Data fusion according to the principle of polyrepresentation

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 60, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 646-654

  Larsen, Birger ^a   Ingwersen, Peter ^a   Lund, Berit ^b  

^a ROYAL SCHOOL OF LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE   (Denmark)

^b Skills Creator ^*  (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CUT-OFF VALUES; DATA FUSION METHODS; FUSION EXPERIMENTS; FUSION METHODS; INDIVIDUAL MODELS; IR MODELS; LOGICAL DATUM; PRECISION AND RECALLS; RELEVANT DOCUMENTS; RETRIEVAL MODELS; RETRIEVAL PERFORMANCE; SCORING METHODS;

EXPERIMENTS; INFORMATION FUSION; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; INFORMATION SERVICES; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS;

DATA FUSION;

EID: 63849165440     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: 15322890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.21028     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Aslam, J.A., & Montague, M. (2001). Models for metasearch. In D.H. Kraft, W.B. Croft, D.J. Harper, & J. Zobel (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR 2001) (pp. 276-284). New York: ACM.
2. Aslam, J.A., & Montague, M. (2002). Condorcet fusion for improved retrieval. In C. Nicholas, D. Grossman, K. Kalpakis, S. Qureshi, H. van Dissel, & L. Seligman (Eds.). Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM 2002) (pp. 538-548). New York: ACM.
3. Baillie, M., Azzopardi, L., & Ruthven, I. (2008). Evaluating epistemic uncertainty under incomplete assessments. Information Processing & Management, 44(2), 811-837.
4. Ballerini, J.-P., Buchel, M., Domenig, R., Knaus, D., Mateev, B., Mittendorf, E., Schauble, P., & Wechsler, M. (1997). SPIDER retrieval system at TREC-5. In E.M. Vorhees & D.K. Harman (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th TREC Retrieval Conference (TREC-5) (pp. 217-228). Retrieved January 20. 2009, from http://trec.nist.gov/pubs/trec5/t5-proceedings.html
5. Beitzel, S.M., Jensen, E.C., Chowdhury, A., Grossman, D., Frieder, O., & Goharian, N. (2004). Fusion of effective retrieval strategies in the same information retrieval system. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55(10), 859-868.
6. Buckley, C, Singhal, A., & Mitra, M. (1997). Using query zoning and correlation within SMART: TREC-5. In E.M. Vorhees & D.K. Harman (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th TREC Retrieval Conference (TREC-5) (pp. 105-118). Retrieved January 20,2009, from http://trec.nist.gov/pubs/trec5/t5-proceedings. html
7. Clarke, C.L.A., & Cormack, G.V. (1997). Interactive substring retrieval (Multitext retrieval for TREC-5). In E.M. Vorhees & D.K. Harman (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th TREC Retrieval Conference (TREC-5) (pp. 267-278). Retrieved January 20, 2009, from http://trec.nist.gov/pubs/trec5/t5- proceedings.html
8. 3R: A new approach to the design of document retrieval systems. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 38(6), 389-104.
9. Fox, E., & Shaw, J. A. (1994). Combination of multiple searches. In D.K. Harman (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2nd TREC Retrieval Conference (TREC-2) (pp. 267-278). Retrieved January 20, 2009, from http://trec. nist.gov/pubs/trec2/t2-proceedings.html
10. Ingwersen, P. (1996). Cognitive perspectives of information retrieval interaction: Elements of a cognitive IR theory. Journal of Documentation, 52(1), 3-50.
11. Ingwersen, P., & Järvelin, K. (2005). The turn: Integration of information seeking and retrieval in context. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
12. Kekäläinen, J., & Järvelin, K. (2002). Using graded relevance assessments in IR evaluation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(13), 1120-1129.
13. Kelly, D., Deepak, V, & Fu, X. (2005). The loquacious user: A documentindependent source of terms for query expansion. In E.M. Vorhees & L.P. Buckland (Eds.), Proceedings of the 14th TREC Retrieval Conference (TREC 2005) (pp. 457-464). Retrieved January 20, 2009, from http://trec.nist.gov/pubs/ trec14/t14-proceedings.html
14. Kelly, D., & Fu, X. (2007). Eliciting better information need descriptions from users of information search systems. Information Processing & Management, 43(1), 30-46.
15. Larsen, B., Ingwersen, P., & Kekäläinen, J. (2006). The Polyrepresentation Continuum in IR. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Information Interaction in Context (pp. 148-163). New York: ACM.
16. Lee, J.H. (1997). Analyses of multiple evidence combination. In N.J. Belkin, A.D. Narasimhalu, P. Willett, & W. Hersh (Eds.), Proceedings of the 20th Annual International ACM SIG1R Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR 1997 (pp. 267-276). New York: ACM.
17. Lillis, D., Toolan, F, Collier, R., & Dunnion, J. (2006). ProbFuse: A probabilistic approach to data fusion. In E.N. Efthimiadis, S. Dumais, D. Hawking, & K. Järvelin (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR 2006) (pp. 139-146). New York: ACM.
18. Lund, B., Schneider, J.W., & Ingwersen, P. (2006). Impact of relevance intensity in test topics on IR performance in polyrepresentative exploratory search systems. In R. White, G. Muresan, & G. Marchionini (Eds.), Proceedings of the ACM-SIGIR Workshop on Evaluating Exploratory Search Systems (EESS 2006) (pp. 42-47). Retrieved January 20, 2009, from http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/ryenw/eess/eess2006-proceedings. pdf
19. Ng, K.B., & Kantor, P. (2000). Predicting the effectiveness of naive data fusion on the basis of systems characteristics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(13), 1177-1189.
20. Siegel, S., & Castellan, N.J., Jr. (1988). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill.
21. Skov, M. Larsen, B., & Ingwersen, P. (2006). Inter and intra-document contexts applied to in Polyrepresentation. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Information Interaction in Context (pp. 763-770). New York: ACM.
22. Skov, M., Larsen, B., & Ingwersen, P. (2008). Inter and intra-document contexts applied in polyrepresentation for best match IR. Information Processing & Management, 44, 1673-1683.
23. Strzalkowski, T., Guthrie, L., Karlgren, J., Leistensnider, J., Fang, L., Perez-Carballo, J., et al. (1997). Natural language information retrieval: TREC-5 report. In E.M. Vorhees & D.K. Harman (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th TREC Retrieval Conference (TREC-5) (pp. 291-314). Retrieved January 20, 2009, from http://trec.nist.gov/pubs/trec5/t5-proceedings.html
24. Vogt, C.C., & Cottrell, G. (1999). Fusion via a linear combination of scores. Information Retrieval, 1(3), 151-153.
25. Vorhees, E., & Harman, D. (1997). Overview of the 5th Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-5). In E.M. Vorhees & D.K. Harman (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th TREC Retrieval Conference (TREC-5) (pp. 1-20). Retrieved January 20, 2009, from http://ttec.nist.gov/pubs/trec5/t5-proceedings.html
26. Voorhees, E., & Harman, D. (1998). Overview of the 6th Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-6). In E.M. Vorhees & D.K. Harman (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th TREC Retrieval Conference (TREC-6) (pp. 1-24). Retrieved January 20, 2009, from http://ttec.nist.gov/pubs/trec6/t6-proceedings.html
27. White, R. (2006). Using searcher simulations to redesign a polyrepresentative implicit feedback interface. Information Processing & Management, 42(5), 1185-1202.
28. Wu, S., & McClean, S. (2006). Improving high accuracy retrieval by eliminating the uneven correlation effect in data fusion. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(14), 1962-1973.