processing & Management, 36, 207-227.
30. Jacquemin, C., & Tzoukerman, E. (1999). NLP for term variant extraction: synergy between morphology, lexicon, and syntax. In T. Strzralkowski (Ed.), Natural language information retrieval (pp. 25-74). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
31. Karlsson, F. (1986). Frequency considerations in morphology. Zeitsschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung, 39, 19-28.
32. Karlsson, F. (2000). Defectivity. In G. Booij, et al. (Ed.), Morphology. An International Handbook on Inflection and Word-Formation (Vol, 1. pp. 647-654). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
33. Kekäläinen, J. (1999). The effects of query complexity, expansion and structure on retrieval performance in probabilistic text retrieval, Acta Universitatis Tamperensis 678.
34. Kettunen, K. (2006). Developing and automatic linguistic truncation operator for best-match retrieval of Finnish in inflected word form text database indexes. Journal of Information Science, 32, 465-479.
35. Kettunen, K., & Airio, E. (2006). Is a morphologically complex language really that complex in full-text retrieval? In Salakoski, T., et al. (Ed.), Advances in natural language processing, LNAI 4139 (pp. 411-422). Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
36. Kettunen, K., Kunttu, T., & Järvelin, K. (2005). To stem or lemmatize a highly inflectional language in a probabilistic IR environment? Journal of Documentation, 61, 476-496.
37. Kettunen, K, Sadeniemi, M, Lindh-Knuutila, T and Honkela, T (2006) Analysis of EU Languages through Text Compression. In Salakoski T et al. (Ed.), Advances in natural language processing, LNAI 4139 (pp. 99-109) Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
38. Koskenniemi, K. (1996). Finite state morphology and information retrieval, Natural Language Engineering, 2, 331-336.
39. Kostić, A., Marković, T., & Baucal, A. (2003). Inflectional, morphology and word meaning: Orthogonal or co-implicative cognitive domains. In R. H. Baayen, & R. Schreuder (Eds.), Morphological, structure in language processing. Trends in linguistics, studies and monographs 151 (pp. 1-43). Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin.
40. Koval, S., Beliaeva, L., Kogan, L., Mikhailov, A., Nikolaev, V., Piotrowski, R., & Tovmach, Yu. (2000). Morphological representation in PC-based text processing systems. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 15, 131-155.
41. Kraaij, W. (2004) Variations on language modeling for information retrieval. Haag: CTIT Ph. D. series No. 04-62.
42. Lemur. The Lemur Toolkit for Language Modeling and Information Retrieval, http://www.lemurproject.org/ (visited September 10th, 2006).
43. Lexin. Svensk-finskt lexicon, http://www.lexikon.nada.kth.se/sve-fin. shtml (visited in August 2006).
44. Manning, C. D., & Schütze, H. (1999). Foundations of statistical natural language processing. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
45. Mayfield, J., & McNamee, P. (2003). Single N-gram stemming. In Proceedings of Sigir2003, The twentysixth annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval, pp. 415-416.
46. Metzler, D., & Croft, W. B. (2004). Combining the Language Model, and Inference Network Approaches to Retrieval, Information Processing and Management Special Issue on Bayesian Networks and Information Retrieval, 40, 735-750.
47. Multitran, http://www.multitran.ru/ (visited in September 2006).
48. Peters, C. (2003). Introduction to the CLEF 2003 Working Notes, http://www.clef-campaign.org/2003/WN_web/00.2%20-%20intro.pdf (visited September 1st, 2005).
49. Peters, C (2004) What happened in CLEF 2004? Introduction to the working notes, http://clef.isti.cnr.it/2004/working_notes/WorkingNotes2004/ CLEF2004WN%20-%20intro.pdf (visited October 20th, 2006).
50. Petrasi, V., Perelman, N., & Gey, F. (2003). UC Berkeley at CLEF 2003-Russian Language Experiments and Domain-Specific Cross-Language Retrieval. Working Notes for the CLEF 2003 Workshop 21-22 August, Trondheim, Norway. http://clef.isti.cnr.it/2003/WN_web/29a.pdf (visited October 10th, 2006).
51. Popovič, M., & Willett, P. (1992). The effectiveness of stemming for natural-language access to slovene textual data. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43, 384-390.
52. Rasmussen, E. M. (2003). Indexing and retrieval for the web. In B. Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 37, pp. 91-124). Medford, NJ: Information Today, Inc.
53. Russian National Corpus. E-mailed information about noun and adjective distributions, September 1st, 2006. Corpus info available at http://www.ruscorpora.ru/ (in Russian).
54. Search Engine Showdown. Search Engine Features Chart (Last updated Sep. 17, 2006), http://www.searchengineshowdown.com/features/ (visited October 28th, 2006).
55. Siegel, S., & Castellan, N. J. Jr. (1988). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
56. Snowball web page, http://snowball.tartarus.org/ (visited October 20th, 2006).
57. Sormunen, E. (2000). A method for measuring wide range performance of boolean queries in full-text databases. Tampere: University of Tampere, Doctoral Thesis. Acta Electronica Universitatis Tamperensis. http://acta.uta.fi/pdf/951-44-4732-8.pdf (visited August 15, 2006).
58. SWETWOL, http://www2.lingsoft.fi/cgi-bin/swetwol (visited August 2006).
59. Tiger corpus, http://www.ims.uni-stuttgart.de/projekte/TIGER/TIGERCorpus/ (visited June 7th, 2006).
60. Tomlinson, S. (2004a) Lexical and algorithmic stemming compared for 9 European languages with Humminbird SearchServer™ at CLEF 2003. In Comparative evaluation of multilingual information access systems (pp. 286-300). Springer-Verlag, LNCS #3237.
61. Tomlinson, S (2004b) Finnish, Portuguese and Russian Retrieval with Hummingbird SearchServerTM at CLEF 2004. Working Notes for the CLEF 2004 Workshop, 15-17 September, Bath, UK. http://clef.isti.cnr.it/2004/working_notes/ WorkingNotes2004/21.pdf. (visited October 10th, 2006).
62. Tordai, A and de Rijke, M (2005) Hungarian Monolingual Retrieval at CLEF 2005. Working Notes for the CLEF 2005 Workshop, 21-23 September, Vienna, Austria, http://www.clef-campaign.org/2005/working_notes/workingnotes2005/ tordai05.pdf (visited September 6th, 2006).
63. Xu, J., & Croft, B. (1998). Corpus-based stemming using cooccurrence of word variants. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 16(1), 61-81.