Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
The Scientific World Journal
Volume 2014, Article ID 404518, 10 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/404518
Research Article

An Exponentiation Method for XML Element Retrieval

Department of Computer Science, Faculty of Science, Kasetsart University, Bangkok 10903, Thailand

Received 8 August 2013; Accepted 5 December 2013; Published 13 February 2014

Academic Editors: J. Shu and F. Yu

Copyright © 2014 Tanakorn Wichaiwong. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. J. Kamps, M. Marx, M. de Rijke, and B. Sigurbjornsson, “Structured queries in xml retrieval,” in Proceedings of the 14th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM '05), pp. 4–11, ACM, 2005.
  2. R. Stephen, Z. Hugo, and T. Michael, “Simple bm25 extension to multiple weighted fields,” in Proceedings of the 13th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM '04), D. Grossman, L. Gravano, C. Zhai, O. Herzog, and D. A. Evans, Eds., pp. 42–49, ACM Press, 2004.
  3. J. Kim, X. Xue, and W. B. Croft, “A probabilistic retrieval model for semistructured data,” in Proceedings of the 31th European Conference on IR Research on Advances in Information Retrieval (ECIR '09), pp. 228–239, Springer, 2009.
  4. J. Y. Kim and W. B. Croft, “A field relevance model for structured document retrieval,” in Proceedings of the 34th European conference on Advances in Information Retrieval (ECIR '12), pp. 97–108, Springer, 2012.
  5. A. Broschart and R. Schenkel, “Proximity-aware scoring for XML retrieval,” in Proceedings of the 31st Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR '08), pp. 845–846, July 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. T. Schlieder and H. Meuss, “Querying and ranking XML documents,” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 53, no. 6, pp. 489–503, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. P. Ogilvie and J. Callan, “Language models and structured document retrieval,” in Proceedings of the 1st Workshop of the INitiative for the Evaluation of XML Retrieval (INEX '03), pp. 18–23, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2003.
  8. J. Kamps, M. De Rijke, and B. Sigurbjörnsson, “The importance of length normalization for XML retrieval,” Information Retrieval, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 631–654, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. A. Theobald and G. Weikum, “The index-based xxl search engine for querying xml data with relevance ranking,” in Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Extending Database Technology: Advances in Database Technology, pp. 477–495, Springer, 2002.
  10. M. Theobald, H. Bast, D. Majumdar, R. Schenkel, and G. Weikum, “TopX: efficient and versatile top-k query processing for semistructured data,” VLDB Journal, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 81–115, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. M. Gery, C. Largeron, and F. Thollard, “Ujm at inex 2008: pre impacting of tags weights,” in Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop of the Initiative for the Evaluation of XML Advances in Focused Retrieval, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 46–53, Springer, 2008.
  12. A. Trotman and M. Lalmas, “Why structural hints in queires do not help XML-retrieval,” in Proceedings of the 29th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pp. 711–712, ACM, August 2006. View at Scopus
  13. S. Geva, “Gpx—gardens point xml information retrieval at inex 2006,” in Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop of the Initiative for the Evaluation of XML Comparative Evaluation of XML Information Retrieval Systems, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 137–150, Springer, 2007.
  14. P. Ogilvie and J. Callan, “Parameter estimation for a simple hierarchical generative model for xml retrieval,” in Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop of the Initiative for the Evaluation of XML Advances in XML Information Retrieval and Evaluation, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 211–224, Springer, 2006.
  15. Y. Mass and M. Mandelbrod, “Using the inex environment as a test bed for various user models for xml retrieval,” in Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop of the Initiative for the Evaluation of XML Advances in XML Information Retrieval and Evaluation, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 187–195, Springer, 2006.
  16. T. Wichaiwong and C. Jaruskulchai, “Mexir at inex-2011,” in Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop of the Initiative for the Evaluation of XML Focused Retrieval of Content and Structure, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 180–187, Springer, 2012.
