Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Discover Computing
Erschienen in: Discover Computing 4/2014

01.08.2014

Evaluating hierarchical organisation structures for exploring digital libraries

verfasst von: Mark M. Hall, Samuel Fernando, Paul D. Clough, Aitor Soroa, Eneko Agirre, Mark Stevenson

Erschienen in: Discover Computing | Ausgabe 4/2014

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Search boxes providing simple keyword-based search are insufficient when users have complex information needs or are unfamiliar with a collection, for example in large digital libraries. Browsing hierarchies can support these richer interactions, but many collections do not have a suitable hierarchy available. In this paper we present a number of approaches for automatically creating hierarchies and mapping items into them, including a novel technique which automatically adapts a Wikipedia-based taxonomy to the target collection. These approaches are applied to a large collection of cultural heritage items which is formed through the aggregation of other collections and for which no unified hierarchy is available. We investigate a number of novel user-evaluated metrics to quantify the hierarchies’ quality and performance, showing that the proposed technique is preferred by users. From this we draw a number of conclusions as to what makes a hierarchy useful to the user.
Vorheriger Artikel Identifying top news stories based on their popularity in the blogosphere
Nächster Artikel Distance matters! Cumulative proximity expansions for ranking documents

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Fußnoten
Literatur
Anick, P., & Tipirneni, S. (1999) The paraphrase search assistant: Terminological feedback for iterative information seeking. In Proceedings of the 22nd annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval, ACM (pp. 153–159).
Atserias, J., Villarejo, L., Rigau, G., Agirre, E., Carroll, J., Magnini, B. et al. (2004). The meaning multilingual central repository. In Proceedings of GWC (pp. 23–30).
Auer, S., Bizer, C., Kobilarov, G., Lehmann, J., Cyganiak, R., & Ives, Z. (2007). Dbpedia: A nucleus for a web of open data. In The Semantic Web (pp. 722–735).
Azzopardi, L., Girolami, M., & Van Rijsbergen, C. (2004). Topic based language models for ad hoc information retrieval. In Neural networks, 2004. Proceedings. 2004 IEEE international joint conference on, IEEE (Vol. 4, pp. 3281–3286).
Borlund, P., & Ingwersen, P. (1997). The development of a method for the evaluation of interactive information retrieval systems. Journal of documentation, 53(3), 225–250.CrossRef
Brewster, C., Alani, H., Dasmahapatra, S., & Wilks, Y. (2004). Data driven ontology evaluation. In Proceedings of international conference on language resources and evaluation.
Carterette, B., Bennett, P. N., Chickering, D. M., & Dumais, S. T. (2008). Here or there: Preference judgements for relevance. In C. Macdonald, I. Ounis, V. Plachouras, I. Ruthven, & R. W. White (Eds.), Proceedings of the IR research, 30th European conference on advances in information retrieval (ECIR’08) (pp. 16–27). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
Chang, J., Boyd-Graber, J., Wang, C., Gerrish, S., & Blei, D. M. (2009). Reading tea leaves: How humans interpret topic models. In NIPS.
Chen, M., Hearst, M., Hong, J., & Lin, J. (1999). Cha-cha: A system for organizing intranet search results. In Proceedings of the 2nd conference on USENIX symposium on internet technologies and systems (pp. 11–14).
Falleti, M. G., Maruff, P., Collie, A., & Darby, D. G. (2006). Practice effects associated with the repeated assessment of cognitive function using the cogstate battery at 10-minute, one week and one month test–retest intervals. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 28(7), 1095–1112.CrossRef
Fellbaum, C. (1998). WordNet: An electronic database. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.MATH
Fernando, S., Hall, M., Agirre, E., Soroa, A., Clough, P., & Stevenson, M. (2012). Comparing taxonomies for organising collections of documents. In Proceedings of COLING 2012, The COLING 2012 Organizing Committee, Mumbai, India (pp. 879–894). http://​www.​aclweb.​org/​anthology/​C12-1054.
Gómez-Pérez, A. (1996). Towards a framework to verify knowledge sharing technology. Expert Systems with Applications, 11(4), 519–529.CrossRef
Hall, M. M., & Toms, E. (2013). Building a common framework for iir evaluation. In CLEF 2013—Information access evaluation. Multilinguality, multimodality, and visualization (pp. 17–28). doi:10.​1007/​978-3-642-40802-1_​3.
Hearst, M. (2006a). Clustering versus faceted categories for information exploration. Communications of the ACM, 49(4), 59–61.CrossRef
Hearst, M. (2006b). Design recommendations for hierarchical faceted search interfaces. In Proceedings of the 29th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (SIGIR’06) workshop on faceted search.
Hoffart, J., Suchanek, F., Berberich, K., Lewis-Kelham, E., De Melo, G., & Weikum, G. (2011). Yago2: Exploring and querying world knowledge in time, space, context, and many languages. In Proceedings of the 20th international conference companion on World Wide Web, ACM (pp. 229–232).
Horvat, M., Grbin, A., & Gledec, G. (2012) Wntags: A web-based tool for image labeling and retrieval with lexical ontologies. In: M. Graña, C. Toro, J. Posada, R. J. Howlett & L. C. Jain (Eds.), Frontiers in artificial intelligence and applications (Vol. 243, pp. 585–594). KES, IOS Press.
Kelly, D., & Sugimoto, C. (2013). A systematic review of interactive information retrieval evaluation studies, 1967–2006. JASIST, 64(4), 745–770.CrossRef
Lau, J., Grieser, K., Newman, D., & Baldwin, T. (2011). Automatic labelling of topic models. In Proceedings of the 49th annual meeting on association for computational linguistics (pp. 1536–1545).
Lawrie, D., Croft, W., & Rosenberg, A. (2001). Finding topic words for hierarchical summarization. In Proceedings of the 24th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval, ACM (pp. 349–357).
Liu, X., Song, Y., Liu, S., & Wang, H. (2012). Automatic taxonomy construction from keywords. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, ACM, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’12 (pp. 1433–1441). doi:10.​1145/​2339530.​2339754.
Maedche, A., & Staab, S. (2002). Measuring similarity between ontologies. In Knowledge engineering and knowledge management: Ontologies and the semantic web (pp. 15–21).
Magnini, B., & Cavaglia, G. (2000). Integrating subject field codes into wordnet. In Proceedings of LREC-2000, second international conference on language resources and evaluation (pp. 1413–1418).
Marchionini, G. (2006). Exploratory search: From finding to understanding. Communications of the ACM, 49(4), 41–46.CrossRef
Markkula, M., & Sormunen, E. (2000). End-user searching challenges indexing practices in the digital newspaper photo archive. Information Retrieval, 1(4), 259–285.CrossRefMATH
Milne, D., & Witten, I. H. (2008). Learning to link with Wikipedia. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on information and knowledge management (pp. 509–518).
Milne, D. N., Witten, I. H., & Nichols, D. M. (2007). A knowledge-based search engine powered by Wikipedia. In Proceedings of the sixteenth ACM conference on conference on information and knowledge management, ACM (pp. 445–454).
Navigli, R., Velardi, P., & Gangemi, A. (2003). Ontology learning and its application to automated terminology translation. Intelligent Systems, IEEE, 18(1), 22–31.CrossRef
Nevill-Manning, C., Witten, I., & Paynter, G. (1999). Lexically-generated subject hierarchies for browsing large collections. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 2(2), 111–123.CrossRef
Padró, L., Reese, S., Agirre, E., & Soroa, A. (2010). Semantic services in freeling 2.1: Wordnet and ukb. In P. Bhattacharyya, C. Fellbaum, & P. Vossen (Eds.), Principles, construction, and application of multilingual Wordnets, global Wordnet conference 2010 (pp. 99–105). Mumbai, India: Narosa Publishing House.
Pirolli, P., Schank, P., Hearst, M., & Diehl, C. (1996). Scatter/gather browsing communicates the topic structure of a very large text collection. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems: common ground, ACM (pp. 213–220).
Ponzetto, S., & Strube, M. (2011). Taxonomy induction based on a collaboratively built knowledge repository. Artificial Intelligence, 175(9–10), 1737–1756.CrossRefMathSciNet
Pratt, W., Hearst, M., & Fagan, L. (1999). A knowledge-based approach to organizing retrieved documents. In Proceedings of th 16th annual conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI 99).
Rao, R., Pedersen, J. O., Hearst, M. A., Mackinlay, J. D., Card, S. K., Masinter, L., et al. (1995). Rich interaction in the digital library. Communications of the ACM, 38(4), 29–39. doi:10.​1145/​205323.​205326.CrossRef
Rosenfeld, L., & Morville, P. (2002). Information architecture for the World Wide Web: Designing large-scale web sites. Sebastopol: O’Reilly Media, Incorporated.
Sanderson, M., & Croft, B. (1999). Deriving concept hierarchies from text. In Proceedings of the 22nd annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval, ACM (pp. 206–213).
Shiri, A., Revie, C., & Chowdhury, G. (2002). Thesaurus-enhanced search interfaces. Journal of Information Science, 28(2), 111–122.CrossRef
Singer, G., Norbisrath, U., & Lewandowski, D. (2012). Ordinary search engine users carrying out complex search tasks. Journal of Information Science, 39(3), 346–358.
Skov, M., & Ingwersen, P. (2008). Exploring information seeking behaviour in a digital museum context. In Proceedings of the second international symposium on Information interaction in context, ACM (pp. 110–115).
Stoica, E., Hearst, M., & Richardson, M. (2007). Automating creation of hierarchical faceted metadata structures. In Human language technologies: The annual conference of the North American chapter of the association for computational linguistics (NAACL-HLT 2007) (pp. 244–251).
Tang, L., Zhang, J., & Liu, H. (2006). Acclimatizing taxonomic semantics for hierarchical content classification. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, ACM, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’06 (pp. 384–393). doi:10.​1145/​1150402.​1150446.
Toms, E. G., Villa, R., & McCay-Peet, L. (2013). How is a search system used in work task completion? Journal of Information Science, 39(1), 15–25.CrossRef
Treeratpituk, P., & Callan, J. (2006). Automatically labeling hierarchical clusters. In Proceedings of the 2006 international conference on Digital Government Research, Digital Government Society of North America, dg.o ’06 (pp. 167–176). doi:10.​1145/​1146598.​1146650.
Wang, Z., Khoo, C. S., & Chaudhry, A. S. (2014). Evaluation of the navigation effectiveness of an organizational taxonomy built on a general classification scheme and domain thesauri. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,. doi:10.​1002/​asi.​23017.
Wei, X., & Croft, W. (2006) LDA-based document models for ad-hoc retrieval. In Proceedings of the 29th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval, ACM (pp. 178–185).
Yu, J., Thom, J., & Tam, A. (2007). Ontology evaluation using Wikipedia categories for browsing. In Proceedings of the sixteenth ACM conference on conference on information and knowledge management, ACM (pp. 223–232).
Metadaten
Titel
Evaluating hierarchical organisation structures for exploring digital libraries
verfasst von
Mark M. Hall
Samuel Fernando
Paul D. Clough
Aitor Soroa
Eneko Agirre
Mark Stevenson
Publikationsdatum
01.08.2014
Verlag
Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in
Discover Computing / Ausgabe 4/2014
Print ISSN: 2948-2984
Elektronische ISSN: 2948-2992
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10791-014-9242-y