Using Various Indexing Schemes and Multiple Translations in the CL-SR Task at CLEF 2005

  • Diana Inkpen
  • Muath Alzghool
  • Aminul Islam
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4022)


We present the participation of the University of Ottawa in the Cross-Language Spoken Document Retrieval task at CLEF 2005. In order to translate the queries, we combined the results of several online Machine Translation tools. For the Information Retrieval component we used the SMART system [1], with several weighting schemes for indexing the documents and the queries. One scheme in particular led to better results than other combinations. We present the results of the submitted runs and of many un-official runs. We compare the effect of several translations from each language. We present results on phonetic transcripts of the collection and queries and on the combination of text and phonetic transcripts. We also include the results when the manual summaries and keywords are indexed.


Weighting Scheme Term Frequency Concentration Camp Information Retrieval System Indexing Scheme 
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.
    Buckley, C., Salton, G., Allan, J.: Automatic retrieval with locality information using SMART. In: Proceedings of the First Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-1), NIST Special Publication 500-207, March 1993, pp. 59–72 (1993)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Clarke, C.L.A.: Waterloo Experiments for the CLEF 2005 SDR Track, In: Working Notes for the CLEF 2005 Workshop, September, Vienna, Austria (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Oard, D.W., Soergel, D., Doermann, D., Huang, X., Murray, G.C., Wang, J., Ramabhadran, B., Franz, M., Gustman, S.: Building an Information Retrieval Test Collection for Spontaneous Conversational Speech. In: Proceedings of SIGIR (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Inkpen, D., Désilets, A.: Semantic Similarity for Detecting Recognition Errors in Automatic Speech Transcripts. In: Proceedings of EMNLP 2005, Vancouver, Canada (October 2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Salton, G.: Automatic Text Processing: The Transformation, Analysis, and Retrieval of Information by Computer. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading (1989)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Salton, G., Buckley, C.: Term-weighting approaches in automatic retrieval. Information Processing and Management 24(5), 513–523 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    White, R.W., Oard, D.W., Jones, G.J.F., Soergel, D., Huang, X.: Overview of the CLEF-2005 Cross-Language Speech Retrieval Track. In: Working Notes for the CLEF 2005 Workshop, Vienna, Austria (September 2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Diana Inkpen
    • 1
  • Muath Alzghool
    • 1
  • Aminul Islam
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Information Technology and EngineeringUniversity of Ottawa 

Personalised recommendations