Data processing: database and file management or data structures – Database design – Data structure types
Reexamination Certificate
1999-11-01
2002-09-17
Homere, Jean R. (Department: 2177)
Data processing: database and file management or data structures
Database design
Data structure types
C707S793000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06453315
ABSTRACT:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The invention relates generally information organization and retrieval. More specifically, the invention relates to search engine technology.
BACKGROUND
The Internet, which is a global network of interconnected networks and computers, commonly makes available a wide variety of information through a vehicle known as the world wide web (WWW). Currently, hundreds of millions of “web sites,” that house and format such information in documents called web pages are available to users of the Internet. Since the content of such pages is ungoverned, unregulated and largely unorganized between one site and the next, finding certain desired information is made difficult.
To aid users in finding sites or pages having information they desire, search engines were developed. Search engines and directories attempt to index pages and/or sites so that users can find particular information. Typically, search engines are initiated by prompting a user to type in one or more keywords of their choosing along with connectors (such as “and”) and delimiters. The search engine matches the keywords with documents or categories in an index that contain those keywords or are indexed by those keywords and returns results (either categories or documents or both) to the user in the form of URLs (Uniform Resource Locators). One predominant web search engine receives submissions of sites and manually assigns them to categories within their directory. When the user types in a keyword, a literal sub-string match of that keyword with either the description of the site in their index or the name of the category occurs. The results of this sub-string search will contain some sites of interest, but in addition, may contain many sites that are not relevant or on point. Though one may refine the search with yet more keywords, the same sub-string match will be employed, but to the result set just obtained. Almost all search engines attempt to index sites and documents and leave it to the user to formulate an appropriate query, and then to eliminate undesired search results themselves. Recently other search engines using natural language queries have been developed but these also often result in many undesired responses.
The quality of the results obtained varies, but by doing essentially sub-string matches or category browsing, the engines are unable to properly discern what the user actually intends or means when a particular keyword is entered.
REFERENCES:
patent: 4839853 (1989-06-01), Deerwester et al.
patent: 5056021 (1991-10-01), Ausborn
patent: 5128865 (1992-07-01), Sadler
patent: 5680511 (1997-10-01), Baker et al.
patent: 5694523 (1997-12-01), Wical
patent: 5778362 (1998-07-01), Deerwester
patent: 5794050 (1998-08-01), Dahlgren et al.
patent: 5873056 (1999-02-01), Liddy et al.
patent: 5940821 (1999-08-01), Wical
patent: 5953718 (1999-09-01), Wical
patent: 6038560 (2000-04-01), Wical
patent: 6101515 (2000-08-01), Wical et al.
patent: 6247009 (2001-06-01), Shiiyama et al.
Ferri et al. “Toward a Retrieval of HTML Documents Using a Semantic Approach”, IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo, vol. 3, 2000, pp. 1571-1574.*
Caudal, P. “Using Complex Lexical Types to Model the Polysemy of Collective Nouns within the Generative Lexicon”, Proceedings of the Ninth International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications, 1998, pp. 154-159.*
Fellbaum, C., ed. “WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database”, Cambridge:MIT Press, Mar. 1998. P325.5D38W67 1998.*
Meijs, W. “Inferring Grammar from Lexis: Machine-Readable Dictionaries as Sources of Wholesale Syntactic and Semantic Information”, IEEE Colloquium on Grammatical Inference: Theory, Applications and Alternatives, 1993, pp. P3/1-P3/5.*
Budanitsky, A. and Hirst, G. “Semantic Distance in WordNet: An Experimental, Application-Oriented Evaluation of Five Measures”, Proc. of the North Amer. Association for Computational Linguistics, WordNet and Other Lexical Reasources Workshop, Jun. 2-7, 2001.*
Mihalcea, R. and Moldovan, D. “Semantic Indexing using WordNet Senses”, Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on IR and NLP Oct. 2000.*
Budanitsky, A. “Lexical Semantic Relatedness and its Application in Natural Language Processing”, Technical Report CSRG-390, Computer Systems Research Group, University of Toronto, Aug. 1999.*
Resnick, P. “Semantic Similarity in a Taxonomy: An Information-Based Measure and its Application to Problems of Ambiguity in Natural Language”, Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, vol. 11, Jul. 1999.*
Smeaton, A.F. and Quigley, I. “Experiments on Using Semantic Distances Between Words in Image Caption Retrieval”, Proceedings of the 19thInternational Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Aug. 1996. pp. 174-180.*
Sutcliffe, R.F.E. et al. “Beyond Keywords: Accurate Retrieval from Full Text Documents”, Proceedings of the 2ndLanguage Engineering Convention, Oct. 16-18, 1995.*
Chakravarthy, A.S. and Haase, K.B. “NetSerf: Using Semantic Knowledge to Find Internet Information Archives”, Proceedings of the 18thAnnual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Developement in Information Retrieval, Jul. 1995, pp. 4-11.*
Sutcliffe, R.F.E. et al. “The Automatic Acquisition of a Board-Coverage Semantic Lexicon for use in Information Retrieval”, Proc of the AAAI Symp 'Representation and Acquisition of Lexical Knowledge: Polysemy, Ambiguity and Generativity, Mar. 27-29, 1995.*
St-Onge, D. “Detecting and Correcting Malapropisms with Lexical Chains”, M.S. Thesis, University of Toronto, Mar. 1995.*
Richardson, R., Smeaton, A.F. and Murphy, J. “Using Wordnet for Conceptual Distance Measurement”, roc. of the 16thResearch Colloquium of the BCS-IRSG, 1994. pp. 100-123.*
Buckley, C. et al. “Automatic Query Expansion Using SMART: TREC-3”, Proceedings of the Text Retrieval Conference (TREC3), Nov. 1994, pp. 69-81.*
Voorhees, E.M. “Query Expansion Using Lexical-Semantic Relations”, Proceedings of the 17thAnnual International ACM-SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Jul. 1994, pp. 61-69.*
Rada, R. et al. “Development and Application of a Metric on Semantic Nets”, IEEE Transactions of Systems, Man and Cybernetics, vol. 19, No. 1, Jan./Feb./ 1989, pp. 17-30.*
Brachman, R.J. and Schmolze, J.G. “An Overview of the KL-ONE Knowledge Representation System”, Cognitive Science, vol. 9, 1985, pp 171-216.*
Collins, A.M. and Loftus, E.F. “A Spreading-Activation Theory of Semantic Processing”, Psychological Review, vol. 82, No. 6, 1975, pp. 407-428.
Elbaz Gilad Israel
Weissman Adam J.
Applied Semantics, Inc.
Homere Jean R.
Pillsbury & Winthrop LLP
Wassum Luke S
LandOfFree
Meaning-based information organization and retrieval does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Meaning-based information organization and retrieval, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Meaning-based information organization and retrieval will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-2828085