Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
IRList Digest Volume 1 Number 02
IRList Digest Friday, 16 Aug 1985 Volume 1 : Issue 2
Today's Topics:
Politics - Sensitivity of Mailing Lists in Australia
EMAIL - Distribution List for Australia
Research Interests - Human and Silicon Memory
- Distributed Workstations and Backend Search
Article - Online Access Aids for Documentation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Shepherd <jas@mungunni>
Date: 23 Jul 85 12:57:22 +1000 (Tue)
Subject: Adding Australia to IRList
Ed,
We here at Melbourne University would be very interested in
receiving and contributing to the Information Retrieval Digest.
In order to cut transmission costs we plan to set up a mail
alias on the Australian gateway machine (munnari), and distribute
the list from there ...
As you can see, we will handle requests from our end, and simply
add people to the mailing list.
I have one major question, related to a recent experience with
the Parallel Symbolic computation digest. A number of people here
at Melbourne were put onto that mailing list, and received the
first few issues. Suddenly, they received mail telling them that
they would no longer be receiving the list because they were "foreign
nationals" and there was some problem with "technology transfer".
Do you have any feelings on this matter? (Perhaps Parallel Symbolic
computation is slightly more sensitive because of its military
connections). ...
Regards, John Shepherd (jas@mungunni)
UUCP: {seismo,ukc,mcvax,ubc-vision}!munnari!jas
ARPA: munnari!jas@seismo.ARPA
CSNET: jas@munnari.oz
-------
From: pje@munnari [Note- this is reachable by UUCP from SEISMO.ARPA - Ed]
Date: 23 Jul 85 12:55:25 +1000 (Tue)
Subject: IRList
Would you please add IR-List@munnari to the IRList subscription list.
We provide for redistribution of mailing list items to all sites in
the "oz" domain. So if you receive any subscription requests
from sites in Australia, please refer them to IR-List-Request@munnari.
Thank you. Peter Eden.
[Australian members please note! After this issue, you will be
deleted from the list, so be sure to get added as mentioned. - Ed]
-------
From: Wolf-Dieter Batz <L12%DHDURZ2.BITNET@WISCVM>
Date: 24-July-85
[Comments on interests by new members is most welcome! Please feel
free to respond to the implied question, folks! - Ed]
I'm interested in human memory phenomena as well as in
silicon-based memory systems. The latter interest especially
concentrates on an expert system for political issues.
Cordial Thanx & kind regards
--- Wodi
-------
Subj: From: Lee Hollaar <Hollaar@UTAH-20>
Date: Tue 30 Jul 85 06:25:42-MDT
Would you please add me to your distribution list for the IR digest.
I am the principal investigator of a project developing a distributed
workstation environment for information handing and retrieval, and
and directing the implementation of a high-speed backend search engine
(announced as a product through a spin-off company). I'm also the
Vice-Chair of SIGIR.
[SIGIR Forum should be of interest to all readers. It is distributed
to all members of the ACM Special Interest Group on Inf. Ret. - Ed]
Lee Hollaar
Hollaar@Utah-20
-------
From: "girill terry%d.mfenet"@LLL-MFE
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 85 07:26 pst
Subject: Access aids bibliography for IRlist distribution
IRlist readers who did not attend the ACM Twelfth Annual User
Services Conference, November 1984, in Reno, Nevada, may find this
bibliographic outline interesting. It covers recently discussed access
aids for online documentation......
Online Access Aids For Documentation:
A Bibliographic Outline
T. R. Girill
National Magnetic Fusion Energy Computer Center
University of California
Livermore, CA 94550
Background for a Panel on
Online Documentation and User Services
ACM SIGUCCS
Twelfth User Services Conference
Reno, Nevada
November 12, 1984
Computer documentation poses three information management problems,
access problems that readers face when they try to find answers to
questions using the documentation. All three problems arise from a
mismatch between what readers want or expect and what document authors
provide in (1) vocabulary, (2) text structure, and (3) text scope.
Techniques exist for addressing this threefold mismatch in
traditional, offline documentation. But these offline techniques are
often limited in breadth or power, or prove prohibitively complex or
expensive to apply.
Online solutions for each access problem also exist, and are much
more effective than their traditional counterparts. They apply
computational tools already successfully tested elsewhere, and they all
share the property of adapting a document's terminology, structure, or
scope to meet reader needs. The relative benefits of these adaptive
access aids can make a well-designed online documentation system very
helpful to answer-seeking users.
This outline reviews the three kinds of mismatch that cause access
problems for readers, and inventories the online techniques that respond
to each problem. Implementation details are already available in other
published articles and books, for which I provide full bibliographic
references.
Vocabulary Mismatch
-------------------
Mismatch between the vocabulary in a document and the query or search
terms used by prospective readers poses the first major access problem.
1. That a document's vocabulary affects the ease with with one can read
it is well known.
2. But vocabulary also strongly affects the retrieval of answer
passages from documents.
a. Common practice selects index terms and keywords chiefly from
the text of the document itself. [Browning]
b. But these text terms are only a small fraction of all possible
terms. This makes the index entries and keywords inappropriate
for many readers, who then cannot locate answer passages even
when the text does contain relevant answers and when the
searcher has a specific question formulated. [Sullivan]
3. Psychological experiments confirm the seriousness of this mismatch
of terms. [Furnas]
a. For passsages flagged with a single keyword, the probability
that a user's search term will match that keyword is often less
than 20%.
b. Even if keyword choice exploits empirical evidence of user
preferences, the match probability remains below 40%.
c. One must assign as many as 15 distinct keywords to a sought
passage to raise the probability of a first-time match by users
to 60-80%. "Different people, contexts, and motives give rise
to so varied a list of names that no single name, no matter how
well chosen, can do very well." [Furnas, p. 1796]
4. Although professional indexers know techniques to enhnace
index-entry and keyword choice, offline indexes can never adapt to
reader needs at the time of use.
5. On the other hand, actively "negotiating" search terms with
documentation users while they look for answers, via an interactive
interface to online text, can dramatically improve term-match (and
hence search-success) probability.
a. Programs that "begin with user's words and look for
interpretations--that is, try to recognize every possible word
that the users generate, and use empirical data to determine
what they mean by that word" by iterative guessing, can yield
match probabilities around 90%. [Furnas, p. 1797]
b. Even when keywords come exclusively from a standard, limited
thesaurus, "relevance feedback" from users during a search
improves performance. [Doszkocs]
c. Soliciting and exploiting feedback on term correlations in
online documents during a search promotes success by letting
users recognize, rather than try to imagine, the semantic
relationships they seek. [Doyle]
d. Soliciting and exploiting feedback on term frequencies in online
documents during a search quickly reveals and isolates relevant
passages amidst large collections. [Burket]
e. "Query optimization" programs can exploit synonymy and other
semantic relations to convert queries posed in user's terms into
faster-searching, less-expensive queries behind the scenes.
[Barr]
Structure Mismatch
------------------
Mismatch between a document's structure and the structure expected or
needed by the reader poses the second major access problem.
1. That a document's structure affects its coherence and clarity is
well known.
2. But document structure also strongly affects the ease with which
readers can find answer passages. [Gerrie, p. 117]
3. In this access-support role, the structure of offline documents is
intrinsically limited. [Swigger] [Wright]
a. No matter how astute its organization, a printed document can
have only one hierarchical structure.
b. Any single structure will fail to match the needs, expectations,
and distinctions of some who encounter it.
c. The more diverse a document's audience, the more common and
severe this mismatch will be.
d. Even a single reader may bring to a document different needs and
interests at different times, although its structure remains
unchanged.
4. Techniques to adapt document structure to user needs have been
developed to cope with these limitations.
a. Two techniques apply both offline and online.
1. Providing more than one outline or "retrieval guide" for a
document, where each embodies quite different distinctions,
can improve access. [Sprowl]
2. Converting the table of contents or text hierarchy into a
decision tree for locating passages can improve access.
[Wright]
b. Even in these cases, online implementation is often more
successful than offline.
1. Programs exist to easily generate outlines and decision
trees online. [Gaffney]
2. Updating is easier and more frequent if the outlines and
decision trees are kept online. [Sprowl]
3. Use can be monitored online, and the (empirically) most
common choices can then be offered first.
5. Furthermore, some adaptive techniques are only available online:
computer-directed searching techniques can actively adapt to suit
readers in ways impossible with traditional publications.
a. Document distribution and passage retrieval programs can keep a
model of the user, constantly modified in light of past requests
and performance. By relying on this model, the software can
actively map the user's needs onto the document's structure,
even if his interests change during a search. [Oddy]
b. Online search interfaces can infer a user's goals from his overt
request (including indirect or implicit goals). They can then
plan a "cooperative response" that furthers those search goals,
even when the user might have been unable to formulate them
himself (something no book can do). [Wilensky] [Jackson]
c. Integrating online documentation with the program it explains
can provide an alternative access structure, one tied to
practical applications and actual user tasks. Query-in-depth
(increasingly detailed) passage display can make integrated
documentation even more adaptive. [Houghton]
d. Online passage-retrieval programs can use data structures much
more complex and sophisticated than any writer could support or
any reader could exploit offline. Linked lists, associative
networks, and other relation-rich structures support diverse
search paths, multiple classifications, and elaborate cross
references among passages. [Price]
Scope Mismatch
--------------
Mismatch between a document's scope and the scope expected or needed by
readers poses the third major access problem.
1. That the scope of a document's passages affects readers' ability to
learn from them and notice key features in them is well known.
[Fleming] [Conklin]
2. But scope also strongly influences the ease with which readers can
find adequate answers.
a. If passages are too small or sparse (compared to what readers
need), then readers must "jump, detour, and change [search]
directions" frequently to find complete answers. [Weiss, p. 10]
b. If passages are too large or detailed (compared to what readers
need), they intimidate and confuse readers, leading to awkward
rereading and lengthy searches. [Bethke]
3. The ability of offline documents to provide passages of suitable
scope is limited.
a. Documents that avoid redundancy to keep passages small must rely
on an elaborate web of cross references to provide detailed
answers. Following these reference chains can be awkward and
confusing.
b. Documents that avoid cross references by including many
intentionally redundant (hence complete) passages automatically
grow in bulk. Their large size can intimidate readers and boost
costs.
4. Techniques to adapt passage scope to reader needs are available
online that would be impractical or impossible in offline
documentation.
a. Freed from the offline contraints of page size and binding, one
can package online text in intellectually meaningful chunks, in
display units whose scope is based on content alone. [Badre]
[Rothenberg]
b. Online cross references between such meaningful chunks minimize
access delays and reader confusion because they lead directly
and precisely to related text, which seldom occurs offline.
[Girill]
c. Online passage-display programs can support virtual redundancy,
by showing a set of text lines wherever it is relevant but
without storing duplicate copies of the lines. This gives the
reader the quick-answer benefits of a highly redundant document,
yet without an increase in total size, and hence without
intimidation, unwieldy bulk, or higher storage costs. [Luk]
References
----------
Badre, Albert. "Designing Chunks for Sequentially Displayed
Information," in Albert Badre and Ben Shneiderman, Eds.,
Directions in Human/Computer Interaction (Norwood, NJ: Ablex
Publishing Co., 1982), pp. 179-193.
Barr, Avron and Edward A. Feigenbaum. The Handbook of Artificial
Intelligence (Los Altos, CA: William Kaufman, Inc., 1982),
vol. 2, Ch. VII-D, "Artificial Intelligence in Database
Management."
Bethke, F. J. Ease-of-Use Study Group Report (San Jose, CA: IBM Santa
Teresa Laboratory, 1979).
Browning, Christine. Guide to Effective Software Technical Writing
(Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1984), Ch. 8.
Burket, T. G., P. Emrath, and D. J. Kuck. "The Use of Vocabulary Files
for On-line Information Retrieval," Information Processing and
Management, 15 (1979), 281-289.
Conklin, E. J., K. Ehrlich, and D. D. McDonald. "An Empirical
Investigation of Visual Salience and its Role in Text
Generation," Cognition and Brain Theory 6 (1983), 197-225.
Doszkocs, Tamas and Barbara A. Rapp. "Searching MEDLINE in English: A
Prototype User Interface with Natural Language Query, Ranked
Output, and Relevance Feedback," Proceedings of the ASIS 42nd
Annual Meeting, vol. 16 (White Plains, NY: Knowledge Industry
Publications, 1979), 131-137.
Doyle, Lauren B. "Semantic Road Maps for Literature Searchers," Journal
of the Association for Computing Machinery, 8 (October 1961),
553-578.
Fleming, Malcolm and W. Howard Levie. Instructional Message Design
(Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications,
1978), Ch. 2.
Furnas, G. W. , T. K. Landauer, L. M. Gomez, and S. J. Dumais.
"Statistical Semantics: Analysis of the Potential Performance
of Key-Word Information Systems," Bell System Technical
Journal, 62 (July 1983), 1753-1806.
Gaffney, P. W., J. W. Wooten, and K. A. Kessel. NITPACK--A Numerical
Interactive Tree Package (Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, 1982), Report ORNL/CSD-89.
Gerrie, Brenda. Online Information Systems (Arlington, VA: Information
Resources Press, 1983), Ch. 4, "The Retrieval Process."
Girill, T. R. "Display Units for Online Passage Retrieval: A
Comparative Analysis," Proceedings of the 31st International
Technical Communication Conference, (Seattle: Society for
Technical Communication, 1984), ATA87-90.
Houghton, Raymond C. Jr. "Online Help Systems: A Conspectus,"
Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery, 27
(February 1984), 126-133.
Jackson, Peter and Paul Lefrere. "On the Application of Rule-Based
Techniques to the Design of Advice-Giving Systems,"
International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 20 (January
1984), 63-86.
Luk, Clement and T. R. Girill. "DOCUMENT: An Interactive, Online
Solution to Four Documentation Problems," Communications of the
Association for Computing Machinery, 26 (May 1983), 328-337.
Oddy, R. N. "Information Retrieval Through Man-Machine Dialogue,"
Journal of Documentation, 33 (March 1977), 1-14.
Price, Lynne A. "Using Offline Documentation Online," SIGSOC Bulletin,
13 (January 1982), 15-20.
Rothenberg, J. H. "Online Tutorials and Documentation for the SIGMA
Message Service," Proceedings of the AFIPS National Computer
Conference, vol. 48 (Montvale, NJ: AFIPS Press, 1979),
863-867.
Sprowl, James A. "Computer-Assisted Legal Research--An Analysis of
Full-Text Document Delivery Systems," American Bar Foundation
Research Journal, 175 (1976), 175-226.
Sullivan, Patricia, and Carol Janik. "Adapting Manuals to a Variety of
Audiences: Information Access," Proceedings of the 31st
International Technical Communication Conference (Seattle:
Society for Technical Communication, 1984), WE187-190.
Swigger, Keith. "A Structured Model for Software Documentation," 13th
ASIS Midyear Meeting, Bloomington, IN, May 21, 1984, 9 pp.
Weiss, Edmond. "Usability: Toward a Science of User Documentation,"
Computerworld, 17 (January 1983), 9-16.
Wilensky, Robert. Talking to UNIX in English: An Overview of an Online
Consultant, (Berkeley: Computer Science Division, University
of California, 1982), Report UCB/CSD 82/104.
Wright, Patricia. "Presenting Technical Information: A Survey of
Research Findings," Instructional Science, 6 (April 1977),
93-134.
--------------------------
END OF IRList Digest
********************
