ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Does “authority” mean quality? predicting expert quality ratings of Web documents
Full text PdfPdf (773 KB)
Source Annual ACM Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval archive
Proceedings of the 23rd annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval table of contents
Athens, Greece
Pages: 296 - 303  
Year of Publication: 2000
ISBN:1-58113-226-3
Authors
Brian Amento  AT&T Shannon Laboratories, 180 Park Avenue, Florharn Park, NJ and Department of Computer Science, Virginia Tech.
Loren Terveen  AT&T Shannon Laboratories, 180 Park Avenue, Florharn Park, NJ
Will Hill  AT&T Shannon Laboratories, 180 Park Avenue, Florharn Park, NJ
Sponsors
Athens U of Econ & Business : Athens University of Economics and Business
Greek Com Soc : Greek Computer Society
SIGIR: ACM Special Interest Group on Information Retrieval
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 20,   Downloads (12 Months): 172,   Citation Count: 46
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues   peer to peer  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
Save this Article to a Binder    Display Formats: BibTex  EndNote ACM Ref   
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/345508.345603
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

For many topics, the World Wide Web contains hundreds or thousands of relevant documents of widely varying quality. Users face a daunting challenge in identifying a small subset of documents worthy of their attention.

Link analysis algorithms have received much interest recently, in large part for their potential to identify high quality items. We report here on an experimental evaluation of this potential.

We evaluated a number of link and content-based algorithms using a dataset of web documents rated for quality by human topic experts. Link-based metrics did a good job of picking out high-quality items. Precision at 5 is about 0.75, and precision at 10 is about 0.55; this is in a dataset where 0.32 of all documents were of high quality. Surprisingly, a simple content-based metric performed nearly as well; ranking documents by the total number of pages on their containing site.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
2
3
4
 
5
6
 
7
 
8
 
9
Page L., Brin S., Motwani R., and Winograd T. The PageRank Citation Ranking: Bringing Order to the Web. Stanford Digital Libraries Working Paper
10
11
12
13

CITED BY  46
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Collaborative Colleagues:
Brian Amento: colleagues
Loren Terveen: colleagues
Will Hill: colleagues

Peer to Peer - Readers of this Article have also read: