ScholarGate
어시스턴트
Process / pipelineInformation retrieval evaluation

TREC Pooling and Relevance Judgments

Pooling is the technique that lets the Cranfield evaluation paradigm scale to collections of millions of documents, where judging every document for every topic is impossible. Developed and institutionalized at the US National Institute of Standards and Technology for the Text REtrieval Conference (TREC), pooling gathers the top-ranked documents returned by many participating systems for each topic, merges them into a single pool, has human assessors judge only that pool, and treats every unjudged document as non-relevant. The result is a reusable test collection — documents, topics, and pooled relevance judgments (qrels) — on which new systems can later be scored without further assessment. Pooling is what made large-scale, reproducible retrieval evaluation feasible.

MethodMind에서 열기곧 제공적용, 비교, 안내 받기
도구 및 자료
슬라이드 다운로드
학습 및 탐색
동영상곧 제공

방법 전문 읽기

회원 전용

무료 계정으로 로그인하면 이 섹션을 읽을 수 있습니다.

로그인

방법 지도

관련 방법들로 이루어진 인접 영역 — 노드를 선택해 살펴보세요.

출처

  1. Voorhees, E. M., & Harman, D. K. (Eds.). (2005). TREC: Experiment and Evaluation in Information Retrieval. MIT Press. ISBN: 9780262220736
  2. Manning, C. D., Raghavan, P., & Schütze, H. (2008). Introduction to Information Retrieval. Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 9780521865715
  3. Cleverdon, C. W. (1967). The Cranfield tests on index language devices. Aslib Proceedings, 19(6), 173-194. DOI: 10.1108/eb050097

이 페이지 인용 방법

ScholarGate. (2026, June 23). TREC Pooling and Relevance Judgments (Scalable Construction of Reusable Test Collections). ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/ko/library-information-science/trec-pooling-relevance-judgments

어떤 방법일까요?

이 방법을 가장 가까운 동류의 방법들과 나란히 놓고 비교해 보세요 — 라이브러리는 책을 펼쳐 놓을 뿐, 선택은 여러분의 몫입니다.

나란히 비교하기

이 방법을 참조하는 항목

ScholarGateTREC Pooling and Relevance Judgments (TREC Pooling and Relevance Judgments (Scalable Construction of Reusable Test Collections)). 2026-06-24에 다음에서 검색함: https://scholargate.app/ko/library-information-science/trec-pooling-relevance-judgments · 데이터셋: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026