Preferential Models of Query by Navigation

The Information Retrieval (IR) problem can be described as the quest to find the set of relevant information objects corresponding to a given information need, which is represented by a request. IR begins with a user who wishes to satisfy an information need. The information need is typically formulated in the form of a request, denoted by q. The intention is that the request q be as good as possible description of the information need N. The information being queried is modelled as a set of information carriers, or documents. An often used premise in IR is the following: if a given document d is about the request q, then there is a high likelihood that d is relevant with respect to the associated information need. Thus, the IR problem is reduced to deciding the aboutness relation between documents and requests. Many IR models have been developed, and there is a wide variation in how they determine aboutness. A common approach is to equate aboutness with overlap, meaning if there is sufficient overlap between the document and the query, the document is deemed to be about the query. The degree of overlap determined by the retrieval model is usually expressed as a real number between zero (no overlap) and unity (complete overlap). In most models, “sufficient” overlap is not prescribed by the model but by experimentation within a given IR setting. Such experimentation may lead to the conclusion, say, that sufficient overlap is apparent when the overlap measure is greater than α, 0 < α ≤ 1. The value α varies from setting to setting.

[1]  Peter Bruza,et al.  Investigating aboutness axioms using information fields , 1994, SIGIR '94.

[2]  Peter Bruza,et al.  Stratified Hypermedia Structures for Information Disclosure , 1992, Comput. J..

[3]  F. C. Berger Theory for Searching in a Thesaurus , 1995 .

[4]  Peter Bruza,et al.  Query Reformulation on the Internet: Empirical Data and the Hyperindex Search Engine , 1997, RIAO.

[5]  Yoav Shoham Efficient Reasoning about Rich Temporal Domains , 1988 .

[6]  Brian Vickery Donald Urquhart, 1909-1994 , 1995, J. Documentation.

[7]  D.,et al.  The E ectiveness of Navigable InformationDisclosure SystemsF , 1993 .

[8]  Yoav Shoham,et al.  Efficient reasoning about rich temporal domains , 1988, J. Philos. Log..

[9]  Richmond Thomason Philosophical logic and artificial intelligence , 1988, J. Philos. Log..

[10]  Iadh Ounis,et al.  Conceptual Graph Aboutness , 1996, ICCS.

[11]  Peter Bruza,et al.  Hyperindices: A Novel Aid for Searching in Hypermedia , 1992, ECHT.

[12]  Theo Huibers Situations, a General Framework for Studying Information Retrieval , 1994 .

[13]  Fabio Crestani,et al.  Information Retrieval by Logical Imaging , 1995, J. Documentation.

[14]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Preferential Models and Cumulative Logics , 1990, Artif. Intell..

[15]  Jian-Yun Nie,et al.  Information Retrieval as Counterfactual , 1995, Comput. J..

[16]  P. D. BruzaSchool How nonmonotonic is Aboutness ? , 1995 .

[17]  Theo Huibers,et al.  An axiomatic theory for information retrieval , 1996 .

[18]  P. D. Bruza,et al.  Stratified information disclosure: a synthesis between hypermedia and information retrieval , 1993 .

[19]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  Intelligent text handling using default logic , 1996, Proceedings Eighth IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence.

[20]  Anthony Hunter Using Default Logic in Information Retrieval , 1995, ECSQARU.