arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 1006.4535cs.IR
收藏

相关性、排序与结果显示研究

Studies on Relevance, Ranking and Results Display

Judith Gelernter, Dong Cao, Jaime Carbonell

摘要:

这项研究认为,在何种程度上用户与相同的查询同意什么是相关的,以及如何被认为是相关的可能转化为检索算法和结果显示。为了将用户对相关性的感知与算法排名相结合并呈现结果,我们创建了一个学术文献的原型数字图书馆。我们将研究限制在一个科学家群体(古生物学家),一个学术科学文章领域(古相关),以及我们为此目的构建的原型系统(PaleoLit)。基于用户不预设给定查询的答案,但当他们看到它时,他们会认识到他们想要什么的原则,我们的系统使用基于规则的算法将结果聚类到具有三个相关级别的模糊类别。我们的系统匹配至少1/3的参与者的相关性评级87%的时间。我们随后的可用性研究发现,参与者信任我们的不确定性标签,但不重视我们的颜色编码的水平结果布局以上的标准检索列表。我们认为用户在有限的时间内做出这样的判断,每个任务的时间优化可能有助于解释我们的一些发现。

英文摘要:

This study considers the extent to which users with the same query agree as to what is relevant, and how what is considered relevant may translate into a retrieval algorithm and results display. To combine user perceptions of relevance with algorithm rank and to present results, we created a prototype digital library of scholarly literature. We confine studies to one population of scientists (paleontologists), one domain of scholarly scientific articles (paleo-related), and a prototype system (PaleoLit) that we built for the purpose. Based on the principle that users do not pre-suppose answers to a given query but that they will recognize what they want when they see it, our system uses a rules-based algorithm to cluster results into fuzzy categories with three relevance levels. Our system matches at least 1/3 of our participants' relevancy ratings 87% of the time. Our subsequent usability study found that participants trusted our uncertainty labels but did not value our color-coded horizontal results layout above a standard retrieval list. We posit that users make such judgments in limited time, and that time optimization per task might help explain some of our findings.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