Clustering with random indexing K-tree and XML structure

This paper describes the approach taken to the clustering task at INEX 2009 by a group at the Queensland University of Technology. The Random Indexing (RI) K-tree has been used with a representation that is based on the semantic markup available in the INEX 2009 Wikipedia collection. The RI K-tree is a scalable approach to clustering large document collections. This approach has produced quality clustering when evaluated using two different methodologies.

Overview of the INEX 2009 XML mining track : clustering and classification of XML documents

This report explains the objectives, datasets and evaluation criteria of both the clustering and classification tasks set in the INEX 2009 XML Mining track. The report also describes the approaches and results obtained by the different participants.

Utilising semantic tags in XML clustering

This paper presents an overview of the experiments conducted using Hybrid Clustering of XML documents using Constraints (HCXC) method for the clustering task in the INEX 2009 XML Mining track. This technique utilises frequent subtrees generated from the structure to extract the content for clustering the XML documents. It also presents the experimental study using several data representations such as the structure-only, content-only and using both the structure and the content of XML documents for the purpose of clustering them. Unlike previous years, this year the XML documents were marked up using the Wiki tags and contains categories derived by using the YAGO ontology. This paper also presents the results of studying the effect of these tags on XML clustering using the HCXC method.

Report on INEX 2011

INEX investigates focused retrieval from structured documents by providing large test collections of structured documents, uniform evaluation measures, and a forum for organizations to compare their results. This paper reports on the INEX 2011 evaluation campaign, which consisted of a five active tracks: Books and Social Search, Data Centric, Question Answering, Relevance Feedback, and Snippet Retrieval. INEX 2011 saw a range of new tasks and tracks, such as Social Book Search, Faceted Search, Snippet Retrieval, and Tweet Contextualization.

Overview of INEX 2013

INEX investigates focused retrieval from structured documents by providing large test collections of structured documents, uniform evaluation measures, and a forum for organizations to compare their results. This paper reports on the INEX 2013 evaluation campaign, which consisted of four activities addressing three themes: searching professional and user generated data (Social Book Search track); searching structured or semantic data (Linked Data track); and focused retrieval (Snippet Retrieval and Tweet Contextualization tracks). INEX 2013 was an exciting year for INEX in which we consolidated the collaboration with (other activities in) CLEF and for the second time ran our workshop as part of the CLEF labs in order to facilitate knowledge transfer between the evaluation forums. This paper gives an overview of all the INEX 2013 tracks, their aims and task, the built test-collections, and gives an initial analysis of the results

Overview of the INEX 2008 Ad Hoc Track

This paper gives an overview of the INEX 2008 Ad Hoc Track. The main goals of the Ad Hoc Track were two-fold. The first goal was to investigate the value of the internal document structure (as provided by the XML mark-up) for retrieving relevant information. This is a continuation of INEX 2007 and, for this reason, the retrieval results are liberalized to arbitrary passages and measures were chosen to fairly compare systems retrieving elements, ranges of elements, and arbitrary passages. The second goal was to compare focused retrieval to article retrieval more directly than in earlier years. For this reason, standard document retrieval rankings have been derived from all runs, and evaluated with standard measures. In addition, a set of queries targeting Wikipedia have been derived from a proxy log, and the runs are also evaluated against the clicked Wikipedia pages. The INEX 2008 Ad Hoc Track featured three tasks: For the Focused Task a ranked-list of nonoverlapping results (elements or passages) was needed. For the Relevant in Context Task non-overlapping results (elements or passages) were returned grouped by the article from which they came. For the Best in Context Task a single starting point (element start tag or passage start) for each article was needed. We discuss the results for the three tasks, and examine the relative effectiveness of element and passage retrieval. This is examined in the context of content only (CO, or Keyword) search as well as content and structure (CAS, or structured) search. Finally, we look at the ability of focused retrieval techniques to rank articles, using standard document retrieval techniques, both against the judged topics as well as against queries and clicks from a proxy log.

Report on INEX 2008

INEX investigates focused retrieval from structured documents by providing large test collections of structured documents, uniform evaluation measures, and a forum for organizations to compare their results. This paper reports on the INEX 2008 evaluation campaign, which consisted of a wide range of tracks: Ad hoc, Book, Efficiency, Entity Ranking, Interactive, QA, Link the Wiki, and XML Mining.

Report on INEX 2013

INEX investigates focused retrieval from structured documents by providing large test collections of structured documents, uniform evaluation measures, and a forum for organizations to compare their results. This paper reports on the INEX 2013 evaluation campaign, which consisted of four activities addressing three themes: searching professional and user generated data (Social Book Search track); searching structured or semantic data (Linked Data track); and focused retrieval (Snippet Retrieval and Tweet Contextualization tracks). INEX 2013 was an exciting year for INEX in which we consolidated the collaboration with (other activities in) CLEF and for the second time ran our workshop as part of the CLEF labs in order to facilitate knowledge transfer between the evaluation forums. This paper gives an overview of all the INEX 2013 tracks, their aims and task, the built test-collections, and gives an initial analysis of the results.

Overview of INEX 2014

INEX investigates focused retrieval from structured documents by providing large test collections of structured documents, uniform evaluation measures, and a forum for organizations to compare their results. This paper reports on the INEX 2014 evaluation campaign, which consisted of three tracks: The Interactive Social Book Search Track investigated user information seeking behavior when interacting with various sources of information, for realistic task scenarios, and how the user interface impacts search and the search experience. The Social Book Search Track investigated the relative value of authoritative metadata and user-generated content for search and recommendation using a test collection with data from Amazon and LibraryThing, including user profiles and personal catalogues. The Tweet Contextualization Track investigated tweet contextualization, helping a user to understand a tweet by providing him with a short background summary generated from relevant Wikipedia passages aggregated into a coherent summary. INEX 2014 was an exciting year for INEX in which we for the third time ran our workshop as part of the CLEF labs. This paper gives an overview of all the INEX 2014 tracks, their aims and task, the built test-collections, the participants, and gives an initial analysis of the results.

Report on INEX 2012

INEX investigates focused retrieval from structured documents by providing large test collections of structured documents, uniform evaluation measures, and a forum for organizations to compare their results. This paper reports on the INEX'12 evaluation campaign, which consisted of a five tracks: Linked Data, Relevance Feedback, Snippet Retrieval, Social Book Search, and Tweet Contextualization. INEX'12 was an exciting year for INEX in which we joined forces with CLEF and for the first time ran our workshop as part of the CLEF labs in order to facilitate knowledge transfer between the evaluation forums.

相位恢复算法在量子关联衍射成像中的应用研究

随着研究工作的逐步深入,目前已经利用经典热光源实现了关联衍射成像,使得该技术有望在X射线以及中子衍射成像等方面得到广泛应用。在实验利用非相干光得到物体无透镜傅里叶变换频谱的基础上,采用误差消除与输入输出恢复算法,并结合过采样理论,实现了实验所用物体透射率函数的恢复。分别得到了纯振幅物体的振幅分布函数与纯相位物体的相位分布函数。此外,还讨论了实验所得傅里叶变换频谱的噪声等因素对图像恢复结果的影响。

Cachability of Web Objects

Much work on the performance of Web proxy caching has focused on high-level metrics such as hit rate and byte hit rate, but has ignored all the information related to the cachability of Web objects. Uncachable objects include those fetched by dynamic requests, objects with uncachable HTTP status code, objects with the uncachable HTTP header, objects with an HTTP 1.0 cookie, and objects without a last-modified header. Although some researchers filter the Web traces before they use them for analysis or simulation,many do not have a comprehensive understanding of the cachability of Web objects. In this paper we evaluate all the reasons that a Web object might be uncachable. We use traces from NLANR. Since these traces do not contain HTTP header information, we replay them using request generator to get the response header information. We find that between 15% and 40% of Web objects in our traces can not be cached by a Web proxy server. We use a LRU simulator to show the performance gap when the cachability is either considered or not. We show the characteristics of the cachable data set and find that all its characteristics are fairly similar to that of total data set. Finally, we present some additional results for the cachable and total data set: (1) The main reasons for uncachability are: dynamic requests, responses without last-modified header, responses with HTTP "302 Moved Temporarily" status code, and responses with a HTTP/1.0 cookie. (2) The cachability of Web objects can not be ignored in simulation because uncachable objects comprise a huge percentage of the total trace. Simulations without cachability consideration will be misleading.

The 2015 Bioinformatics Open Source Conference (BOSC 2015).

The Bioinformatics Open Source Conference (BOSC) is organized by the Open Bioinformatics Foundation (OBF), a nonprofit group dedicated to promoting the practice and philosophy of open source software development and open science within the biological research community. Since its inception in 2000, BOSC has provided bioinformatics developers with a forum for communicating the results of their latest efforts to the wider research community. BOSC offers a focused environment for developers and users to interact and share ideas about standards; software development practices; practical techniques for solving bioinformatics problems; and approaches that promote open science and sharing of data, results, and software. BOSC is run as a two-day special interest group (SIG) before the annual Intelligent Systems in Molecular Biology (ISMB) conference. BOSC 2015 took place in Dublin, Ireland, and was attended by over 125 people, about half of whom were first-time attendees. Session topics included "Data Science;" "Standards and Interoperability;" "Open Science and Reproducibility;" "Translational Bioinformatics;" "Visualization;" and "Bioinformatics Open Source Project Updates". In addition to two keynote talks and dozens of shorter talks chosen from submitted abstracts, BOSC 2015 included a panel, titled "Open Source, Open Door: Increasing Diversity in the Bioinformatics Open Source Community," that provided an opportunity for open discussion about ways to increase the diversity of participants in BOSC in particular, and in open source bioinformatics in general. The complete program of BOSC 2015 is available online at http://www.open-bio.org/wiki/BOSC_2015_Schedule.