  17. M. Theobald, Q. Wang, G. Ramrez, M. M. Marx, M. Theobald, and J. Kamps, “Overview of the inex 2011 data-centric track,” in Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop of the Initiative for the Evaluation of XML Retrieval Focused Retrieval of Content and Structure (INEX '12), Springer, 2012.
  18. D. V. Ayala, D. Pinto, S. L. Silverio, E. Castillo, and M. T. Vidal, “Buap: a recursive approach to the data-centric track of inex 2011,” in Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop of the Initiative for the Evaluation of XML Focused Retrieval of Content and Structure, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 161–166, Springer, 2012.
  19. Q. Wang, Y. Gan, and Y. Sun, “Ruc at inex 2011 data-centric track,” in Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop of the Initiative for the Evaluation of XML Focused Retrieval of Content and Structure, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 167–179, Springer, 2012.
  20. A. Schuth and M. Marx, “University of amsterdam data centric ad hoc and faceted search runs,” in Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop of the Initiative for the Evaluation of XML Focused Retrieval of Content and Structure, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 155–160, Springer, 2012.
  21. G. Ramrez, “Upf at inex 2011: books and social search track and data-centric track,” in Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop of the Initiative for the Evaluation of XML Focused Retrieval of Content and Structure, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 146–154, Springer, 2012.
  22. C. Laitang, K. Pinel-Sauvagnat, and M. Boughanem, “Edit distance for xml information retrieval: some experiments on the datacentric track of inex 2011,” in Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop of the Initiative for the Evaluation of XML Focused Retrieval of Content and Structure, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 138–145, Springer, 2012.
  23. A. Trotman and M. Lalmas, “The interpretation of cas,” in Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop of the Initiative for the Evaluation of XML Advances in XML Information Retrieval and Evaluation, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 58–71, Springer, 2005.
  24. A. Trotman and B. Sigurbjörnsson, “Nex, now and next,” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop of the Initiative for the Evaluation of XML Advances in XML Information Retrieval, vol. 3493 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 41–53, Springer, 2004.
  25. A. Trotman and B. Sigurbjörnsson, “Narrowed extended xpath i (nexi),” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop of the Initiative for the Evaluation of XML Advances in XML Information Retrieval, vol. 3493 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 16–40, Springer, 2004.
  26. S. Robertson and H. Zaragoza, “The probabilistic relevance framework: BM25 and beyond,” Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 333–389, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. R. Stephen, S. Walker, S. Jones, M. Hancock-Beaulieu, and M. Gatford, “Okapi at trec-3,” in Overview of the Third Text Retrieval Conference, pp. 109–126, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 1994. View at Google Scholar
  28. K. Y. Itakura and C. L. A. Clarke, “A framework for BM25F-based XML retrieval,” in Proceedings of the 33rd Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR '10), pp. 843–844, July 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. A. Aksyono, Introduction to Search with Sphinx, O'Reilly Media, 2011.
  30. T. Wichaiwong and C. Juruskulchai, “A score sharing method for xml element retrieval information,” An International Interdisciplinary Journal, vol. 15, no. 10, pp. 4165–4178, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  31. R. A. Baeza-Yates and B. Ribeiro-Neto, Modern Information Retrieval, The Concepts and Technology Behind Search, Addison Wesley Longman, Boston, Mass, USA, 2011.
  32. J. Kamps, J. Pehcevski, G. Kazai, M. Lalmas, and S. Robertson, “Inex 2007 evaluation measures,” in Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop of the Initiative for the Evaluation of XML Focused Access to XML Documents, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 24–33, Springer, 2007.
  33. T. Wichaiwong and C. Jaruskulchai, “Mexir: an implementation of high performance and high precision on xml retrieval,” Computer Technology and Application, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 301–310, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  34. T. Wichaiwong and C. Jaruskulchai, “XML retrieval more efficient using ADXPI indexing scheme,” in Proceedings of the 25th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications Workshops (WAINA '11), pp. 638–643, March 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus