Comments on: micro-IR http://probablyirrelevant.org/2009/09/micro-ir/ Information Retrieval Research and Development Tue, 22 Jun 2010 14:21:52 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Gene Golovchinsky http://probablyirrelevant.org/2009/09/micro-ir/comment-page-1/#comment-3320 Gene Golovchinsky Mon, 14 Sep 2009 18:07:45 +0000 http://probablyirrelevant.org/?p=66#comment-3320 I think one of the key issues here is whether the retrieved information is actionable, that is, whether enough context is represented in the system to suggest meaningful actions based on retrieved results. <a href="http://palblog.fxpal.com/?p=1818" rel="nofollow">Here</a>'s my take. I think one of the key issues here is whether the retrieved information is actionable, that is, whether enough context is represented in the system to suggest meaningful actions based on retrieved results. Here’s my take.

]]> By: Daniel Tunkelang http://probablyirrelevant.org/2009/09/micro-ir/comment-page-1/#comment-3281 Daniel Tunkelang Sat, 12 Sep 2009 18:39:38 +0000 http://probablyirrelevant.org/?p=66#comment-3281 Great post! I just posted my own reaction here: http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/09/12/micro-vs-macro-information-retrieval/ Great post! I just posted my own reaction here:

http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/09/12/micro-vs-macro-information-retrieval/

]]> By: Jinyoung http://probablyirrelevant.org/2009/09/micro-ir/comment-page-1/#comment-3268 Jinyoung Sat, 12 Sep 2009 03:52:17 +0000 http://probablyirrelevant.org/?p=66#comment-3268 Hi, Miles. (we met in ECIR) I agree with Fernando in that we've been dealing with very constrained features (i.e. textual similarity) in traditional IR. What characterize Micro IR seems to be that the context (searcher goal) is known, with domain-specific notion of relevance (goodness) and similarity measures. I guess current IR frameworks (including learning to rank) can accmmodiate most of these problems. After all, it's still about combining evidences, albeit of a different type. This also reminds me of vertical search, where we need to infer user's information goal given only query-words. Here, each information type may have somewhat different notion of relevance as well, although not to the extent you talk about in Micro IR. Hi, Miles. (we met in ECIR)

I agree with Fernando in that we’ve been dealing with very constrained features (i.e. textual similarity) in traditional IR.

What characterize Micro IR seems to be that the context (searcher goal) is known, with domain-specific notion of relevance (goodness) and similarity measures. I guess current IR frameworks (including learning to rank) can accmmodiate most of these problems. After all, it’s still about combining evidences, albeit of a different type.

This also reminds me of vertical search, where we need to infer user’s information goal given only query-words. Here, each information type may have somewhat different notion of relevance as well, although not to the extent you talk about in Micro IR.

]]> By: Fernando http://probablyirrelevant.org/2009/09/micro-ir/comment-page-1/#comment-3265 Fernando Sat, 12 Sep 2009 00:57:22 +0000 http://probablyirrelevant.org/?p=66#comment-3265 Any particular information retrieval problem is a function of queries and documents. I try to approach this in as general a way as possible. For me, the only difference between micro and macro IR is text. In fact, I would say, in many ways, pure text IR is _more_ constrained than other IR tasks you mention. Any particular information retrieval problem is a function of queries and documents. I try to approach this in as general a way as possible. For me, the only difference between micro and macro IR is text. In fact, I would say, in many ways, pure text IR is _more_ constrained than other IR tasks you mention.

]]>