The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A statistical interpretation of term specificity and its application in retrieval
Abstract
The exhaustivity of document descriptions and the specificity of index terms are usually regarded as independent. It is suggested that specificity should be interpreted statistically, as a function of term use rather than of term meaning. The effects on retrieval of variations in term specificity are examined, experiments with three test collections showing, in particular, that frequently‐occurring terms are required for good overall performance. It is argued that terms should be weighted according to collection frequency, so that matches on less frequent, more specific, terms are of greater value than matches on frequent terms. Results for the test collections show that considerable improvements in performance are obtained with this very simple procedure.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
PromptMagician: Interactive Prompt Engineering for Text-to-Image Creation
Feng, Y., Wang, X., Wong, K. K., Wang, S., Lu, Y., Zhu, M., Wang, B., & Chen, W. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics · doi:10.1109/tvcg.2023.3327168 · Cited by 124
CommunityCommands: command recommendations for software applications
Matejka, J., Li, W., Grossman, T., & Fitzmaurice, G. (2009) · Proceedings of the 22nd annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology · doi:10.1145/1622176.1622214 · Cited by 125
Han, B., Susnjak, T., & Mathrani, A. (2024) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app14199103 · Cited by 68
Augmenting interpretable models with large language models during training
Singh, C., Askari, A., Caruana, R., & Gao, J. (2023) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-43713-1 · Cited by 63
Search atlas: Visualizing divergent search results across geopolitical borders
Ochigame, R., & Ye, K. (2021) · Designing Interactive Systems Conference 2021 · doi:10.1145/3461778.3462032 · Cited by 23
Automation of Legal Precedents Retrieval: Findings from a Literature Review
Mentzingen, H., António, N., & Bacao, F. (2023) · International Journal of Intelligent Systems · doi:10.1155/2023/6660983 · Cited by 16
Metadata
- Authors
- Spärck Jones, K.
- Venue
- Journal of Documentation
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2004-10-01
- Volume
- 60
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 493-502
- ISSN
- 0022-0418 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3090556797
- Cited by
- 500
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.