ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Ambiguous requests: implications for retrieval tests, systems and theories
Full text PdfPdf (219 KB)
Source
ACM SIGIR Forum archive
Volume 41 ,  Issue 2  (December 2007) table of contents
Pages 8-17  
Year of Publication: 2007
ISSN:0163-5840
Authors
Karen Spärck-Jones  University of Cambridge, UK
Stephen E. Robertson  Microsoft Research Cambridge and City University, UK
Mark Sanderson  University of Sheffield, UK
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 3,   Downloads (12 Months): 42,   Citation Count: 4
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1328964.1328965
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Retrieval system experimentation has assumed that user requests represent a single information need. The problem is identifying and meeting this need. Search engine experience demonstrates that this assumption is far from holding in the real world. Responding appropriately to this fact raises new issues for research on retrieval system theory, design, and evaluation.


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
 
4
 
5
 
6
Voorhees, E. M. 'Question answering in TREC', in TREC. Experiment and evaluation in information retrieval, Ed. E. M. Voorhees and D. K. Harman, Cambridge, MA: MITP Press, 2005, 233--257.
 
7
Robertson, S. E. 'The probability ranking principle in IR', Journal of Documentation, 33, 1977, 130--137.
 
8
9


Collaborative Colleagues:
Karen Spärck-Jones: colleagues
Stephen E. Robertson: colleagues
Mark Sanderson: colleagues