IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jamest/v41y1990i4p264-271.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fuzzy versus probabilistic models for user relevance judgments

Author

Listed:
  • Mathew Koll
  • Padmini Srinivasan

Abstract

A crucial aspect of information retrieval is the process of making relevance judgments. Although this highly complex decision making procedure still eludes researchers, it is evident that a number of mental models are involved: models of the information need, retrieval system, database, user's knowledge in the subject area etc. In general, it is accepted that relevance judgments are made by evaluating documents for an overall conceptual match with the information need. In this study, we take the view that, given a document and a query, users first judge the document against the individual concepts in the query and then use some inferencing process to derive from these “atomic” decisions a “compound” judgment for the entire query. In other words we adopt a bottom up approach to this decision making process. In this context we examine strategies that may be used to infer compound relevance judgments made from judgments against smaller units of the information need. The probabilistic and fuzzy models are used as two points of reference against which to analyze the user's decision process in making compound judgments. Each model has a different way of approaching the problem. The objective was to empirically examine the relative effectiveness of the models at predicting compound judgments made by users, from their atomic judgments. The results show that the fuzzy model is sometimes a better predictor than the probabilistic model. The conclusions are interesting when comparing performances across AND and OR queries. No differences were observed between the two models for the OR queries. Both models tend to underestimate relevance for the AND queries. However, the probabilistic model regularly underestimated relevance more than the fuzzy model. The conclusion made is that the user seldom employs the AND operator as rigidly as assumed by these models and perhaps by most IR systems. Also, matching functions that better approximate the user's decision process are required to lead to more effective systems. © 1990 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Suggested Citation

  • Mathew Koll & Padmini Srinivasan, 1990. "Fuzzy versus probabilistic models for user relevance judgments," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 41(4), pages 264-271, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jamest:v:41:y:1990:i:4:p:264-271
    DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199006)41:43.0.CO;2-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199006)41:43.0.CO;2-3
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199006)41:43.0.CO;2-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:jamest:v:41:y:1990:i:4:p:264-271. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.asis.org .

    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.