Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 453

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A comparison of classifiers and document representations for the routing problem

Open access
Schütze, Hinrich, Hull, David A., Pedersen, Jan O.·1995·Proceedings of the 18th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval - SIGIR '95

Abstract

In this paper, we compare learning techniques based on statistical classification to traditional methods of relevance feedback for the document routing problem.We consider three classification techniques which have decision rules that are derived via explicit error minimization linear discriminant analysis, logistic regression, and neuraf networks.We demonstrate that the classifiers perform 10-15% better than relevance feedback via Rocchio expansion for the TREC-2 and TREC-3 routing tasks.Error minimization is difficult in high-dimensional feature spaces because the convergence process is slow and the models ~e prone to overfitting.We use two different strategies, latent semantic indexing and optimaJ term selection, to reduce the number of features.Our results indicate that features based on latent semantic indexing are more effective for techniques such as linear discriminant anafysis and logistic regression, which have no way to protect against overfitting.Neural networks perform equally well with either set of features and can take advantage of the additional information available when both feature sets are used as input.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/215206.215365

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Schütze, H., Hull, D. A., & Pedersen, J. O.
Venue
Proceedings of the 18th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval - SIGIR '95
Publisher
ACM Press
Published
1995
Pages
229-237
OpenAlex
W2058982198
Cited by
453
References
2
FWCI
13.36
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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.