Methods for Determining the Semantic Difference Between Collections of Documents
William M. Pottenger and Dmitry Zelenko
A standard approach to semantic retrieval performs statistical correlations on each subject area to support deeper retrieval. However, true information retrieval involves entire sessions not individual queries. For example, a user first chooses subjects of interest and then retrieves pertinent documents. Next, the user repartitions the collection for further queries more closely related to the desired topic. An unaided human user can perform this task for tens or possibly hundreds of items, but automated assistance is clearly required to refine a query on a set of tens or hundreds of thousands of items, as are routinely found on the World Wide Web.
We have developed automatic techniques for clustering categories from a collection and then indexing concepts from each of the identified categories. The clustering techniques produce a Category Map [Orwig, Chen and Nunamaker 1995] and the indexing techniques produce a Concept Space [Chen, Schatz, Martinez and Ng 1995]. Collectively we refer to these techniques as semantic indexing.
Concept Spaces are collections of abstract concepts which are generated from concrete objects. The concepts are typically labeled with text phrases and the collections have traditionally been text documents. However, except for the generation operations, the logical concepts are independent of the physical objects they represent.
A Concept Space thus summarizes the statistically derived semantics of a given collection. In light of this fact, we have developed automatic techniques which enable us to perform a "Semantic Difference" (or semantic 'diff') between two collections. This gives us a quantitative measure for determining the difference, or semantic distance, between two collections.
One of the key problems that can be addressed with this technology is the evaluation of Concept Spaces and Category Maps, particularly in that we are experimenting with alternative algorithms and implementations for computing indexes of this nature.
In this seminar, we present the research results of our experiments in the automatic comparison and validation of Concept Spaces.
media validation in a multimedia retrieval system
Michael Ortega, Kaushik Chakrabarti, Kriengkrai Porkaew and Sharad Mehrotra
Conventional retrieval systems are commonly measured by their performance in terms of precision and recall. While the merit of these metrics is under debate, they enjoy widespread use. A central problem with these metrics is the implicit requirement of a small collection for which few experts can develop queries and determine relevant and non relevant sets. Increased collection sizes force us to investigate alternate metrics to determine the quality of retrieval. The MARS research group at the University of Illinois explores multimedia retrieval. While information retrieval is not a solved problem, some domains have significant progress in retrieval quality. We propose to exploit spatial and temporal associations between media to use a reference media and a test media. An automatic technique can compare the results and determine how much agreement exists between test and reference media, thus validating the test media retrieval under a correctness assumption of the reference media.
for Evaluating Database Selection Techniques
James C. French, Allison L. Powell, Charles L. Viles, Travis Emmitt and Kevin J. Prey
There have been a number of research efforts focusing on database selection and distributed searching; however, the variety of test environments and evaluation measures employed by these researchers has made it difficult to compare the results. We have created a testbed for evaluating database selection techniques and have conducted a study to examine the effectiveness of one specific technique. We will describe the evaluation measures that we are currently employing in our ongoing investigation and discuss their effectiveness in terms of the specific study.
Web Characterization and 4S
Edward A. Fox, Ghaleb Abdulla, and Neill Kipp
This presentation will provide perspective on DL metrics from three different sources. First, there will be a brief report on the work of the W3C Web Characterization Group, which has developed metrics and scenarios to characterize the Web. Second there will be a summary of the recently completed dissertation of Ghaleb Abdulla, who studied Web traffic and measured certain aspects of digital library usage. Third, there will be an explanation of how the 4S model can provide a framework for describing and studying digital libraries, based on doctoral studies of Neill Kipp.
with Complex Evaluations of Digital Libraries
Paul Kantor, Rutgers.
The "performance" of a digital library is a complex relation among inputs, outputs and constraints. Realistic evaluation of alternative technologies and designs for digital libraries will result in a wealth of data. Typically, configuration A will seem better than configuration B with regard to some, but not other scales or criteria. This will be true whether the measures are measures of input (or cost, bandwidth, operating expense) or output (activity, timeliness, reliability, usability, ...). In such situations it is not possible to arrive at a single realistic measure of value, which takes all of these aspects into account. On the other hand, there is a rigorous method for determining that some configurations are "dominant" in the sense that no others are definitely better. And for others, which are not dominant, it is possible to find the comparison set which shows up their shortcomings, and even to put a number to the amount of shortfall. This technology, called Data Envelopment Analysis, is an essential tool in the Rutgers project to understand and take advantage of the "Human in the Loop" in the design of digital libraries to serve widely diverse populations.
Types of Metrics for the Changing Landscape of Visual Dominant Interfaces
We are on the verge of the discovery of a new human information discourse. This new discourse will enable people to view, search, retrieve, manage, transform, and further present masses of information such as those found in the digital libraries of the future. Understanding the foundations of this new human information discourse will help guide our selection and refinement of the appropriate metrics. It no longer is the visual paradigm that is the dominant factor of the point and click interaction. It is the human to information space bindings facilitated by a suite of high order interaction techniques that will have to be measured. This presentation will give a vision of this new discourse and the fundamental advances that are envisioned to change how we interact with our personal to public information spaces.