The Search Process
Sulé, Andreu
This lecture is about the Search Process. Lecture done during the European Summer School of Information Science , ESSIS 2018. ESSIS is an event into the EINFOSE european project funded by Erasmus+
 Well, good afternoon. First of all, I would like to thank the organization for the invitation to stay here, to explain a part of the lesson of Thomas, the specific part of the search process. My name is Andrés Hulé, I'm from the University of Barcelona in Spain. And I will explain the methodology that the information retrieval professional used to search information, but not search information, it's not the most relevant information for a program. It's called also a need of information. Usually these phases, these steps are divided in four phases. Know what is needed, where to search, how to search and evaluate the results. Each step, each phase, condition the next one. That means that, for example, we don't make correctly the analysis of the problem, it's probably that we choose incorrectly the ways where to search and how to search in this place, in this site, even that we, unless we choose the incorrect documents. And therefore, that means that the most important step is the first one. It's the first that when we analyze the problem, the need of information. The goal, the objective of the purpose of this first phase is to identify clearly what the problem is. That means sometimes that seems very easy, but it's not easy because sometimes even the user doesn't know very well what he wants. The professional uses two kinds of analysis, the subject analysis and the situation analysis. And at the end, write a list of steps that we'll use to search in the catalogs, repositories, databases, Google, Google Scholar, anywhere. The idea when we talk the best information, the most relevant information, as Thomas explained, is that to find the document information, the resources that are relevant for a problem. We'll do a practice, the number one, the exercise number one, when we will see two problems with the same subject, the information about the Patriot Act, but we will see that the user, the situation are so different that the tools that we have to search and evaluate the results, everything is different. The idea is to avoid, to find irreverent information, it's technically called noise, and avoid the lack of relevant information in technically silence. I would like that you read in a minute carefully the two cases in the first exercise. No, no, wait, wait, just read. Just read. Let's make the first part of the analysis, the subject analysis. Usually this kind of analysis and the other one, the situation analysis, the professional usually make an interpersonal interview with the user and ask questions. For example, we use these cases to compare. The subject analysis, the purpose is to define, to identify with precision what is the topic, or sometimes the subtopics that involve the problem. Some questions could be to identify the generic subject, a specific aspect of the subject, panel view, very important in this case, geographic scope, or chronological scope. With this information that we will find in the case, help us to decide where to search, for example, if we have to search in database, in Google, or anywhere, and how to search, because we identify the words more important. For example, what's your name? Ricardo. Ricardo, sorry, thank you. What's the generic subject of case one and the generic subject of case two? I think the generic subject of case one is a critical show. This is not the topic. This is maybe the panel view, the purpose, but what is the topic of the... Patriotic act. Patriotic act, the low. And the second one? Is to analyze the patriotic. Both cases is the same. Generic. Cecilia. Do you identify a specific aspect in case one or in case two? That means, okay, it's a patriotic act in both cases, but with some specific topics in the case one, for example? In the case one, for example, the victim of a terrorist attack. Terrorist attack just could be, but for example... Politics. Politics, but for example, when the journalists want to know the application of the patriotic act where? In New York? No, in American libraries. Okay. Yes? So, the specific aspect in the generic aspect is patriotic act, but when the specific is American libraries. Your name please? Sara. Sara. The subject topic. Something... The comparison with other law. Okay, the interpretation. In fact, I think, in my opinion, there is not any specific topic. I said specific or sub-topic is the law itself in the second case. That is true that the user wants to compare with other laws, jurisdiction, etc. Okay. Your name? Jessica. The view. Don't have you means... well, means don't have you. I don't know if it's clear or not. Because... Journalist. Journalist, perfect. And the case to law student. Law student academic. In the university, in the school, work. Yes? It's important because both are different. Your name? Julia. Geographic scope are different? Yes. In the first case, it's New York for a city. Yes? Well, I think it's not in New York. The journalist is working in New York. But... A radio talk show. If the journalist go to a radio talk show to talk about the Patriot Act, where? In America. In America. Okay. In the second, do you remember that the Patriot Act is an American law? It's not an international law. And the second? It's not really clear. It's not explicit. It's not explicit but... It's the same. The same but... Your friend, you say something... Not specified. Not specified but... The second one wants to compare. The law with... In other countries. That means that the geographical scope of the needs is bigger. The journal is just in America, but the students wants to compare this law with the law in other countries. That the geographical scope of the needs in these cases, bigger. Chronological scope. What's your name? Pietro. Pietro. That means the information is needed from the Patriot Act is from 2001. Different chronological scope. This week. What? From the beginning of the Patriot Act. From the beginning of the Patriot Act to now. Maybe the second case, as the students want a comparative analysis, maybe one that is older, laws related with the Patriot Act. This is what we call the subject analysis. This helps us to decide, for example, where to search in Google, or maybe not in Wikipedia, or maybe in a law