Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
Cranfield Evaluation Paradigm/Evidence
Method evidence record

Cranfield Evaluation Paradigm

The Cranfield evaluation paradigm is the foundational experimental design for measuring how well an information retrieval system finds relevant documents. Devised by Cyril Cleverdon at the College of Aeronautics in Cranfield during the 1960s, it fixes three ingredients — a document collection, a set of search requests, and human relevance judgments linking requests to documents — and then holds them constant so that competing indexing methods or retrieval algorithms can be compared on recall and precision under controlled, repeatable conditions. By abstracting evaluation away from any single live user and turning it into a reusable laboratory experiment, Cranfield made retrieval effectiveness a measurable quantity and supplied the template that every later large-scale campaign, including TREC, has built upon.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Source record

Citations copied verbatim from the method’s source record. No claim-level verification is inferred from them.

Cranfield Evaluation Paradigm (Test-Collection Evaluation of Retrieval Effectiveness)
Taxonomic method record · process-pipeline / library-information-science
  • Cleverdon, C. W. (1967). The Cranfield tests on index language devices. Aslib Proceedings, 19(6), 173-194. · DOI 10.1108/eb050097
  • Voorhees, E. M., & Harman, D. K. (Eds.). (2005). TREC: Experiment and Evaluation in Information Retrieval. MIT Press. · ISBN 9780262220736
  • Manning, C. D., Raghavan, P., & Schütze, H. (2008). Introduction to Information Retrieval. Cambridge University Press. · ISBN 9780521865715
Open full method

Curated claims

Claims persisted in the evidence ledger, each with its own assessment.

No curated claims yet

This view does not invent a claim assessment when the ledger has none.

Related methods

Generated from the method graph and shown as machine-suggested relations — no evidence claim is inferred.

Taxonomic bucketQuery Expansion Evaluationmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Taxonomic bucketRelevance Feedback Evaluationmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Taxonomic bucketTREC Pooling and Relevance Judgmentsmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.

Evidence status

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Bibliographic sources are present. Claim-level evidence review has not been performed.

Sources

3 recorded citations, copied from the method source record.

Actions

Open method page
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account