In Mendeley we are using number of readers to rank search results on
our catalog.
Our search index is in solr.
I don't have more fine grained details, but I could get them if people
are interested.
- Ian
On 16 February 2011 14:21, LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> As you pointed out, WorldCat does all sorts of tricky ranking. I
> believe there's a dashboard that they use for tuning the ranking.
> Library holdings count, term frequencies, availability, FRBR, and
> locality are all facets of that ranking.
>
> In OCLC Research we do practically nothing without some sort of ranking.
> In our VIAF project, we gather name authority records from 20-some
> national libraries and merge matching records into a single VIAF record.
> We rank search results by the size of the records, figuring that the
> larger a record is, the more attention the component records got from
> the national libraries and that size can be used as an indirect measure
> of popularity.
>
> In WorldCat Identities, we create author records from WorldCat data.
> Simple SRU searches are ranked by the total number of items held in
> libraries for that author. There is also a fuzzy name searching service
> for WorldCat Identities that uses a combination of holdings and
> similarity to rank results.
>
> We use WorldCat holdings information for ranking wherever we can. For
> instance, our FAST subject headings database returns results ranked by
> holdings.
>
> We've never done any usability testing on these ranking algorithms as
> they are simply clearly superior to no ranking at all.
>
> Ralph
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
> Of
>> Till Kinstler
>>
>> ...
>>
>> So, if you implemented something beyond term statistics based ranking,
>> speak up and show.
>
--
Ian Mulvany | VP New Product Development
http://www.mendeley.com/profiles/ian-mulvany/
Mendeley Limited | London, UK | www.mendeley.com
Registered in England and Wales | Company Number 6419015
|