database, or maybe in a repository of a university law, etc. How to search? Also because when we see how to search, we see that we have to type words. And these words are related with this one. For example, Ponevue. Laura. I know him because he's from my school. Laura. Ponevue, the first one is a journalist. If you read the case, what kind of resources, documentation, do you think that the journalist needs to go to talk in the radio? What kind of information? Well, he needs information that could be... I don't understand it. Understands by the police and the radio. Correct me. But he's a law journalist and he could know the databases of journalism. Yes, but do you think that, for example, the journalists need a very, very special... No. No. No, because he's a television. Is the radio just a talk? Yes. To make arguments with the other participant in the talk, but it's not necessary. Maybe searching in Google for news. Articles, blogs. Articles, blogs or anything. And Carla, the other one, the student. Yes. It's an academic point of view. What kind of documents? If the students are working in his last project in the master. He needs an academic document. Documents. He has to look for in a database, specific database. Articles of journals, papers, congress. That means that this helps us to know that we have to search in a low database. Okay? The first one. The second one. It's called... There are some different names, but sometimes it's called situational analysis. There is two. The first is the situation itself. We will see later. And the other is related with the person. The person, for example, the most clear condition is the language that the person can read. If the journalist just can read in English, I look for documentation just in English. And if the student just can read in Spanish, I have to look for documentation in Spanish. Okay? Access to information. That means that, as you know, not all information is free. It's in open access. If the database has no access to databases by payment, we can't offer him articles that are in a payment database. Okay? Related with the situation itself, that means that the situation, the purpose. The purpose. What's the purpose? What's the user? What's the information for? For what? Sorry? Why is he doing that? Yes. Level of accessibility doesn't mean that the user needs all the documents that has been published about this topic or not. It's not necessary. It's a few documents that give him or her the basic information about the topic is enough or not. Type of resources. Video, audio, pictures, text with page, thesis, etc., etc. And the situation itself times that the user has to read the information, analyze the information. If the user, this one is related with level of accessibility because if the user has many time, much time to read, we can offer him or her more documents. Let's analyze. It's one of these in each case. Laya. Purpose. What is the purpose of the first user? The first case. In the first case? What's the one he wants the information for? For to prepare the talk show. Okay, perfect. And the second one? To make the final master portion. Perfect. What's your name? Tina. Related with the purpose is the level of accessibility. What do you think about the level of accessibility in the case one? Is the user needs all the information published about the topic or not? No. Just the basic information. Even in my opinion, the most updated information because if he is going to talk in a radio with other participants, needs to have the information about, for example, the records of government to American libraries this year, not 10 years ago. Catarina. Type of resource, type of documents in the case one. What do you think? Audio. Audio could be? Interview. For example, audio of interview with user of the library or with the personnel that is in church of the libraries. There's no information. Yes, for example, news. Also, maybe some blogs. Okay. And in the second case, what type of documents? Some articles. Those articles, news section, congress. And your name? Maya. Time allowed in the first case. Three days. Very short time. That means that we as professionals, we have to search and prepare very relevant information. And few documents. Okay. That is difficult. And the second? Nine months. Nine months. Many times. Okay. Aldi. Aldi. Aldi? No, Aldi is sorry. Aldi, okay. Thank you. Well, education level and knowledge about the subject. What do you think about the third one? Well, in case one, the journalist has to do really good research because it's a tough topic. But then he has, I mean, he or she, we don't know if it's her. Don't worry. This person has a professional librarian, a conservative politician and a left-wing politician. And also the family member of the group. So that kind of heterogeneous people who he or she is going to talk to just asks for a lot of love, research and good education. Yes. Maybe we don't hate so much know about the subject. Totally agree. Okay. And the second case? The other hand, a person who let's take it as starting point, a person is researching that topic. So it doesn't know everything, but should have some big basis knowledge. Cororally. Yeah. You could know if he or she could do what's essential. Yes. Probably you need to be an expert for the second case because you have to expose and you have to present addresses or... But I think you will be an expert at the end of the work. Not at the beginning. Okay. Normally. Yes. Mario. Mario. Languages? Well, first case, I am for sure English. Yes, sure English. But I would also consider that we talk about US, so it tend to be pretty straight on discussing what happens only in US. Also the provenance of these documents should only be... I mean, it can also be Europe, but they're not really interested. So most likely the guy who just be looking at US only articles, media, history, happened in the last 17 years and definitely the language will be... English. Yeah. Even if the journalist can read in another language, probably it's just necessary documents in English. Yeah. Exactly. And the second one? Well, the second one actually... It's again a bit... Well, because it's the law and it's always a... It's the only... Spain only thing, so probably it has to do with Spanish but also some English. Some English, sure, because... Yeah, you have to see... I mean, the Patriot Act is something which is American, so