Linguistic analysis of users' queries: Towards an adaptive information retrieval system

Proceedings - International Conference on Signal Image Technologies and Internet Based Systems, SITIS 2007

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 77-84

  Mothe, Josiane ^a,b   Tanguy, Ludovic ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE TOULOUSE   (France)

^b Institut Universitaire de Formation des Maîtres   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEMS; INFORMATION SERVICES; INTERNET; LINGUISTICS; MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS;

ADAPTIVE INFORMATION RETRIEVALS; LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS; LINGUISTIC FEATURES; NATURAL LANGUAGES; SYSTEM VARIANTS; SYSTEMS FAILURES;

INFORMATION RETRIEVAL;

EID: 57849167085     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/SITIS.2007.81     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. Salton, G. (1971). The SMART retrieval system: Experiments in automatic document processing. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.
2. van Rijsbergen, C. J. (1979). Information Retrieval. London: Butterworths.
3. Robertson, S. E., and K. Spark Jones (1976). Relevance weighting of search terms. J. of the American Society for Information Science 27 (3), 129-146.
4. Deerwester, S. et al. (1990), Indexing by latent semantic analysis, J. of the Society for Information Science, 41(6), 391-407.
5. Eckart, C. & Young, G. (1936). The approximation of one matrix by another of lower rank. Psychometrika, Vol. 1, 211-218.
6. Ponte J.M., Croft W.B., (1998). A language modeling approach to information retrieval, 21nd Inter. Conf. on Research an Development in Inf. Retr., 275-281.
7. Mitra M., Buckley C., Singhal A., Cardie C., (1997). An analysis of Statistical and Syntactic Phrases, RIAO, 200-214.
8. Dkaki T., Mothe J., (2004). Combining Positive and Negative Query Feedback in Passage Retrieval, RIAO 2004, Coupling approaches, coupling media and coupling languages for information retrieval, 661-672.
9. Sparck Jones K. (2003): Document Retrieval: Shallow Data, Deep Theories; Historical Reflections, Potential Directions, ECIR 2003, 1-11.
10. Buckley, C. and Harman, D. (2004) Reliable Information Access Final Workshop Report, Jan. 2004.
11. Mandl, T. Womser-Hacker, C. (2002) Linguistic and Statistical Analysis of the CLEF Topics, CLEF Wkp.
12. Mothe, J., Tanguy, L., (2005), Linguistic features to predict query difficulty - A case study on previous TREC campaign. SIGIR workshop on Predicting Query Difficulty - Methods and Applications, pp. 7-10.
13. Carmel D., Yom-Tov E., Darlow A., Pelleg D., (2006) What makes a query difficult?, 29th Inter. Conf. on Research an Development in Inf. Retr., 390-397.
14. Harman D., (2002). Overview of the TREC 2002 novelty track, Text Retrieval Conference, 46-55.
15. Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16. Karlgren, J. (1999). Stylistic Experiments in Information Retrieval, in Natural Language Information Retrieval, Kluwer.
17. Fabre, C. and Bourigault D. (2001). Linguistic clues for corpus-based acquisition of lexical dependencies. Corpus Linguistics, Lancaster, April 2001.
18. J.P. Benzecri, (1973) L'analyse de données, Tome 1 et 2, Dunod Edition.
19. Lee, J.H., (1997). Analysis of multiple evidence combination, 20th Inter. Conf. on Research an Development in Inf. Retr., 267-275.
20. Beitzel S.M., Jensen, E.C., Chowdhury, A. Grossman D., Goharian N. Frieder O. (2004), On Fusion of Effective Retrieval Strategies in the Same Information Retrieval System, J. of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55(10), p 859-868.