Proceedings of the 29th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval 2006
DOI: 10.1145/1148170.1148285
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Term proximity scoring for ad-hoc retrieval on very large text collections

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
86
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 126 publications
(86 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
86
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The proximity IR model [20,21] does not improve the performance significantly while the BM25P model [22] improves the performance but it is sensitive to the window size.…”
Section: A Proximity-base Information Retrieval Modelmentioning
confidence: 92%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The proximity IR model [20,21] does not improve the performance significantly while the BM25P model [22] improves the performance but it is sensitive to the window size.…”
Section: A Proximity-base Information Retrieval Modelmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Some research combines the proximity information to frequency scoring function [20,21,22]. The proximity IR model [20,21] does not improve the performance significantly while the BM25P model [22] improves the performance but it is sensitive to the window size.…”
Section: A Proximity-base Information Retrieval Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Rasolofo and Savoy (2003) added proximity information to the Okapi probabilistic model and found improved performance specifically among the top scored documents. Buttcher, Clarke, and Lushman (2006) also incorporated proximity into the Okapi BM25 model and observed positive results. Metzler and Croft (2005) introduced the use of the Markov random fields (MRF) for modeling term dependencies in the language-modeling framework.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this paper we aim to investigate the effectiveness of entity extraction from the texts of top retrieved documents. In our preliminary experiments we compared the extraction of entities from top documents retrieved from the ClueWeb09 Category B 1 collection using BM25tp (a variant of BM25 incorporating term proximity information) (Büttcher et al, 2006) with the extraction from top documents retrieved from the Web by a major search engine. The effectiveness of the latter approach is higher, and therefore it is used in the methods described in this paper.…”
Section: Extracting Candidate Entitiesmentioning
confidence: 99%