2015
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-23826-5_30
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluating Geographical Knowledge Re-Ranking, Linguistic Processing and Query Expansion Techniques for Geographical Information Retrieval

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
14
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…However, a major challenge remains the limited availability of training data outside of commercial search contexts. Ferrès and Rodriguez, 2015 demonstrate the possibilities of using existing training data, in their case from the GeoCLEF evaluation campaign discussed in detail in Chapter 7 on evaluation, to improve over results through more intelligent ranking.…”
Section: Learning To Rank For Girmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, a major challenge remains the limited availability of training data outside of commercial search contexts. Ferrès and Rodriguez, 2015 demonstrate the possibilities of using existing training data, in their case from the GeoCLEF evaluation campaign discussed in detail in Chapter 7 on evaluation, to improve over results through more intelligent ranking.…”
Section: Learning To Rank For Girmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Related to the query description improvement, other works have focused on the identification of textual patterns describing locations or location-based references (e.g., north of X ). Works such as Sallaberry (2013), Ferrés and Rodríguez (2015), and Kim et al (2016) show that the identification of textual patterns describing locations can greatly improve the quality of the results when spatial description in metadata records is textual. However, in geospatial data catalogs these solutions are less relevant because, by design, the metadata records of spatial resources specify their spatial limits as coordinates.…”
Section: State Of the Artmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sets of place names are firstly used to represent the document extents and the relevance is calculated by their hierarchical relationships [21,22]. Furthermore, geographic ontologies or knowledge graphs, instead of footprints, are constructed to measure the semantic similarities for spatial rankings [23][24][25][26]. The latest topic models are also utilized in geographic information retrieval to find the similar place-related documents based on latent semantics [23,27].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%