Empirical Evaluation of Adaptive User Modeling in a Medical Information Retrieval Application

  • Eugene Santos
  • Hien Nguyen
  • Qunhua Zhao
  • Erik Pukinskis
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2702)


A comprehensive methodology for evaluating a user model presents challenges in choosing metrics and in assessing usefulness from both user and system perspectives. In this paper, we describe such a methodology and use it to assess the effectiveness of an adaptive user model embedded in a medical information retrieval. We demonstrate that the user model helps to improve the retrieval quality without degrading the system performance and identify usability problems overlooked in the user model architecture. Empirical data help us in analyzing drawbacks in our user model and develop solutions.


Information Retrieval Query Graph System Response Time Adaptive User Comprehensive Methodology 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Brajnik G.; Mizzaro S.; and Tasso C. 1996. Evaluating User Interfaces to Information Retrieval Systems. In Proceedings of SIGIR 96. 128–136.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chin N. David. 2001. Empirical Evaluation of User Models and User-Adapted Systems. In User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction. Vol 11. 181–194.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Harter S. P.; and Hert C. A. 1997. Evaluation of Information Retrieval Systems: Approaches, Issues and Methods. In Annual Review of Information Science and Technology. Vol 32. 3–94.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hart, S. G.; and Staveland, L. E. 1988. Development of the NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research. InHuman Mental Workload, Hancock, P. and Meshkati, N. (Ed.). North Holland B.V., Amsterdam. 139–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Koenemann, J.; and Belkin, N. 1996. A case for interaction: a study of interactive information retrieval behavior and effectiveness. In Proceedings of CHI 96. 205–212.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    McLeod, M.; Bowden, R., Bevan, N. 1997. The MUSiC Performance Measurement Method. Behaviour and Information Technology. Volume 16(4). 279–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Santos E. Jr.; Nguyen H.; and Brown M.S. 2001. Kavanah: An active user interface Information Retrieval Application. In Proceedings of 2nd Asia-Pacific Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology. 412–423.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Salton, G.; and McGill, M. 1983. Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval. McGraw-Hill Book Company.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shneiderman, B. 1998. Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction. Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eugene Santos
    • 1
  • Hien Nguyen
    • 1
  • Qunhua Zhao
    • 1
  • Erik Pukinskis
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science and Engineering DepartmentUniversity of ConnecticutStorrs

Personalised recommendations