Advertisement

Enhancing the Set-Based Model Using Proximity Information

  • Bruno Pôssas
  • Nivio Ziviani
  • Wagner MeiraJr.
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2476)

Abstract

(SBM), which is an effective technique for computing term weights based on co-occurrence patterns, employing the information about the proximity among query terms in documents. The intuition that semantically related term occurrences often occur closer to each other is taken into consideration, leading to a new information retrieval model called proximity set-based model (PSBM). The novelty is that the proximity information is used as a pruning strategy to determine only related co-occurrence term patterns. This technique is time efficient and yet yields nice improvements in retrieval effectiveness. Experimental results show that PSBM improves the average precision of the answer set for all four collections evaluated. For the CFC collection, PSBM leads to a gain relative to the standard vector space model (VSM), of 23% in average precision values and 55% in average precision for the top 10 documents. PSBM is also competitive in terms of computational performance, reducing the execution time of the SBM in 21% for the CISI collection.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    R. Agrawal, T. Imielinski, and A. Swami. Mining association rules between sets of items in large databases. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference Management of Data, pages 207–216, Washington, D.C., May 1993.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    R. Agrawal and R. Srikant. Fast algorithms for mining association rules. In The 20th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pages 487–499, Santiago, Chile, September 1994.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    J. P. Callan. Passage-level evidence in document retrieval. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pages 302–310, Dublin, Ireland, 1994.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    C. L. A. Clarke, G.V. Cormack, and F. J. Burkowski. Shortest substring ranking. In In Fourth Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-4), pages 295–304, Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA, November 1995.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    E. Fox. Characterization of two new experimental collections in computer and information science containing textual and bibliographical concepts. Technical report, 1983. http://www.ncstrl.org.
  6. [6]
    D. J. Harper and C. J. Van Rijsbergen. An evaluation of feedback in document retrieval using co-occurrence data. In Journal of Documentation, volume 34, pages 189–216, 1978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    D. Hawking and P. Thistlewaite. Proximity operators-so near and yet so far. In In Fourth Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-4), pages 131–144, Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA, November 1995.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    M. Kaszkeil and J. Zobel. Passage retrieval revisited. In Proceedings of the 20th ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pages 178–185, Philadelphia, Philadelphia, USA, 1997.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    M. Kaszkeil, J. Zobel, and R. Sacks-Davis. Efficient passage ranking for document databases. In ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), volume 17(4), pages 406–439, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    D. Knaus, E. Mittendorf, P. Schauble, and P. Sheridan. Highlighting relevant passages for users of the interactive spider retrieval system. In Proceedings of the Fourth Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-4), pages 233–244, Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA, 1996.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    E. Mittendorf and P. Schauble. Document and passage retrieval based on hidden markov models. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pages 318–327, Dublin, Ireland, 1994.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    M. Persin, J. Zobel, and R. Sacks-Davis. Filtered document retrieval with frequency-sorted indexes. In Journal of the American Society of Information Science, pages 749–764, 1996.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    B. Pôssas, N. Ziviani, W. Meira, and B. Ribeiro-Neto. Set-based model: A new approach for information retrieval. In The 25th ACM-SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Tampere, Finland, August 2002.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    V.V. Raghavan and C.T. Yu. Experiments on the determination of the relationships between terms. In ACM Transactions on Databases Systems, volume 4, pages 240–260, 1979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    C. J. Van Rijsbergen. A theoretical basis for the use of co-occurrence data in information retrieval. In Journal of Documentation, volume 33, pages 106–119, 1977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    G. Salton, J. Allan, and C. Buckley. Approaches to passage retrieval in full text information systems. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pages 49–58, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, USA, 1993.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    G. Salton and C. Buckley. Term-weighting approaches in automatic retrieval. In Information Processing and Management, volume 24(5), pages 513–523, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    G. Salton and C. S. Yang. On the specification of term values in automatic indexing. In Journal of Documentation, volume 29, pages 351–372, 1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    W.M. Shaw, J.B. Wood, R.E. Wood, and H.R. Tibbo. The cystic fibrosis database: Content and research opportunities. In Library and Information Science Research, volume 13), pages 347–366, 1991.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    H. Small. The relationship of information science to the social sciences: A co-citation analysis. In Information Processing and Management, volume 17(1), pages 39–50, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    I. Witten, A. Moffat, and T. Bell. Managing Gigabytes. Compressing and Indexing Documents and Images. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1999.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    S.K.M. Wong, W. Ziarko, V.V. Raghavan, and P.C.N. Wong. On modeling of information retrieval concepts in vector spaces. In The ACM Transactions on Databases Systems, volume 12(2), pages 299–321, June 1987.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    S.K.M. Wong, W. Ziarko, and P.C.N. Wong. Generalized vector space model in information retrieval. In The 8th ACM-SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pages 18–25, New York, USA, 1985.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    C. T. Yu and G. Salton. Precision weighting-an effective automatic indexing method. In Journal of the ACM, volume 23(1), pages 76–88, January 1976.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    M. J. Zaki. Generating non-redundant association rules. In 6th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pages 34–43, Boston, MA, USA, August 2000.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    J. Zobel, A. Moffat, R. Wilkinson, and R. Sacks-Davis. Efficient retrieval of partial documents. In Information Processing and Management, volume 31(3), pages 361–377, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bruno Pôssas
    • 1
  • Nivio Ziviani
    • 1
  • Wagner MeiraJr.
    • 1
  1. 1.Departamento de Ciência da ComputaçãoUniversidade Federal de Minas GeraisBelo Horizonte-MGBrazil

Personalised recommendations