Segmentation of search engine results for effective data-fusion

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 4425 LNCS, Issue , 2007, Pages 185-197

  Shokouhi, Milad ^a  

^a RMIT UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

APPROXIMATION THEORY; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEMS; METADATA; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; PROBABILITY; SEARCH ENGINES;

ESTIMATED PROBABILITIES; METASEARCH; RANK LISTS; SEARCH SYSTEMS;

DATA FUSION;

EID: 37149037779     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-71496-5_19     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (28)

1. J. Aslam and M. Montague, Bayes optimal metasearch: a probabilistic model for combining the results of multiple retrieval systems (poster session). In Proc. ACM SIGIR conf., pages 379 381, Athens, Greece, 2000.
2. J. Aslam and M. Montague. Models for metasearch. In Proc. ACM SIGIR conf., pages 276-284, New Orleans, Louisiana, 2001.
3. Z. Bar-Yossef and M. Gurevich. Random sampling from a search engine's index. In Proc. 15th Int. Conf. on the World Wide Web, Edinburgh, Scotland, 2006.
4. C. Buckley and E. Voorhees. Retrieval evaluation with incomplete information. In Proc. ACM SIGIR conf, pages 25-32, Sheffield, UK, 2004.
5. J. Callan. Distributed information retrieval. Advances in information retrieval, chapter 5, pages 127-150, 2000.
6. A. Calvé and J. Savoy. Database merging strategy based on logistic regression. Information Processing and Management, 36(3):341-359, 2000.
7. B. Croft. Combining approaches to information retrieval. Advances in information retrieval, chapter 1, pages 1-36, 2000.
8. D. Dreilinger and A. Howe. Experiences with selecting search engines using metasearch. ACM Transaction on Information Systems, 15(3):195-222, 1997.
9. C. Dwork, R. Kumar, M. Naor, and D. Sivakumar. Rank aggregation methods for the Web. In Proc. the 10th Int. conf. on World Wide Web, pages 613-622, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, 2001.
10. E. Fox and J. Shaw. Combination of multiple searches. In Proc. the second Text REtrievalConf.,pages 243-252, Gaithersburg, Maryland, 1993. NIST Special Publication.
11. E. Fox and J. Shaw. Combination of multiple searches. In Proc. the Third Text REtrieval Conf., pages 105-108, Gaithersburg, Maryland, 1994. NIST Special Publication.
12. D. Harinan. Overview of the third Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-3). In Proc. the third Text REtrieval Conf., pages 1-19, NIST, 1994.
13. T. Joachims, L. Granka, B. Pan, H. Hembrooke, and G. Gay. Accurately interpreting clickthrough data as implicit feedback. In Proc. ACM SIGIR conf., pages 154-161, Salvador, Brazil, 2005.
14. J. Lee. Analyses of multiple evidence combination. In Proc. the 20th ACM SIGIR conf, pages 267-276, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1997.
15. D. Lillis, F. Toolan, R. Collier, and J. Dunnion. ProbFuse: a probabilistic approach to data fusion. In Proc. ACM SIGIR conf., pages 139-146, Seattle, Washington, 2006.
16. R. Manmatha, T. Rath, and F. Feng. Modeling score distributions for combining the outputs of search engines. In Proc. ACM SIGIR conf., pages 267-275, New Orleans, Louisiana, 2001.
17. W. Meng, C. Yu, and K. Liu. Building efficient and effective metasearch engines. ACM Computing Surveys, 34(1):48-89, 2002.
18. Y. Rasolofo, D. Hawking, and J. Savoy. Result merging strategies for a current news metasearcher. Information Processing and Management, 39(4):581-609, 2003.
19. J. Savoy, A. Calvć, and D. Vrajitoru. Information retrieval systems for large document collections. In Proc. the Fifth Text REtrieval Conf., pages 489-502, Gaithersburg, Maryland, 1996.
20. E. Selberg and O. Etzioni. The MetaCrawler architecture for resource aggregation on the web. IEEE Expert, 12(1):8-14, 1997.
21. L. Si and J. Callan. A semisupervised learning method to merge search engine results. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 21(4):457-491, 2003.
22. A. Spink, B. Jansen, C. Blakely, and S. Koshman. A study of results overlap and uniqueness among major web search engines. Information Processing and Management, 42(5):1379-1391, 2006.
23. C. Vogt. How much more is better? characterizing the effects of adding more ir systems to a combination. In Content-Based Multimedia Information Access (RIAO), pages 457-475, Paris, France, 2000.
24. C. Vogt. Adaptive combination of evidence for information retrieval. PhD thesis, University of California, San Diego, 1999.
25. C. Vogt and G. Cottrell. Fusion via a linear combination of scores. Information Retrieval, 1(3):151-173, 1999.
26. E. Voorhees and D. Harman. Overview of the third Text REtrieval Conference (TREC5). In Proc. the fifth Text Retrieval Conf., pages 1-28, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 1996.
27. E. Voorhees, K. Gupta, and B. Johnson-Larid. The collection fusion problem. In Proc. the Third Text REtrieval Conf. (TREC-S), pages 95-104, 1994.
28. E. Voorhees, N. Gupta, and B. Johnson-Laird. Learning collection fusion strategies. In Proc. ACM SIGIR conf, pages 172-179, Seattle, Washington, 1995.