The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Boosting and Rocchio applied to text filtering
Abstract
We discuss two learning algorithms for text filtering: modified Rocchio and a boosting algorithm called AdaBoost. We show how both algorithms can be adapted to maximize any general utility matrix that associates cost (or gain) for each pair of machine prediction and correct label. We first show that AdaBoost significantly outperforms another highly effective text filtering algorithm. We then compare AdaBoost and Rocchio over three large text filtering tasks. Overall both algorithms are comparable and are quite effective. AdaBoost produces better classifiers than Rocchio when the training collection contains a very large number of relevant documents. However, on these tasks, Rocchio runs much faster than AdaBoost. 1 Introduction With the explosion in the amount of information available electronically, information filtering systems that automatically send articles of potential interest to a user are becoming increasingly important. If users indicate their interests to a filtering system...
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
Cites
A decision-theoretic generalization of on-line learning and an application to boosting
Freund, Y., & Schapire, R. E. (1997) · Journal of Computer and System Sciences · doi:10.1006/jcss.1997.1504 · Cited by 20,466
Self-citationA vector space model for automatic indexing
Salton, G., Wong, A., & Yang, C. S. (1975) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/361219.361220 · Cited by 7,521
The sixth text Retrieval conference (TREC-6)
(1998) · doi:10.6028/nist.sp.500-240 · Cited by 113
Cited by
Selecting thresholds of occurrence in the prediction of species distributions
Liu, C., Berry, P. M., Dawson, T. P., & Pearson, R. G. (2005) · Ecography · doi:10.1111/j.0906-7590.2005.03957.x · Cited by 2,701
Machine learning: a review of classification and combining techniques
Kotsiantis, S. B., Zaharakis, I. D., & Pintelas, P. E. (2006) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-007-9052-3 · Cited by 1,582
Information retrieval and text mining technologies for chemistry
Krallinger, M., Rabal, O., Lourenço, A., Oyarzabal, J., & Valencia, A. (2017) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.6b00851 · Cited by 281
Automatic classification of literature in systematic reviews on food safety using machine learning
van den Bulk, L. M., Bouzembrak, Y., Gavai, A., Liu, N., van den Heuvel, L. J., & Marvin, H. J. P. (2022) · Current Research in Food Science · doi:10.1016/j.crfs.2021.12.010 · Cited by 38
“AB has been applied successfully on text classification tasks in previous research (Schapire et al., 1998; Bloehdorn and Hotho, 2004; Zhang et al., 2016).”
MethodA Balanced Ensemble Approach to Weighting Classifiers for Text Classification
Cheong Fung, G., Yu, J., Wang, H., Cheung, D., & Liu, H. (2006) · Sixth International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM'06) · doi:10.1109/icdm.2006.2 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- Schapire, R. E., Singer, Y., & Singhal, A.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 21st annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 1998-08
- Pages
- 215-223
- OpenAlex
- W2040424159
- Cited by
- 301
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 14.62
- Type
- conference paper
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Boosting and Rocchio applied to text filtering. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/290941.290996
- The paper
- Schapire, R. E., Singer, Y., & Singhal, A. (1998). Boosting and Rocchio applied to text filtering. Proceedings of the 21st annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval. https://doi.org/10.1145/290941.290996
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.