Comments on: Defining relevance in search: Part IV http://blog.webgenomeproject.org/defining-relevance-in-search-part-iv/ Thu, 01 Jul 2010 19:42:57 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Kaila Colbin http://blog.webgenomeproject.org/defining-relevance-in-search-part-iv/comment-page-1/#comment-964 Kaila Colbin Sun, 05 Aug 2007 21:24:10 +0000 http://blog.webgenomeproject.org/defining-relevance-in-search-part-iv/#comment-964 Hello Falafulu! Thank you for your comment. I'll leave it to the engineers to respond to you; suffice it to say we're grateful for your interest. All the best, Kaila Hello Falafulu!

Thank you for your comment. I’ll leave it to the engineers to respond to you; suffice it to say we’re grateful for your interest.

All the best,
Kaila

]]> By: Falafulu Fisi http://blog.webgenomeproject.org/defining-relevance-in-search-part-iv/comment-page-1/#comment-953 Falafulu Fisi Sun, 05 Aug 2007 13:06:13 +0000 http://blog.webgenomeproject.org/defining-relevance-in-search-part-iv/#comment-953 To the developers of VortexDNA, do you know how to measure the relevancy of information that is being retrieved? If you dont , then I guess that you should learn a thing or two about Information Retrieval (IR), before you make those claims about the superior capability of VortexDNA. If you know about IR, the produce some example of how the retrieval rate using VortexDNA is higher than the currently available methods? I am awaiting your response. To the developers of VortexDNA, do you know how to measure the relevancy of information that is being retrieved? If you dont , then I guess that you should learn a thing or two about Information Retrieval (IR), before you make those claims about the superior capability of VortexDNA. If you know about IR, the produce some example of how the retrieval rate using VortexDNA is higher than the currently available methods?

I am awaiting your response.

]]>