-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[Docu] Semantics of contextKeywords->text not clear #20
Comments
The system relies on how the partners interpret the queries. |
Thanks for this clarification! Is this the reason why neither this query { doesn't return any result. By the way, we are not able to find any combination for 2 search phrases that returns a result. Nevertheless, the web-front end (https://www.kgportal.bl.ch/sammlungen) returns results for the keywords "König Europa". |
for this query you could retrieve results if you put two keywords into the query like in example 1 the query terms are conjunct in the case of KimPortal since it is considered as phrase. In general one of the main ideas of the maintopic field is, since we can normally easily file a result list with 10 or 20 results if all partners are used, gaining a higher precision. |
just as example where the mainTopic makes sense: "contextKeywords": [ |
Thanks for this information. As far as I can see the programmer of a client has to take into accout what functionalities are provided by which Data Provider. |
Peter, definitely not. Because:
I know that the current solution is not optimal, but working around and optimizing for single data providers is of no use - one then might as well connect to the data provider directly. |
thank you @chseifert, although you had more or less the same answer i was already in the process of answering. Therefore i post it anyway. Actually the intension of the system is to provide most helpfull items to users. The main topic it self is an possibility for frontends to increase |
In the best of all possible world both of you are right, but ... If you generate a query with the "Napoleon-data" Mendeley would return a result-set that seems to be something like "Napoleon OR Frankreich OR Schweiz OR Helena" and KimPortal one for "(Napoleon) AND (Frankreich OR Schweiz OR Helena)" (I hope I got it right) Thus, when a user provides more that one key word, the data from the KimPortal result-set seems to be "more common" (or "less surprising") for an "average user" than the data from the Mendeley result-set. And again: Yes, both of you are right when you mention that this ranking is based on a momentary survey, uses internal knowledge and might not be valid in "42 days". But currently such a heuristic helps us to "improve" the overall result-set. And yes for the third time, both of you are right again! It would be brain-damaging-stupid not to use the EEXCESS-PP for fetching those data! |
What you basically suggest for your client is a client-based result-set aggregation. Would be interesting to see how this turns out (especially in terms of user satisfaction). Conceptionally, this would be the job of the federated recommender - with the setting - that nothing is known about specific partners - and all analysis that you have been doing manually to find things out , would have to be done automatically without human intervention. |
just to correct something here, i meant that in that specific case above Mendeley is interpreting the query like an OR query, but thats just in that case above where one search term is missing. { ] |
A recommendation with the contextKeywords-text entry "assdwefwnff" return an empty result list which is absolutely reasonable.
Changing the contextKeywords-text entry to "assdwefwnff halloween" give the following response:
{
"provider": "federated",
"totalResults": 10,
"partnerResponseState": [
{
"systemID": "RijksMuseum",
"success": true
},
{
"systemID": "Deutsche Digitale Bibliothek",
"success": true
},
{
"systemID": "Europeana",
"success": false,
"errorMessage": "Waited too long for partner system 'Europeana' to respond 5023 ms "
},
{
"systemID": "Kierling",
"success": true
},
{
"systemID": "KIMPortal",
"success": true
},
{
"systemID": "Mendeley",
"success": true
},
{
"systemID": "ZBW",
"success": true
}
],
"queryID": "1468329700",
"result": [
{
"resultGroup": [
]
}
It is not totally clear why the second query returns more results. Looking at the last result, the "generatingQuery" was "(assdwefwnff AND halloween)". As the recommendation for "assdwefwnff" returns an empty result list, it is unclear why the more specific recommendation for "(assdwefwnff AND halloween)" now returns some elements.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: