ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Efficient passage ranking for document databases
Full text PdfPdf (329 KB)
Source ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS) archive
Volume 17 ,  Issue 4  (October 1999) table of contents
Pages: 406 - 439  
Year of Publication: 1999
ISSN:1046-8188
Authors
Marcin Kaszkiel  RMIT Univ., Melbourne, Australia
Justin Zobel  RMIT Univ., Melbourne, Australia
Ron Sacks-Davis  RMIT Univ., Melbourne, Australia
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 11,   Downloads (12 Months): 79,   Citation Count: 23
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues   peer to peer  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
Save this Article to a Binder    Display Formats: BibTex  EndNote ACM Ref   
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/326440.326445
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Queries to text collections are resolved by ranking the documents in the collection and returning the highest-scoring documents to the user. An alternative retrieval method is to rank passages, that is, short fragments of documents, a strategy that can improve effectiveness and identify relevant material in documents that are too large for users to consider as a whole. However, ranking of passages can considerably increase retrieval costs. In this article we explore alternative query evaluation techniques, and develop new tecnhiques for evaluating queries on passages. We show experimentally that, appropriately implemented, effective passage retrieval is practical in limited memory on a desktop machine. Compared to passage ranking with adaptations of current document ranking algorithms, our new “DO-TOS” passage-ranking algorithm requires only a fraction of the resources, at the cost of a small loss of effectiveness.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

1
2
3
 
4
BERTINO, E., OOI, B., SACKS-DAVIS, R., TAN, K.-L., AND ZOBEL, J. 1997. Text databases. In Indexing Techniques for Advanced Database Systems Kluwer Academic Publishers, Hing-ham, MA.
5
6
 
7
 
8
CLARKE,C.L.A.,CORMACK,G.V.,AND BURKOWSKI, F. J. 1995. Shortest substring ranking MultiText experiments for TREC-4. In Proceedings of the 4th Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-4, Washington, D.C., Nov.), D. K. Harman, Ed. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, 295-304.
 
9
CLARKE, C., CORMACK, G., AND TUDHOPE, E. 1997. Relevance ranking for one to three term queries. In Proceedings of the 5th RIAO Conference 388-412.
 
10
CORMACK, G., PALMER, C., BIESBROUCK, M., AND CLARKE, C. 1998. Deriving very short queries for high precision and recall. In Proceedings of the 7th Text Retreival Conference (TREC-7)
 
11
 
12
FULLER, M., KASZKIEL, M., KIM, D., NG, C., ROBERTSON, J., WILKINSON, R., WU, M., AND ZOBEL, J. 1998. TREC 7 ad hoc, speech, and interactive tracks at MDS/CSIRO. In Proceedings of the 7th Text Retreival Conference (TREC-7)
 
13
FULLER, M., KASZKIEL, M., NG, C., VINES, P., WILKINSON, R., AND ZOBEL, J. 1997. MDS TREC 6 report. In Proceedings of the 6th Text Retreival Conference (TREC-6, Nov.), E. Voorhees and D. Harman, Eds. 241-258.
 
14
 
15
HARMAN,D.AND CANDELA, G. 1990. Retrieving records from a gigabyte of text on a minicomputer using statistical ranking. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 41, 8, 581-589.
16
17
18
 
19
20
 
21
MOFFAT, A., ZOBEL, J., AND KLEIN, S. 1995. Improved inverted file processing for large text databases. In Proceedings of the 6th Australasian Database Conference (Adelaide, Jan.), R. Sacks-Davis and J. Zobel, Eds. 162-171.
 
22
PERSIN, M. 1996. Efficient implementation of text retrieval techniques. RMIT, Melbourne, Australia.
 
23
 
24
25

CITED BY  23
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Collaborative Colleagues:
Marcin Kaszkiel: colleagues
Justin Zobel: colleagues
Ron Sacks-Davis: colleagues

Peer to Peer - Readers of this Article have also read: