Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Justin Clark

dblp:13/4527 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
5ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2022
—ORCID · conflict

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 4 · 2 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 2 · 1 since 2021Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 first-authorHuman-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
2 papers
Information retrieval · 100%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Information retrieval › evaluation › test collection
test collection construction
0.612022
From Little Things Big Things Grow: A Collection with Seed Studies for Medical Systematic Review Literature Search · SIGIR 2022
Information retrieval › query formulation
boolean query formulation
0.412020
Automatic Boolean Query Formulation for Systematic Review Literature Search · WWW 2020
Information retrieval
query formulation
0.412020
Automatic Boolean Query Formulation for Systematic Review Literature Search · WWW 2020
Information retrieval
search engines
0.412020
Automatic Boolean Query Formulation for Systematic Review Literature Search · WWW 2020
Information retrieval › document retrieval › domain-specific retrieval › biomedical information retrieval
biomedical literature search
0.212022
From Little Things Big Things Grow: A Collection with Seed Studies for Medical Systematic Review Literature Search · SIGIR 2022

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

syntax parsing · 0.4stemming · 0.4search filters · 0.4entity expansion · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2022 From Little Things Big Things Grow: A Collection with Seed Studies for Medical Systematic Review Literature Search
abstract
Medical systematic review query formulation is a highly complex task done by trained information specialists. Complexity comes from the reliance on lengthy Boolean queries, which express a detailed research question. To aid query formulation, information specialists use a set of exemplar documents, called 'seed studies', prior to query formulation. Seed studies help verify the effectiveness of a query prior to the full assessment of retrieved studies. Beyond this use of seeds, specific IR methods can exploit seed studies for guiding both automatic query formulation and new retrieval models. One major limitation of work to date is that these methods exploit 'pseudo seed studies' through retrospective use of included studies (i.e., relevance assessments). However, we show pseudo seed studies are not representative of real seed studies used by information specialists. Hence, we provide a test collection with real world seed studies used to assist with the formulation of queries. To support our collection, we provide an analysis, previously not possible, on how seed studies impact retrieval and perform several experiments using seed study based methods to compare the effectiveness of using seed studies versus pseudo seed studies. We make our test collection and the results of all of our experiments and analysis available at http://github.com/ielab/sysrev-seed-collection.
Shuai Wang 0032, Harrisen Scells, Justin Clark, Bevan Koopman, Guido Zuccon
SIGIR3
2021 Media Cloud: Massive Open Source Collection of Global News on the Open Web
Hal Roberts, Rahul Bhargava, Linas Valiukas, Dennis Jen, Momin M. Malik, Cindy Bishop, Emily Ndulue, Aashka Dave, Justin Clark, Bruce Etling, Robert Faris, Anushka Shah, Jasmin Rubinovitz, Alexis Hope, Catherine D'Ignazio, Fernando Bermejo, Yochai Benkler, Ethan Zuckerman
ICWSM9
2020 A Computational Approach for Objectively Derived Systematic Review Search Strategies
Harrisen Scells, Guido Zuccon, Bevan Koopman, Justin Clark
ECIR (1)4
2020 Automatic Boolean Query Formulation for Systematic Review Literature Search
abstract
Formulating Boolean queries for systematic review literature search is a challenging task. Commonly, queries are formulated by information specialists using the protocol specified in the review and interactions with the research team. Information specialists have in-depth experience on how to formulate queries in this domain, but may not have in-depth knowledge about the reviews’ topics. Query formulation requires a significant amount of time and effort, and is performed interactively; specialists repeatedly formulate queries, attempt to validate their results, and reformulate specific Boolean clauses. In this paper, we investigate the possibility of automatically formulating a Boolean query from the systematic review protocol. We propose a novel five-step approach to automatic query formulation, specific to Boolean queries in this domain, which approximates the process by which information specialists formulate queries. In this process, we use syntax parsing to derive the logical structure of high-level concepts in a query, automatically extract and map concepts to entities in order to perform entity expansion, and finally apply post-processing operations (such as stemming and search filters).
Harrisen Scells, Guido Zuccon, Bevan Koopman, Justin Clark
WWW4
2004 Selecting components in large COTS repositories
Justin Clark, Chris Clarke, Stefano De Panfilis, Giampiero Granatella, Paolo Predonzani, Alberto Sillitti, Giancarlo Succi, Tullio Vernazza
J. Syst. Softw.1