...controls the probability that the word is relevant:
Similarly, this is the probability that a document will be relevant, given that it is retrieved: . These two measures, Recall and Precision, have remained the bedrock of search engine evaluation since they were first introduced by Kent in 1955 [Kent55,Saracevic75].
A closely related but less common measure is called fallout ,
where we (perversly!) focus on the irrelevant documents and the
fraction of them retrieved:
The close relationship between these three measures can be defined precisely ...
From: Peter Brusilovsky, email@example.com, 20 Feb 01
There are at least two possible interpretations of precisely what a probability of relevance, , means, in terms of an underlying event space [Maron77,REF178,REF318,Robertson77].
...are those with higher impact than their peers! In fact, Price's characterization of ``eminence'' in this passage focuses on the number of publications, not how well cited these might turn out to be. Understanding how ``impact''/``eminence'' accumulates across papers by the same author, across authors at the same institution, etc. is a critical issue for further investigation.
From: Nick Belkin, firstname.lastname@example.org pointed out the gap between Price's focus on productivity and this discussion of impact. 27 Aug 01
Finally, as mentioned in Section 5.2.5, references among documents can be used as the basis for interdocument similarity: cocitation reflects the degree to which two documents are both referenced by other documents' bibliographies [BarHillel57,Small73]. Conversely, bibliographic coupling refers to the amount of overlap between two documents' bibiographies [Kessler63]. Figure 1
From: Nick Belkin, email@example.com identified my confounding of bibliographic coupling and cocitation. 27 Aug 01
The USE/USE FOR relation captures synonymy or quasi-synonomy; thus, one says that in this thesaurus (or domain) we will consider the terms text retrieval and information retrieval to be synonymous, but will USE only the term information retrieval (USED FOR text retrieval).
Related Terms are those which stand in some (any) other relation to one another other than the hierarchical (BT/NT) or synonymous (USE/USE FOR). Sometimes, in thesaurus-speak, we call the BT/NT and USE/USE FOR relations ``paradigmatic'' (i.e. a priori, semantic) and the RT relation ``syntagmatic'' (i.e. a posteriori, dependent upon domain or text characteristics).
From: Nick Belkin, firstname.lastname@example.org, provided these improved defintions, 27 Aug 01
...[Papoulis91, p. 549-554]. In terms of keyword frequencies, then, the mutual ...