CS260 Search Bjrn Hartmann University of California, Berkeley - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

cs260
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

CS260 Search Bjrn Hartmann University of California, Berkeley - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

CS260 Search Bjrn Hartmann University of California, Berkeley EECS, Computer Science Division Fall 2010 Monday, November 22, 2010 Wednesday (before you leave campus) No reading responses . Instead, submit 2 paragraphs about your evaluation


slide-1
SLIDE 1

CS260

Björn Hartmann University of California, Berkeley EECS, Computer Science Division Fall 2010

Search

Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-2
SLIDE 2 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

Wednesday (before you leave campus)

No reading responses. Instead, submit 2 paragraphs about your evaluation plan:

What questions are you trying to answer? How will you operationalize the questions? Who will you recruit? How many participants? When will you test? What will the test protocol be? How will you analyze your results?

2 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-3
SLIDE 3 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

End game...

3 Wed 11/24 Lecture Mobile Interation, Course Survey Due Evaluation Plan Mon 11/29 Lecture Usable Security Wed 12/1 Lecture Course Summary Fri 12/3 Due Paper Draft (Pilot test data) Wed 12/8 Due Final Presentations, 3pm, 306 Soda Mon 12/13 Due Final Paper Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-4
SLIDE 4 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

Search

4 (most material from M. Hearst, Search User Interfaces & SIMS 141) Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-5
SLIDE 5 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

Standard Model of Search Process

5 Task Information Need Verbal Form Query Corpus Corpus Corpus Search Engine Results Query Refinement
  • A. Broder. A taxonomy of web search. SIGIR Forum, 36(2):3–10, 2002.
http://searchuserinterfaces.com/book/sui_ch3_models_of_information_seeking.html Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-6
SLIDE 6 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

Berry-Picking Model

6 Query 1 Query 2 Query 3 Query 4 M.J. Bates. The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the on-line search interface. Online Review, 13(5):407–431, 1989. Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-7
SLIDE 7 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 7 (cc) Thomas Hawk - http://www.flickr.com/photos/thomashawk/85441961/ Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-8
SLIDE 8 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

Searching vs. Browsing

“Browsing is a retrieval process where the users navigate through the text database by following links from one piece of text to the next, aiming to utilize two human capabilities ... the greater ability to recognize what is wanted

  • ver being able to describe it and ... the ability

to skim or perceive at a glance. This allows users to evaluate rapidly rather large amounts

  • f text and determine what is useful.”
8 [Hertzum and Frokjaer, 1996] Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-9
SLIDE 9 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

Searching vs. Browsing

“Considered in cognitive terms, searching is a more analytical and demanding method for locating information than browsing, as it involves several phases, such as planning and executing queries, evaluating the results, and refining the queries, whereas browsing only requires the user to recognize promising-looking links.”

9
  • A. Aula. Studying user strategies and characteristics for developing web search interfaces.
PhD thesis, University of Tampere, Finland, 2005. Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-10
SLIDE 10 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

Information Foraging & Scent

Estimating the utility of distal information sources from proximal signals.

10 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-11
SLIDE 11 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 11 Task: Find the most relevant HCI studies of Q&A communities Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-12
SLIDE 12 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 12 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-13
SLIDE 13 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

Orienteering vs. Teleporting

Orienteering: start with short, general queries, then incrementally refine based on feedback Teleporting: use one, long, specific query Examples?

13 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-14
SLIDE 14 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

Goals

Fact Finding Information Gathering Browsing Transactions Other

14 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-15
SLIDE 15 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 15

Early Web: Directories

Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-16
SLIDE 16 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 16 Yahoo Homepage, 1996 Source: archive.org Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-17
SLIDE 17 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 17 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-18
SLIDE 18 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 18 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-19
SLIDE 19 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 19 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-20
SLIDE 20 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 20

?

Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-21
SLIDE 21 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 21 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-22
SLIDE 22 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

Tree Hierarchies

22 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-23
SLIDE 23 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

The Problem With Hierarchy

Forces a choice of one dimension vs another

Either you commit to one path, Or you have to provide many redundant combinations

Examples

Each topic followed by all time periods followed by all locations AND Each topic followed by all locations followed by all time periods AND Each location followed by all topics followed by all time periods … etc

23 Slide from: M. Hearst, SIMS141 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-24
SLIDE 24 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

Facets

Sets of categories, each of which describe a different aspect of the objects in the collection. Each of these can be hierarchical. (Not necessarily mutually exclusive nor exhaustive, but often that is a goal.)

Time/Date Topic Role GeoRegion + + +

24 Slide from: M. Hearst, SIMS141 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-25
SLIDE 25 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

Facet example: Recipes

Main Course Stir-fry Thai Red Bell Pepper Curry Chicken 25

CUISINE INGREDIENT COOKING METHOD COURSE

Slide from: M. Hearst, SIMS141 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-26
SLIDE 26 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

Hierarchical Faceted Metadata

A simplification of knowledge representation Does not represent relationships directly BUT can be understood well by many people when browsing rich collections

  • f information.
26 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-27
SLIDE 27 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 27 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-28
SLIDE 28 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 28 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-29
SLIDE 29 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 29 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-30
SLIDE 30 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 30 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-31
SLIDE 31 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 31 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-32
SLIDE 32 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 32 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-33
SLIDE 33 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

Query Formulation

33 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-34
SLIDE 34 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

Query Formulation

34

Most people have an incomplete mental model of query formulation

Plenty of searches for “Yahoo” or “Google” Sensitivity to ordering? Boolean connectors?

Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-35
SLIDE 35 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 35

Shortcuts

“Zero-click” Results

Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-36
SLIDE 36 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 36 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-37
SLIDE 37 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 37 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-38
SLIDE 38 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 38 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-39
SLIDE 39 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 39

What is the command language for the Google search box?

Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-40
SLIDE 40 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

Search Result Visualization

40

Document Surrogates

Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-41
SLIDE 41 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 41 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-42
SLIDE 42 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 42

Evernote

Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-43
SLIDE 43 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 43 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-44
SLIDE 44 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 44

Domain-Specific Search

Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-45
SLIDE 45 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 45 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-46
SLIDE 46 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 46 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-47
SLIDE 47 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 47 Also see: Myers et al., Apatite, Jadeite Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-48
SLIDE 48 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 48

Code Search Engines

Assieme, Hoffman, UIST07 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-49
SLIDE 49 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

Collaborative Search

49 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-50
SLIDE 50 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010

Collaborative Search

50

Many search tasks are completed by groups(e.g., plan an itinerary for our vacation). Search user interfaces assume single users. How can user interfaces enhance and support group information seeking?

Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-51
SLIDE 51 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 51 http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/news/features/searchtogether.aspx Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-52
SLIDE 52 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 52

Social Search

Re-rank search results based on social graph information (e.g., links previously published by your friends) Outsource IR to social graph: “Dear Lazyweb: ...”

Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-53
SLIDE 53 CS260 - UC Berkeley Fall 2010 53 Monday, November 22, 2010
slide-54
SLIDE 54

hci.berkeley.edu/cs260-fall10

Monday, November 22, 2010