Going beyond CLEF-IP: The ‘Reality’ for Patent Searchers?
Conference paper
- 7 Citations
- 712 Downloads
Abstract
This paper gives an overview of several different approaches that have been applied by participants in the CLEF-IP evaluation initiative. On this basis, it is suggested that other techniques and experimental paradigms could be helpful in further improving the results and making the experiments more realistic. The field of information seeking is therefore incorporated and its potential gain for patent retrieval explained. Furthermore, the different search tasks that are undertaken by patent searchers are introduced as possible use cases. They can serve as a basis for development in patent retrieval research in that they present the diverse scenarios with their special characteristics and give the research community therefore a realistic picture of the patent user’s work.
Keywords
Search Task Information Seek Patent Document Relevance Assessment Patent Examiner
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.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Lopez, P., Romary, L.: PATATRAS: Retrieval Model Combination and Regression Models for Prior Art Search. In: Peters, C., et al., pp. 430–437 (2010)Google Scholar
- 2.Peters, C., Di Nunzio, G.M., Kurimo, M., Mandl, T., Mostefa, D., Peñas, A., Roda, G. (eds.): CLEF 2009. LNCS, vol. 6241. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
- 3.Petras, V., Forner, P., Clough, P.D. (eds.): CLEF 2011 Labs and Workshop, Notebook Papers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, September 19-22 (2011)Google Scholar
- 4.Järvelin, A., Järvelin, A., Hansen, P.: UTA and SICS at CLEF-IP. In: Peters, C., et al., pp. 460–467 (2010)Google Scholar
- 5.Hansen, P.: Task-based information Seeking and Retrieval in the Patent Domain. Processes and Relationships. Academic Dissertation, University of Tampere (2011)Google Scholar
- 6.Becks, D., Görtz, M., Womser-Hacker, C.: Understanding information seeking in the patent domain and its impact on the interface design of IR systems. In: Proceedings of the HCIR 2010, New Brunswick, NJ, August 22 (2010)Google Scholar
- 7.Graf, E., Azzopardi, L., van Rijsbergen, K.: Automatically Generating Queries for Prior Art Search. In: Peters, C., et al., pp. 480–490 (2010)Google Scholar
- 8.Piroi, F., Zenz, V.: Evaluating Information Retrieval in the Intellectual Property Domain: The CLEF IP Campaign. In: Lupu, M., Tait, J., Trippe, A., Mayer, K. (eds.) Current Challenges in Patent Information Retrieval. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)Google Scholar
- 9.Magdy, W., Leveling, J., Jones, G.J.F.: DCU @ CLEF-IP 2009: Exploring Standard IR Techniques on Patent Retrieval. In: Peters, C., et al., pp. 410–417 (2010)Google Scholar
- 10.Seo, H.-K., Han, K., Lee, J.: CLEF-IP 2011 Working Notes: Utilizing Prior Art Candidate Search Results for Refined IPC Classification. In: Petras, V., et al, eds. (2011)Google Scholar
- 11.D’hondt, E., Verberne, S.: CLEF-IP 2010: Prior Art Retrieval using the different sections in patent documents. In: Braschler, M., et al. (2010)Google Scholar
- 12.Braschler, M., Harman, D., Pianta, E. (eds.): CLEF 2010 LABs and Workshops, Notebook Papers, Padua, Italy, September 22-23 (2010)Google Scholar
- 13.Magdy, W., Jones, G.J.F.: Applying the KISS Principle for the CLEF- IP 2010 Prior Art Candidate Patent Search Task. In: Braschler, M., et al. (2010)Google Scholar
- 14.Szarvas, G., Herbert, B., Gurevych, I.: Prior Art Search using International Patent Classification Codes and All-Claims-Queries. In: Peters, C., et al. (eds.), pp. 452–459 (2010)Google Scholar
- 15.D’hondt, E., Verberne, S., Alink, W., Cornacchia, R.: Combining Document Representations for Prior-art Retrieval. In: Petras, V., et al. (2011)Google Scholar
- 16.Becks, D., Eibl, M., Jürgens, J., Kürsten, J., Wilhelm, T., Womser-Hacker, C.: Does Patent IR profit from Linguistics or Maximum Query Length? In: Petras, V., et al. (2011)Google Scholar
- 17.Teodoro, D., Gobeill, J., Pasche, E., Vishnyakova, D., Ruch, P., Lovis, C.: Automatic prior art searching and patent encoding at CLEF-IP 2010. In: Braschler, M., et al. (2010)Google Scholar
- 18.Toucedo, J.C., Losada, D.E.: University of Santiago de Compostela at CLEF-IP09. In: Peters, C., et al., pp. 418–425 (2010)Google Scholar
- 19.Mahdabi, P., Andersson, L., Hanbury, A., Crestani, F.: Report on the CLEF-IP 2011 Experiments: Exploring Patent Summarization. In: Petras, V., et al. (2011)Google Scholar
- 20.Lopez, P., Romary, L.: Experiments with citation mining and key-term extraction for Prior Art Search. In: Braschler, M., et al. (2010)Google Scholar
- 21.Verma, M., Varma, V.: Exploring Keyphrase Extraction and IPC Classification Vectors for Prior Art Search. In: Petras, V., et al. (2011)Google Scholar
- 22.Alink, W., Cornacchia, R., de Vries, A.P.: Searching CLEF-IP by Strategy. In: Peters, C., et al. (eds.), pp. 468–475 (2010)Google Scholar
- 23.Correa, S., Buscaldi, D., Rosso, P.: NLEL-MAAT at CLEF-IP. In: Peters, C., et al. (eds.), pp. 438–443 (2010)Google Scholar
- 24.Marchionini, G.: Information seeking in electronic environments. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Adams, S.: Information Sources in Patents. KG Sauer, München (2006)Google Scholar
- 26.Hunt, D., Nguyen, L., Rodgers, M.: Patent Searching. Tools and techniques. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, Hoboken (2007)Google Scholar
Copyright information
© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012