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

Mona Golestan Far

dblp:166/3044 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2015
—ORCID · none

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

Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1 · 1 first-author

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
1 paper
Information retrieval · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Information retrieval › document retrieval › domain-specific retrieval › legal information retrieval › patent retrieval
prior art search
0.212015
On Term Selection Techniques for Patent Prior Art Search · SIGIR 2015
Information retrieval
relevance feedback
0.212015
On Term Selection Techniques for Patent Prior Art Search · SIGIR 2015
Information retrieval › query formulation
term selection
0.212015
On Term Selection Techniques for Patent Prior Art Search · SIGIR 2015
Information retrieval
retrieval models
0.112015
On Term Selection Techniques for Patent Prior Art Search · SIGIR 2015

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

query reduction · 0.2BM25 · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2015 On Term Selection Techniques for Patent Prior Art Search
abstract
In this paper, we investigate the influence of term selection on retrieval performance on the CLEF-IP prior art test collection, using the Description section of the patent query with Language Model (LM) and BM25 scoring functions. We find that an oracular relevance feedback system that extracts terms from the judged relevant documents far outperforms the baseline and performs twice as well on MAP as the best competitor in CLEF-IP 2010. We find a very clear term selection value threshold for use when choosing terms. We also noticed that most of the useful feedback terms are actually present in the original query and hypothesized that the baseline system could be substantially improved by removing negative query terms. We tried four simple automated approaches to identify negative terms for query reduction but we were unable to notably improve on the baseline performance with any of them. However, we show that a simple, minimal interactive relevance feedback approach where terms are selected from only the first retrieved relevant document outperforms the best result from CLEF-IP 2010 suggesting the promise of interactive methods for term selection in patent prior art search.
Mona Golestan Far, Scott Sanner, Mohamed Reda Bouadjenek, Gabriela Ferraro, David Hawking
SIGIR1