A Novel Combined Term Suggestion Service for Domain-Specific Digital Libraries

Interactive query expansion can assist users during their query formulation process. We conducted a user study with over 4,000 unique visitors and four different design approaches for a search term suggestion service. As a basis for our evaluation we have implemented services which use three different vocabularies: (1) user search terms, (2) terms from a terminology service and (3) thesaurus terms. Additionally, we have created a new combined service which utilizes thesaurus term and terms from a domain-specific search term re-commender. Our results show that the thesaurus-based method clearly is used more often compared to the other single-method implementations. We interpret this as a strong indicator that term suggestion mechanisms should be domain-specific to be close to the user terminology. Our novel combined approach which interconnects a thesaurus service with additional statistical relations out-performed all other implementations. All our observations show that domain-specific vocabulary can support the user in finding alternative concepts and formulating queries.Comment: To be published in Proceedings of Theories and Practice in Digital Libraries (TPDL), 201

Query Expansion for Survey Question Retrieval in the Social Sciences

In recent years, the importance of research data and the need to archive and to share it in the scientific community have increased enormously. This introduces a whole new set of challenges for digital libraries. In the social sciences typical research data sets consist of surveys and questionnaires. In this paper we focus on the use case of social science survey question reuse and on mechanisms to support users in the query formulation for data sets. We describe and evaluate thesaurus- and co-occurrence-based approaches for query expansion to improve retrieval quality in digital libraries and research data archives. The challenge here is to translate the information need and the underlying sociological phenomena into proper queries. As we can show retrieval quality can be improved by adding related terms to the queries. In a direct comparison automatically expanded queries using extracted co-occurring terms can provide better results than queries manually reformulated by a domain expert and better results than a keyword-based BM25 baseline.Comment: to appear in Proceedings of 19th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries 2015 (TPDL 2015

Assessing Visualization Techniques for the Search Process in Digital Libraries

In this paper we present an overview of several visualization techniques to support the search process in Digital Libraries (DLs). The search process typically can be separated into three major phases: query formulation and refinement, browsing through result lists and viewing and interacting with documents and their properties. We discuss a selection of popular visualization techniques that have been developed for the different phases to support the user during the search process. Along prototypes based on the different techniques we show how the approaches have been implemented. Although various visualizations have been developed in prototypical systems very few of these approaches have been adapted into today's DLs. We conclude that this is most likely due to the fact that most systems are not evaluated intensely in real-life scenarios with real information seekers and that results of the interesting visualization techniques are often not comparable. We can say that many of the assessed systems did not properly address the information need of cur-rent users.Comment: 23 pages, 14 figures, pre-print to appear in "Wissensorganisation mit digitalen Technologien" (deGruyter

How do practitioners, PhD students and postdocs in the social sciences assess topic-specific recommendations?

"In this paper we describe a case study where researchers in the social sciences (n=19) assess topical relevance for controlled search terms, journal names and author names which have been compiled by recommender services. We call these services Search Term Recommender (STR), Journal Name Recommender (JNR) and Author Name Recommender (ANR) in this paper. The researchers in our study (practitioners, PhD students and postdocs) were asked to assess the top n preprocessed recommendations from each recommender for specific research topics which have been named by them in an interview before the experiment. Our results show clearly that the presented search term, journal name and author name recommendations are highly relevant to the researchers topic and can easily be integrated for search in Digital Libraries. The average precision for top ranked recommendations is 0.749 for author names, 0.743 for search terms and 0.728 for journal names. The relevance distribution differs largely across topics and researcher types. Practitioners seem to favor author name recommendations while postdocs have rated author name recommendations the lowest. In the experiment the small postdoc group favors journal name recommendations." (author's abstract

How do practitioners, PhD students and postdocs in the social sciences assess topic-specific recommendations?

Abstract. In this paper we describe a case study where researchers in the social sciences (n=19) assess topical relevance for controlled search terms, journal names and author names which have been compiled by recommender services. We call these services Search Term Recommender (STR), Journal Name Recommender (JNR) and Author Name Recommender (ANR) in this paper. The researchers in our study (practitioners, PhD students and postdocs) were asked to assess the top n preprocessed recommendations from each recommender for specific research topics which have been named by them in an interview before the experiment. Our results show clearly that the presented search term, journal name and author name recommendations are highly relevant to the researchers topic and can easily be integrated for search in Digital Libraries. The average precision for top ranked recommendations is 0.749 for author names, 0.743 for search terms and 0.728 for journal names. The relevance distribution di↵ers largely across topics and researcher types. Practitioners seem to favor author name recommendations while postdocs have rated author name recommendations the lowest. In the experiment the small postdoc group favors journal name recommendations

Suchunterstützung in akademischen Suchmaschinen

Der Beitrag schließt an die Ausarbeitungen zu wissenschaftlichen Suchmaschinen, Query Understanding und Spezialsuchen der Bände 1 und 2 an. Es soll gezeigt werden, wie durch die Konvergenz von qualitativem Fach-Content und Suchtechnologien Mehrwerte gerade für Expertensuchen generiert werden können. Die Beispiele aus unterschiedlichen akademischen Suchmaschinen (u.a. BASE, Web of Knowledge, Pubmed, Scopus, sowiport, Google Scholar und Deutsche Digitale Bibliothek) sollen das illustrieren, insofern sie grundsätzliche Fragen und Lösungsvorschläge zeigen, die aber über den einzelnen Anwendungsfall hinausweisen. Als in der Praxis erprobte State-of-the-Art-Dienste werden sie gleichwohl mit konkreten Beschreibungen der informationstechnischen Grundlagen untermauert