A retrospective evaluation method for exact-match and best-match queries applying an interactive query performance analyser

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

Volumn 2291, Issue , 2002, Pages 334-352

  Sormunen, Eero ^a  

^a TAMPERE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; COMPUTER SCIENCE; COMPUTERS;

BEST MATCH; BOOLEAN QUERIES; INTERACTIVE QUERIES; OPTIMISATIONS; PERFORMANCE COMPARISON; QUERY PERFORMANCE; RETROSPECTIVE EVALUATIONS; RETROSPECTIVE METHOD;

INFORMATION RETRIEVAL;

EID: 84944900125     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-45886-7_22     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (27)

1. Allan, J., Callan, J., Croft, W.B., Ballestros, L., Broglio, J., Xu, J. & Shu, H. (1997). INQUERY at TREC 5. In: Harman, D.K. & Voorhees, E.M. (Eds.) Information technology: The Fifth Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-5). Gaithersburg, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 119-132.
2. Blair, D.C. & Maron, M.E. (1985). An evaluation of retrieval effectiveness for a full-text document retrieval system. Communications of the ACM (28)3, 289-299.
3. Feldman, S. (1996). Testing Natural Language: Comparing DIALOG, TARGET, and DRLINK. Online 20(6), 71-79.
4. Frants, V.I., Shapiro, J., Taksa, I. & Voiskunskii, V.G. (1999). Boolean Search: Current State and Perspectives. Journal of the American Society of Information Science 50(1), 86-95.
5. Harter, S.P. (1986). Online Information retrieval. Orlando: Academic Press.
6. Harter, S.P. (1990). Search Term Combinations and Retrieval Overlap: A Proposed Methodology and Case Study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 41(2), 132-146.
7. Hersh, W.R. & Hickam, D.H. (1995). An Evaluation of Interactive Boolean and Natural Language Searching with Online Medical Textbook. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 48(7), 478-489.
8. Hersh, W., Turpin, A., et al. (2001). Challenging conventional assumptions of automated information retrieval with real users: Boolean searching and batch retrieval evaluation. Information Processing & Management 37, 383-402.
9. Keen, E.M. (1992). Presenting results of experimental retrieval comparisons. Information Processing & Management 28(4), 491-502.
10. Kekäläinen, J. & Järvelin, K. (1998). The impact of query structure and query expansion on retrieval performance. In: Croft, W.B., Moffat, A., et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (ACM SIGIR '98). New York, NY: ACM Press, pp. 130-137.
11. Lu, X.A., Holt, J.D. & Miller, D.J. (1996). Boolean System Revisited: Its Performance and its Behaviour. In: Harman, D.K. (Ed.) The Fourth Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-4). Gaithersburg, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 459-473.
12. Paris, L.A.H. & Tibbo, H.R. (1998). Freestyle vs. Boolean: A comparison of partial and exact match retrieval systems. Information Processing & Management 34(2/3), 175-190.
13. Pirkola A. (1998). The effects of query structure and dictionary setups in dictionary-based cross-language information retrieval. In: Croft, W.B., Moffat, A. et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (ACM SIGIR '98). New York, NY: ACM Press, pp. 55-63.
14. Robertson, S.E. (1996). Letter to the Editor. Information Processing & Management 32(5), 635-636.
15. Robertson, S.E. & Thompson, C.L. (1990). Weighted searching: The CIRT experiment. In: Jones, K.P. (Ed.), Informatics 10-Prospects for Intelligent retrieval. London: Aslib, p. 153-165.
16. Salton, G., Fox, E.A. & Wu, H. (1983). Extended Boolean Information Retrieval. Communications of the ACM 26(11), 1022-1036.
17. Shaw, W.M. (1995). Term-relevance computations and perfect retrieval performance. Information Processing and Management 31(4), 491-498.
18. Sormunen, E. (2000a). A method for measuring wide range performance of Boolean queries in full-text databases. Doctoral Thesis. Acta Electronica Universitatis Tamperensis, URL: http://acta.uta.fi/pdf/951-44-4732-8.pdf. Tampere: University of Tampere, 2000.
19. Sormunen, E. (2000b). A novel method for the evaluation of Boolean query effectiveness across a wide operational range. In: Belkin, N.J., Ingwersen, P. and Leong, M.-K: eds. Proceedings of the 23rd Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. New York, NY: ACM, 2000, 25-32.
20. Sormunen, E. (2001) Extensions to the STAIRS Study-Empirical Evidence for the Hypothesised Ineffectiveness of Boolean Queries in Large Full-Text Databases. Information Retrieval 4(3/4):257-274.
21. Sormunen, E., Keskustalo, H. & Halttunen, K. (2001a). Query Performance Analyser-a interactive tool for bridging information retrieval research and education. Submitted for publication in Information Retrieval.
22. Sormunen, E., Kekäläinen, J., Koivisto, J. and Järvelin, K. (2001b). Document text characteristics affect the ranking of the most relevant documents by expanded structured queries. Journal of Documentation 57(3):358-374.
23. Sperer, R. & Oard, D.W. (2000). Structured translation for cross-language information retrieval. In: Belkin, N.J., Ingwersen, P. and Leong, M.-K: eds. Proceedings of the 23rd Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. New York, NY: ACM, 2000, 120-127.
24. Tague-Sutcliffe, J. (1992). The pragmatics of information retrieval experimentation, revisited. Information Processing and Management 28(4), 467-490.
25. Tenopir, C. & Cahn, P. (1994). TARGET & FREESTYLE: Dialog and Mead join the relevance ranks. Online 18(3), 31-47.
26. Tenopir, C. & Shu, M.E. (1989). Magazines in full text: uses and search strategies. Online Review 13 (2), 107-118.
27. Turtle, H. R. (1990). Inference networks for document retrieval. Ph.D. dissertation. Computer and information Science Department, University of Massachusetts. COINS Technical Report 90-92.