you have to compare it to other... Yes....rejections. In the second case, if the students can read English, he choose the wrong subject for the research, because... No sense. And... Yacin, by easy. Access to information. What do you think? It's not very clear, but you can suppose more or less... What kind of information? No, access. For example, it's the access... In theory, when you search in Google, it's free access. You can read the information, but some databases are about payment, and you have to be subscribed to access the information for articles that are in the database. What do you think the journalist has information to the databases by payment or not? What do you think? No, not really. You can search in Google, and a lot of information gets about the meeting and the public. And... Do you agree? What do you think? What's your opinion? Our opinions too. Case one. I think maybe, no journalist came in with some article, and you can interact with the score or open access databases. It's probably, yeah? And the second case? Second case, I think much more channels close to the house, there was a Norse library in his or her campus, and can you subscribe to the site? Okay, that's true. That's the normal way. Okay, when we have all this information, we have more information to select where to search and to evaluate the results. For example, very clear language that can read when we search and we retrieve 20 documents, one criteria to select is the language. Okay? And then the professional make a list of terms similar to this. Make a list of the terms more relevant for the topic, for the problem, in the language that the user can read. For example, English, German, and Spanish, suppose, and not just the most important terms, factor tag, theories, jurisprudence, library, library user, information privacy, if not also the synonyms. Why? Because normally, a concept can be expressed in several terms. For example, information privacy, data privacy, data protection are the same concept but expressed in three different ways. And then when we search, for example, in Google, we need to search in all of these terms because it adjusts search information privacy, adjusts find documents that contain these two words. Then no other documents that contain data protection, for example. That means that I have to make different ways. And as Thomas explained, also equivalent in other language. For example, if I want documents in English and Spanish, I need to search, theories and terrorism and libraries and bibliothecas. Because if not, I just search with English words, I just retrieve English documents. Then we have that the situation and the subject analysis determine where to search, how to search, and the evaluation of the results. Second step, where to search. I have identified clearly the topic, the subjects, the subtopics, the situation, the personal characteristics. Now the problem is where to search. The problem for us, for as a professional, is that there are thousands of tools where to search. Thousands, there are many, many places where we can go to search. From Google, to Wikipedia, to databases, catalogs, blogs, many, many, many things. That is one of the reasons that the professional of retrieval information usually specializes in one topic or in two. Because it's the only way that a person knows very well where to search about this topic and how to search these tools. Because the third step is how to search in the tools, but it's very difficult in some cases to know how to search in the tools. Things that we have to analyze when of a source, information, a tool. It's the authority, subject specialization, level of accessibility, type of resources, languages, access, chronological scope. Authority means the organization or the institution that creates or maintains the system. For example, in Google, the authority is Google itself. But there's a database of medicine. The authority are two of the most relevant prestigious institutions in the state. The prestigious of the institution, the authorities, is important because the prestigious usually means that the documents that we can find in this system will be also prestigious. Good documents. Obviously, subject specialization. We have to know if we want information about law. We have to know if our tool is a system, is it a specific in law or not. Level of accessibility. That means if the system where I want to search has the access to all the information about the subject or not, or maybe just the more relevant or the videos, just pictures, etc. Language of the resources that we can find in these tools. Access to information, if when we search in a tool, in a system, the information will be free, open access or not, chronological scope or geographical scope. Let's see. This analysis applied to Google and to PubMed. Google is type of information is secondary. That means that they is not a dictionary when we search in Google, Google told us that there is documents where we can find information. Authority Google, subject is general. We can find information in Google about any topic. Level of accessibility is all web that are indexed in Google are there. And that accessibility is full of the documents that are in the web. Type of resources, type of documents was all kind. With pages, PDF, new maps, pictures, videos, language or language, access, mainly free open access, mainly because sometimes Google has links to documents that you have to have the subscription to access them. And chronological scope, tool and geographical scope, all. PubMed is a, I don't know, do you know PubMed is a database? Medicine. Medicine, life science, yes. Secondary type of source because when you receive articles, then you go to the article. The article is a primary source that the database is secondary. Authority, subject is specialization, life science, level of accessibility, selective. Why? Because there you just find the articles of some kind of journals. Not everything. In theory, here you find the articles of the most relevant journals in medicine. That means that if I search in PubMed, I normally, I know that the articles are good articles. The documents are good, are prestigious. Okay? It's important, for example, for the second case, if it was a low database. Type of documents, mainly article journals. Remember, if we need videos, PubMed is not a good tool to search. Access to information, open. Some