Abstract
PurposeThis short note seeks to respond to Hjørland and Pederson's paper “A substantive theory of classification for information retrieval” which starts from Spärck Jones's, “Some thoughts on classification for retrieval”, originally published in 1970.Design/methodology/approachThe note comments on the context in which the 1970 paper was written, and on Hjørland and Pedersen's views, emphasising the need for well‐grounded classification theory and application.FindingsThe note maintains that text‐based, a posteriori, classification, as increasingly found in applications, is likely to be more useful, in general, than a priori classification.Originality/valueThe note elaborates on points made in a well‐received earlier paper.
Subject
Library and Information Sciences,Information Systems
Reference5 articles.
1. Hjørland, B. and Pedersen, K.N. (2005), “A substantive theory of classification for information retrieval”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 61 No. 5.
2. Spärck Jones, K. (1970), “Some thoughts on classification for retrieval”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 89‐101.
3. Spärck Jones, K. and Barber, E.O. (1971), “What makes an automatic classification effective?”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 22, pp. 166‐75.
4. van Rijsbergen, C.J. and Spärck Jones, K. (1973), “A test for the separation of relevant and non‐relevant documents in experimental retrieval collections”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 29, pp. 251‐7.
5. Voorhees, E.M. and Harman, D.K. (Eds) (2005), TREC: Experiment and Evaluation in Information Retrieval, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Cited by
13 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献