Results 1 - 10 of 30,531

Table 1. Ranking accuracies in terms of MAP

in Learning to rank: From pairwise approach to listwise approach
by Zhe Cao, Tie-yan Liu 2007
"... In PAGE 6: ... The accuracies we report in this section are those averaged over five trials. Figure 1 and Table1 give the results for TREC. We can see that ListNet outperforms the three baseline methods of RankNet, Ranking SVM, and RankBoost in terms of all measures.... In PAGE 6: ... Especially for NDCG@1 and NDCG@2, List- Net achieves more than 4 point gain, which is about 10% relative improvement. Figure 2 and Table1 show the results for OHSUMED. Again, ListNet outperforms RankNet and RankBoost in terms of all measures.... ..."
Cited by 2

Table 1. Ranking accuracies in terms of MAP

in Learning to rank: From pairwise approach to listwise approach
by Zhe Cao, Tie-yan Liu 2007
"... In PAGE 6: ... The accuracies we report in this section are those averaged over five trials. Figure 1 and Table1 give the results for TREC. We can see that ListNet outperforms the three baseline methods of RankNet, Ranking SVM, and RankBoost in terms of all measures.... In PAGE 6: ... Especially for NDCG@1 and NDCG@2, List- Net achieves more than 4 point gain, which is about 10% relative improvement. Figure 2 and Table1 show the results for OHSUMED. Again, ListNet outperforms RankNet and RankBoost in terms of all measures.... ..."
Cited by 2

Table 1: Ranking Accuracy of terms by each method

in Searching for Explanatory Web Pages using Query Expansion
by Manabu Tauchi Nigel, Nigel Ward

Table 13: Ranking accuracy: lower number means better ranking.

in Abstract Handling Continuous Attributes in an Evolutionary Inductive Learner
by Federico Divina, Elena Marchiori

Table 1: Ranking Accuracy for Infoseek and 4 Query Expansion Methods

in Searching for Explanatory Web Pages Using Automatic Query Expansion
by Nigel Ward, Manabu Tauchi, Manabu Tauchi, Nigel Ward 2006
"... In PAGE 10: ... A combination of B and C, namely Perrie. The ranking accuracies obtained by Infoseek and methods A, B, C, and D are shown in Table1 , and the average performance for each is illustrated in Figure 8. Figure 8: Average Ranking Accuracy Comparing methods B, C, and D, which all use our extended query vector, no sig- nificant difference was seen between method B, using the vector space model and C, using local density.... ..."

Table 3. Ranking accuracy (Area under the ROC curve) of statistical criteria.

in Bagging Evolutionary ROC-based Hypotheses - Application To Terminology Extraction
by Jérôme Azé, Mathieu Roche, Michèle Sebag 2005
"... In PAGE 5: ....2. Ranking accuracy After the experimental setting described in Section 5, Table 2 compares the average AUC achieved for Broger and SVMTorch with linear, Gaussian and quadratic kernels. On these domain applications, both supervised learning approaches significantly improve on the standalone statistical criteria ( Table3 ). Fur- ther, Broger improves significantly on SVM using any kernel, excepted on the Infrequent CV dataset.... In PAGE 5: ... As expected, Roger detects, on the Frequent CV dataset (F-CV), that the mutual information (MI) criterion does badly (AUC(MI)= 0.31, Table3 ), with a high center cMI = 0.59 and weight wMI = 0.... ..."
Cited by 1

Table 4: Parse ranking accuracy of CCombined by number of possible parses.

in Parse Disambiguation for a Rich HPSG Grammar
by Kristina Toutanova , Christopher D. Manning, Stuart M. Shieber, Dan Flickinger, Stephan Oepen 2002
"... In PAGE 6: ... To assess the influence of ambiguity rate on the parse disambiguation accuracy of our model, we computed average accuracy of the best model CCombined as a function of the number of possible analyses per sentence. Table4 shows the breakdown of accuracy for several sentence categories. The first row shows the number of sentences with ambiguity greater than or equal to two analyses, which are all sentences for which the disambiguation task is non-trivial.... ..."
Cited by 12

Table 4: Parse ranking accuracy of CCombined by number of possible parses.

in Parse Disambiguation for a Rich HPSG Grammar
by Kristina Toutanova , Christopher D. Manning, Stuart M. Shieber, Dan Flickinger, Stephan Oepen 2002
"... In PAGE 6: ... To assess the influence of ambiguity rate on the parse disambiguation accuracy of our model, we computed average accuracy of the best model CCombined asafunctionof the number of possible analyses per sentence. Table4 shows the breakdown of accuracy for several sentence categories. The first row shows the number of sentences with ambiguity greater than or equal to two analyses, which are all sentences for which the disambiguation task is non-trivial.... ..."
Cited by 12

Table 4: Parse ranking accuracy of CCombined by number of possible parses.

in Parse Disambiguation for a Rich HPSG Grammar
by Kristina Toutanova , Christopher D. Manning, Stuart M. Shieber, Dan Flickinger, Stephan Oepen
"... In PAGE 6: ... To assess the influence of ambiguity rate on the parse disambiguation accuracy of our model, we computed average accuracy of the best model CCombined as a function of the number of possible analyses per sentence. Table4 shows the breakdown of accuracy for several sentence categories. The first row shows the number of sentences with ambiguity greater than or equal to two analyses, which are all sentences for which the disambiguation task is non-trivial.... ..."

Table 5: Ranking accuracy with different related- ness thresholds

in Extending the Entity-grid Coherence Model to Semantically Related Entities
by unknown authors
Results 1 - 10 of 30,531