Human assessments of document similarity
Author(s) -
Westerman S.J.,
Cribbin T.,
Collins J.
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
journal of the american society for information science and technology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1532-2890
pISSN - 1532-2882
DOI - 10.1002/asi.21361
Subject(s) - similarity (geometry) , reliability (semiconductor) , computer science , n gram , string (physics) , gram , correlation , information retrieval , data mining , statistics , artificial intelligence , mathematics , image (mathematics) , biology , physics , power (physics) , genetics , geometry , quantum mechanics , bacteria , language model , mathematical physics
Two studies are reported that examined the reliability of human assessments of document similarity and the association between human ratings and the results of n‐gram automatic text analysis (ATA). Human interassessor reliability (IAR) was moderate to poor. However, correlations between average human ratings and n‐gram solutions were strong. The average correlation between ATA and individual human solutions was greater than IAR. N‐gram length influenced the strength of association, but optimum string length depended on the nature of the text (technical vs. nontechnical). We conclude that the methodology applied in previous studies may have led to overoptimistic views on human reliability, but that an optimal n‐gram solution can provide a good approximation of the average human assessment of document similarity, a result that has important implications for future development of document visualization systems.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom