|
ABSTRACT
Search systems have for some time provided users with the ability to request documents similar to a given document. Interfaces provide this feature via a link or button for each document in the search results. We call this feature find-similar or similarity browsing. We examined find-similar as a search tool, like relevance feedback, for improving retrieval performance. Our investigation focused on find-similar's document-to-document similarity, the reexamination of documents during a search, and the user's browsing pattern. Find-similar with a query-biased similarity, avoiding the reexamination of documents, and a breadth-like browsing pattern achieved a 23% increase in the arithmetic mean average precision and a 66% increase in the geometric mean average precision over our baseline retrieval. This performance matched that of a more traditionally styled iterative relevance feedback technique.
REFERENCES
Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.
 |
1
|
|
| |
2
|
|
| |
3
|
C. Buckley. trec_eval. http://trec.nist.gov/trec_eval/trec_eval.8.0.tar.gz.
|
| |
4
|
I. Campbell. The ostensive model of developing information needs. PhD thesis, University of Glasgow, 2000.
|
 |
5
|
|
| |
6
|
|
| |
7
|
W. B. Croft. What do people want from information retrieval? D-Lib Magazine, Nov. 1995.
|
| |
8
|
S. T. Dumais and D. G. Schmitt. Iterative searching in an online database. In Proc. Human Factors Soc. 35th Annual Mtg., pages 398--402, 1991.
|
 |
9
|
|
| |
10
|
M. Hancock-Beaulieu, M. Fieldhouse, and T. Do. An evaluation of interactive query expansion in an online library catalogue with a graphical user interface. Journal of Documentation, 51(3):225--243, 1995.
|
 |
11
|
|
 |
12
|
|
 |
13
|
|
 |
14
|
|
 |
15
|
|
 |
16
|
|
 |
17
|
|
| |
18
|
Lemur Toolkit for Language Modeling and IR. http://www.lemurproject.org/.
|
 |
19
|
|
| |
20
|
H. Lieberman. Letizia: An agent that assists web browsing. In IJCAI-95, pages 924--929, 1995.
|
| |
21
|
|
 |
22
|
|
| |
23
|
D. Metzler, F. Diaz, T. Strohman, and W. B. Croft. UMass robust 2005 notebook: Using mixtures of relevance models for query expansion. In TREC 2005 Notebook, 2005.
|
 |
24
|
|
 |
25
|
|
| |
26
|
Pubmed, www.pubmed.gov. "Related articles": www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/pubmed_tutorial/m5002.html.
|
| |
27
|
J. J. Rocchio. Relevance feedback in information retrieval. In G. Salton, editor, The SMART Retrieval System, pages 313--323. Prentice Hall, 1971.
|
| |
28
|
|
 |
29
|
|
| |
30
|
J. G. Siek, L.-Q. Lee, and A. Lumsdaine. The Boost Graph Library. Addison Wesley, 2001.
|
| |
31
|
A. Spink, B. J. Jansen, and H. C. Ozmultu. Use of query reformulation and relevance feedback by excite users. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, 10(4):317--328, 2000.
|
| |
32
|
|
| |
33
|
T. Strohman, D. Metzler, H. Turtle, and W. B. Croft. Indri: A language-model based search engine for complex queries (extended version). Technical Report IR-407, CIIR, UMass, 2005.
|
| |
34
|
|
| |
35
|
A. Tombros. The effectiveness of query-based hierarchic clustering of documents for information retrieval. PhD thesis, University of Glasgow, 2002.
|
 |
36
|
|
 |
37
|
|
 |
38
|
|
| |
39
|
E. M. Voorhees and H. T. Dang. Draft: Overview of the TREC 2005 robust retrieval track. In TREC 2005 Notebook, pages 105--112, 2005.
|
| |
40
|
R. W. White, J. M. Jose, C. J. van Rijsbergen, and I. Ruthven. A simulated study of implicit feedback models. In ECIR, 2004.
|
| |
41
|
|
 |
42
|
|
|