IR and AI: Traditions of representation and anti-representation in information processing

2Citations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The paper discusses the traditional, and ongoing, question as to whether natural language processing (NLP) techniques, or indeed and representational techniques at all, aid in the retrieval of information, as that task is traditionally understood. The discussion is partly a response to Karen Sparck Jones' (1999) claim that artificial intelligence, and by implication NLP, should learn from the methodology of Information Retrieval (IR), rather than vice versa, as the first sentence above implies. The issue has been made more interesting and complicated by the shift of interest from classic IR experiments with very long queries to Internet search queries which are typically of two highly ambiguous terms. This simple fact has changed the assumptions of the debate. Moreover, the return to statistical and empirical methods with NLP have made it less clear what an NLP technique, or even a "representational" method, is. The paper also notes the growth of "language models" within IR and the use of the term "translation" in recent years to describe a range of activities, including IR, and which constitutes rather the opposite of what Sparck Jones was calling for. © Springer-Verlag 2004.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Wilks, Y. (2004). IR and AI: Traditions of representation and anti-representation in information processing. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 2997, 12–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24752-4_2

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free