Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byPriscilla Gibson Modified over 9 years ago
1
MULTILINGUAL AND MULTIFACETED INTERACTIVE INFORMATION ACCESS (MU) 2 MI 2 A ~ MUMIA COST ACTION IC1002 Michail (Mike) SALAMPASIS Associate Professor Department of Informatics Alexander Technological Educational Institute of Thessaloniki 7 April 2011
2
Outline Next Generation Search The MUMIA COST action Disciplines involved, inherently interdisciplinary Patent search as a unifying test bed A framework to design interactive search systems based on the idea of Coordinated Federated Search (CFS) How it does relate to UX design and evaluation? Conclusion 2
3
New Trends in Information Access Next Decade Presents Many New Grand Challenges the dynamics of Web 2.0+ data being produced distributed sources of multilingual content Semantic Search over large scale dynamic repositories Social Search Important Search Applications (e.g. e-Commerce, Education) requiring new types of interactive search (e.g. Exploratory, Faceted Search) 3
4
What is also new? There also new Demands More sophisticated user needs requiring more complex systems Many types of search are difficult to satisfy with today’s search systems Large volumes of information which often require visualization of their interrelationships to make them usable and useful... and Technology Pushes Powerful Processing Infrastructures Technologies Enabling Multi modal search and access systems Scalable Visualization Solutions (e.g. Power Walls) 4
5
Conclusion so far… Search Technology Has produced significant results empowering users to search relevant information in terabytes of data. Current search engines is one of the greatest successes of the past decade. Next Generation Search Exciting developments bring the digital society into a situation in which the availability and complexity of the information and its possible interrelations outstrips the capability of current search systems.
6
Multilingual and Multifaceted Interactive Information Access Aims to launch a much needed initiative for the collaboration between the multiple disciplines involved in next generation search Play a role in the definition for next generation search Foster Research and Technology Transfer Uses innovative framework to empower the synergies from the disparate research fields Uses Patent Search as the unifying test bed for interdisciplinary research interaction 6
7
Related Disciplines Machine Translation (MT) Integrating and Managing Language Resources, Information Extraction (IE) Information Retrieval (IR) Distributed IR, Social Search, Semantic Search Multifaceted Interactive Information Access (MIIA) User Aspects of Information Access, Visualization 7
8
Patent Search The patent search problem is highly representative of tomorrow's search. Multilingual, Multiple Sources Distributed all over the Internet High value documents (organized in hierarchies, structured, interlinked) Different types of information needs not very common in everyday search Need for multiple search tools and UIs 8
9
© Magister Ltd., 2007 9 Search report Classification(s) Applicant(s) Inventor(s) Designated State(s) Publication Number Priority detail(s) Abstract
10
10 Who searches patents, and why? Patent offices to determine whether they can legally grant a patent The courts (or agents acting on behalf of the courts) during litigation Business analysts/ investment brokers as one metric for company valuation International research bodies e.g. OECD “innovation league tables” 10
11
11 Who searches patents, and why? (II) Corporate R&D as a source for problem-solving to check whether it is worthwhile moving into a new technical area to determine whether their “new invention” is actually new, and patentable to avoid infringing other people’s patents to try to invalidate other people’s patents etc. 11
12
12 Various user needs, various tasks Different searches require different criteria, hence indicating different sources to use: A simple search classification Novelty (patentability) Infringement (freedom of action, freedom to operate) Validity & opposition State-of-the-art Alerting (current awareness) Citation Technology Landscape 12
13
Why this Action ? There are many research groups already working on MUMIA key challenges. Unfortunately, the extent of interaction between these highly talented scientists has been limited because no unifying network is in operation to help guide and harmonise their work. There is a significant lack of awareness of how particular groups of knowledge workers conduct sophisticated information seeking tasks
14
Benefits of the proposed Action Innovation in the process of developing next generation search systems Networking between disparate disciplines to solve a highly interdisciplinary problem. Bridging research and information based industry. MUMIA as a flagship for European scientific excellence while moving to next generation search. Training and Educating Young Researchers in the emerging field of MUMIA. 14
15
Relation to UX design A “representative” architecture of an imaginary Next Generation Search System 15
16
Relation to UX design More complex search systems require careful design of how the users will interact as this will affect their overall experience UX design needs to satisfy user needs that will carry out tasks that are becoming progressively more complicated and cross language and using various media 16
17
Relation to UX evaluation Some Facts IR and MT are two long-standing computer science disciplines with rigorous evaluation methodologies. IR evaluation methodologies are system centered build around the classic Cranfield paradigm, such as TREC and CLEF. IR evaluation methods are mostly based on the use of dichotomous relevance judgements in IR experiments. 17
18
Relation to UX evaluation User-centred evaluation strategies are also used (i.e. user studies, usability measurements, etc.) but not very often. Most of the times they use performance metrics such Recall and Precision as a measurement of attaining an objective or information need. Measures and methods are required to compute the cumulative gain the user obtains by using a sub-system/component/widget within an integrated search system 18
19
Relation to UX evaluation 19 foster the adoption of regular experimental evaluation activities for new interaction styles bring automation into the experimental evaluation process promote collaboration and re-use in evaluation activities in the same way the Cranfield paradigm has achieved the last 30 years
20
Conclusion 20 There are strong demands and technology pushes for the next wave of search systems Information systems are becoming increasingly complex: they need to satisfy user needs and carry out tasks that are becoming progressively more complicated These puts important challenges to Design and Evaluation of Search Systems UX community must play an important role in the development of next generation search community
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com Inc.
All rights reserved.