对于标题分类,搜索顾问是否过于依赖分类器而过于依赖算法?关于搜索顾问自动化的危险和汤姆森-韦斯特分类器优点的证据

Michael Ginsborg
{"title":"对于标题分类,搜索顾问是否过于依赖分类器而过于依赖算法?关于搜索顾问自动化的危险和汤姆森-韦斯特分类器优点的证据","authors":"Michael Ginsborg","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1345465","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Search Advisor has just been renamed \"Search by Topic or Headnote\" to accommodate topical research of not just case law, but other sources of primary and secondary law that users may combine. I retain the name \"Search Advisor\" to signify the initial application of LexisNexis classification to a digest for case law - an application now represented by \"Search by Headnote.\" In this three-part series, I present evidence that Search Advisor largely depends on word-matching-and-ranking algorithms for headnote classification. If my conjecture is right, then Search Advisor has a fatal flaw in design that compromises its usefulness as a classification system. By substituting algorithms for much of the work that we should expect classifiers to do, Search Advisor collapses from the weight of its automation. Whether my conjecture is right or wrong, I hope to renew appreciation of how classifiers make the Key Number System a uniquely valuable tool of case law research.","PeriodicalId":349395,"journal":{"name":"InfoSciRN: Other Special Libraries & Librarianship (Sub-Topic)","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does Search Advisor Depend Too Little on Classifiers, and Too Much on Algorithms, for Headnote Classification? Evidence on the Perils of Search Advisor's Automation and the Virtues of Thomson-West Classifiers\",\"authors\":\"Michael Ginsborg\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1345465\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Search Advisor has just been renamed \\\"Search by Topic or Headnote\\\" to accommodate topical research of not just case law, but other sources of primary and secondary law that users may combine. I retain the name \\\"Search Advisor\\\" to signify the initial application of LexisNexis classification to a digest for case law - an application now represented by \\\"Search by Headnote.\\\" In this three-part series, I present evidence that Search Advisor largely depends on word-matching-and-ranking algorithms for headnote classification. If my conjecture is right, then Search Advisor has a fatal flaw in design that compromises its usefulness as a classification system. By substituting algorithms for much of the work that we should expect classifiers to do, Search Advisor collapses from the weight of its automation. Whether my conjecture is right or wrong, I hope to renew appreciation of how classifiers make the Key Number System a uniquely valuable tool of case law research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":349395,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"InfoSciRN: Other Special Libraries & Librarianship (Sub-Topic)\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2007-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"InfoSciRN: Other Special Libraries & Librarianship (Sub-Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1345465\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"InfoSciRN: Other Special Libraries & Librarianship (Sub-Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1345465","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Search Advisor刚刚被重新命名为“按主题或标题搜索”,以适应不仅仅是判例法的主题研究,还有用户可能结合的其他主要和次要法律来源。我保留了“Search Advisor”这个名称,以表示对判例法摘要的LexisNexis分类的最初应用——这个应用现在由“Search by Headnote”表示。在这个由三部分组成的系列文章中,我将提供证据,证明Search Advisor在很大程度上依赖于标题分类的单词匹配和排序算法。如果我的猜想是正确的,那么Search Advisor在设计上有一个致命的缺陷,它会损害它作为分类系统的可用性。通过用算法代替我们期望分类器完成的大部分工作,Search Advisor从其自动化的权重中崩溃了。无论我的猜想是对还是错,我希望重新认识到分类器是如何使关键数字系统成为判例法研究中独特而有价值的工具的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does Search Advisor Depend Too Little on Classifiers, and Too Much on Algorithms, for Headnote Classification? Evidence on the Perils of Search Advisor's Automation and the Virtues of Thomson-West Classifiers
Search Advisor has just been renamed "Search by Topic or Headnote" to accommodate topical research of not just case law, but other sources of primary and secondary law that users may combine. I retain the name "Search Advisor" to signify the initial application of LexisNexis classification to a digest for case law - an application now represented by "Search by Headnote." In this three-part series, I present evidence that Search Advisor largely depends on word-matching-and-ranking algorithms for headnote classification. If my conjecture is right, then Search Advisor has a fatal flaw in design that compromises its usefulness as a classification system. By substituting algorithms for much of the work that we should expect classifiers to do, Search Advisor collapses from the weight of its automation. Whether my conjecture is right or wrong, I hope to renew appreciation of how classifiers make the Key Number System a uniquely valuable tool of case law research.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信