Methodology and campaign design for the evaluation of semantic search tools

S. Wrigley, D. Reinhard, Khadija Elbedweihy, A. Bernstein, F. Ciravegna
{"title":"Methodology and campaign design for the evaluation of semantic search tools","authors":"S. Wrigley, D. Reinhard, Khadija Elbedweihy, A. Bernstein, F. Ciravegna","doi":"10.1145/1863879.1863889","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The main problem with the state of the art in the semantic search domain is the lack of comprehensive evaluations. There exist only a few efforts to evaluate semantic search tools and to compare the results with other evaluations of their kind.\n In this paper, we present a systematic approach for testing and benchmarking semantic search tools that was developed within the SEALS project. Unlike other semantic web evaluations our methodology tests search tools both automatically and interactively with a human user in the loop. This allows us to test not only functional performance measures, such as precision and recall, but also usability issues, such as ease of use and comprehensibility of the query language.\n The paper describes the evaluation goals and assumptions; the criteria and metrics; the type of experiments we will conduct as well as the datasets required to conduct the evaluation in the context of the SEALS initiative. To our knowledge it is the first effort to present a comprehensive evaluation methodology for Semantic Web search tools.","PeriodicalId":239913,"journal":{"name":"SEMSEARCH '10","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SEMSEARCH '10","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/1863879.1863889","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

The main problem with the state of the art in the semantic search domain is the lack of comprehensive evaluations. There exist only a few efforts to evaluate semantic search tools and to compare the results with other evaluations of their kind. In this paper, we present a systematic approach for testing and benchmarking semantic search tools that was developed within the SEALS project. Unlike other semantic web evaluations our methodology tests search tools both automatically and interactively with a human user in the loop. This allows us to test not only functional performance measures, such as precision and recall, but also usability issues, such as ease of use and comprehensibility of the query language. The paper describes the evaluation goals and assumptions; the criteria and metrics; the type of experiments we will conduct as well as the datasets required to conduct the evaluation in the context of the SEALS initiative. To our knowledge it is the first effort to present a comprehensive evaluation methodology for Semantic Web search tools.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估语义搜索工具的方法和活动设计
目前语义搜索领域的主要问题是缺乏全面的评估。对语义搜索工具进行评估并将结果与同类其他评估进行比较的工作很少。在本文中,我们提出了一种系统的方法来测试和基准化在SEALS项目中开发的语义搜索工具。与其他语义web评估不同,我们的方法既自动测试搜索工具,也与循环中的人类用户进行交互。这使我们不仅可以测试功能性能度量,例如准确性和召回率,还可以测试可用性问题,例如查询语言的易用性和可理解性。本文阐述了评价目标和假设;标准和度量;我们将进行的实验类型,以及在海豹突击队行动的背景下进行评估所需的数据集。据我们所知,这是第一次为语义网搜索工具提出一个全面的评估方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Using BM25F for semantic search Dear search engine: what's your opinion about...?: sentiment analysis for semantic enrichment of web search results The wisdom in tweetonomies: acquiring latent conceptual structures from social awareness streams Paraphrasing invariance coefficient: measuring para-query invariance of search engines A large-scale system for annotating and querying quotations in news feeds
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1