1 / 8

EASTER Evaluating Automated Subject Tools for Enhancing Retrieval

EASTER Evaluating Automated Subject Tools for Enhancing Retrieval . Koraljka Golub, Vanda Broughton, George Buchanan, Emlyn Everitt, Debra Hiom, Marianne Lykke Nielsen, Dagobert Soergel, Douglas Tudhope. Background.

raine
Télécharger la présentation

EASTER Evaluating Automated Subject Tools for Enhancing Retrieval

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. EASTER Evaluating Automated Subject Tools for Enhancing Retrieval Koraljka Golub, Vanda Broughton, George Buchanan, Emlyn Everitt, Debra Hiom, Marianne Lykke Nielsen, Dagobert Soergel, Douglas Tudhope

  2. Background • EASTER is an 18-month JISC project funded under the Information Environment Programme 2009-11. • Started April this year and involves eight institutional partners • Aim is to test and evaluate a range of current tools for automated subject metadata generation • Anticipated outcomes: • better understanding of limitations and what possible • recommendations for services employing subject metadata in JISC community

  3. Rationale • EASTER investigates the creation and enrichment of subject metadata using existing automated tools. • Subject metadata are the most important in resource discovery, yet most expensive to produce manually. In addition, they are more difficult to generate automatically compared to formal metadata such as file type, title, etc. • Due to the high cost of evaluation, automated subject metadata tools are rarely tested in live environments of use. • Challenge facing digital collections, institutional repositories, and aggregators of how to provide high quality subject metadata at reasonable costs.

  4. Intute testbed • Test-bed is Intutehttp://www.intute.ac.uk • Tools for automated subject metadata generation will be tested in two contexts: Intute cataloguers in the cataloguing workflow; end-users of Intute who search for information • Task-based end-user retrieval study will examine contribution of automatically assigned terms and manually assigned terms

  5. Methodology • A methodology for evaluating such tools is also an intended outcome/contribution • The methodology includes creating an enhanced ‘gold standard’ test collection by careful manual cataloguing and expert review by cataloguers and users

  6. Types of subject metadata Two processes and types of subject metadata will be explored: • The creation of subject metadata: using controlled terms from thesauri 2) The enrichment of metadata records: with non-controlled subject keyphrases

  7. Candidate Tools Initial candidate tools (a subset will be selected after review) 1) Temis Categorizer (http://www.temis.com/index.php?id=78&selt=1) 2) KEA (http://www.nzdl.org/Kea/) 3) TextGarden (http://kt.ijs.si/Dunja/textgarden/) 4) TerMine (http://www.nactem.ac.uk/software/termine/) 5) KnowLib’s automated classifier (http://www.it.lth.se/knowlib/auto.htm) 6) Scorpion (http://www.oclc.org/research/software/scorpion/default.htm) 7) iVia project’s libiViaClassification (http://ivia.ucr.edu/manuals/stable/libiViaClassification/5.4.0/)

  8. Contact Project website http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/projects/easter/ Project publications http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/projects/easter/dissemination/ k.golub@ukoln.ac.uk dstudhope@glam.ac.uk

More Related