IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/worpat/v33y2011i3p248-256.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

TREC chemical information retrieval - An initial evaluation effort for chemical IR systems

Author

Listed:
  • Lupu, Mihai
  • Huang, Jimmy
  • Zhu, Jianhan
  • Tait, John

Abstract

There is little need to emphasize the importance of chemoinformatics and chemical information retrieval. However, what seems to require a lot more effort in convincing members of the community is the need for standardized evaluation procedures and measures. How confident are we, as users, that the search tools we used have given us all the information that we were looking for? It is unrealistic to believe a marketing campaign which claims that a specific patent IR (information retrieval) system can find all relevant results for a search topic. And if we don't trust marketing campaigns, how can we get an idea of what to expect from a patent search engine? One of the most prominent initiatives to work in this direction, of evaluating chemical IR tools, has started in 2009 with the support of NIST (National Institute for Standards and Technology): the TREC Chemical IR Track focuses on evaluation of search technologies for retrieval and knowledge discovery of digitally stored information on chemical patents and academic journal articles on chemistry. This paper describes our 2009 experience, presents the official results of the participating groups, and lays down the targets for 2010.

Suggested Citation

  • Lupu, Mihai & Huang, Jimmy & Zhu, Jianhan & Tait, John, 2011. "TREC chemical information retrieval - An initial evaluation effort for chemical IR systems," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 248-256, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:worpat:v:33:y:2011:i:3:p:248-256
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0172219011000536
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:worpat:v:33:y:2011:i:3:p:248-256. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/654/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.