articles are open, but other are in subscription access. Chronological scope is the middle of the last century to now, from, and the scope is mainly the American, the USA. Okay? Then, when we know these characteristics of several systems, several sources of information, then we can select which one is best for each situation, each problem. Okay? First, analyze the problem. Second, select where to search. When I select the word to search, I have to search. Then, search is not an easy work. It's complicated and more in some tools that, for example, like PubMed, that are complicated. Google is easier, but has some cons. Okay, here are the options of search more common. There are others, but these are the more common. Simple search, advanced search, field search, Boolean operators, exit phrase, location, exploratory search. Okay? Each one is not good or bad. Each one has pros and cons, and it's important to know these pros and cons, because if we know this, we know where to use simple, advanced, field search, etc. There are two problems about this third step. One is that every tool, every system, every source of information has its own way to express the simple search, the advanced search, the Boolean operators, the exit phrase. That means that it's not enough to know how Google expresses the exit phrase or the Boolean or. Because in another way, in another tool, it's different. That means that the professional has to know very good how to search in each tool. The first one, the simple search. The simple search is the easiest way to search in every tool. And usually it's a box that you type words here and make a retool and the system retrieves documents. Then the pros is that it's very easy. The cons is that when we put right words here in the box, the system retrieves documents that contain, include these words in any part of the document. Okay? For example, if I search South Africa in Google, Google retrieves this page. Why? Because South Africa is in the title, but also Baguette is in the text. Okay? If I make this similar search in PubMed, it says, I search, head, because I want information about head. Okay. Look, retrieve this document because the word head appears in the title, appears in the keywords, but also because it's difficult to see, but because there is an author, it's called head. Okay? That means that, for example, if there is an article that is written, but an author that is called head, but is about shoulder, we recover also this article. That means that the simple search is easy, but usually produces noise. Retrieves documents that are not relevant for the program. Okay? And it's true that it's the easiest way to do it. How to narrow the search? That means how to make a search that gives us more precise results. For example, with the advanced search. Google, the advanced search allows us to search words in a part of the document. For example, I can search, I want to search this word just in the title. Or I want to search this word just in the author, or just in the keywords, or just in the, etc. Okay? Google has an advanced search interface. It's here sitting, advanced search. And here, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Here, you can see, there, I put, so, Africa. And allows me to limit the words to anywhere in the page, in the title, in the text, in the URL, or in the links. If I want that, to retrieve documents that include South Africa in the title, I can limit with this option. Panmet has more options. Ah, look at that. But if not here. Panmet in the advanced search has these books that you can choose where to search the word. In the title, in the author, in the many places. The advanced search is very interesting because if you know where to search, for example, if I want, search articles that the author is called head, with the advanced search limiting the word to the author field, I narrow, I retrieve just the articles that has as an author head. Okay? Like you can see here. It's about another subject, but the important is the author is head. Let's go ahead. Okay. The third group of operators are the Boolean operators, maybe one of the most famous operators. The operators, there are three. And, or, or not. Those are those as to decide which one of those of the words once that operates include the documents. For example, it's in the box. I type travel and tourist. The system retrieves just the documents that include the two words. For example, a document that just includes the word travel won't be retrieved. And another document that just includes the word tourist won't be retrieved. Those documents that include both terms. That means this is a narrow search. To broaden the search, we use the or. That means that travel or tourist retrieves every document that includes or travel or tourist or the two words. Tourist and travel. The last one not is the less frequent. That means that travel, not tourist, retrieves all the documents that include the word travel and not the word tourist. Okay. Now we will do the exercise. With the parentheses, we can force which one of the operators when there is more than one run before. Okay. For example, we have travel or tourist on an N and web. Sorry. When I put in brackets travel or tourist, that means that the first to run is or. And the second one is an. Here travel and tourist, not tourist. That means that the first will be travel and tourist. And the second not tourist. Okay. Then let's make the second exercise. Okay. Just the number one. Okay. No. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. I think it's more difficult, this one. Yes. Could you explain your. No. Do you have the same? Okay. Is the first condition, R or B, will be all this area. R or B. The second condition is that also include the C. And that is just this area. Okay. Okay. The third one. A or B, not C. A or B, but not C. Correct. Perfect. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Now let's make the number. Okay. Just using Boolean operators, and or not. Just Boolean operators. Can you slide? Yes. Sorry. Okay. Take care with the fourth. The fourth is a little bit complicated, because the way that we express the needs is, we use dogs and cats, but think about what we really need, what we really want. Information about dogs and cats, but what information, what is that we really want? If you put an, normally, what do you think? For example, a book about cats, will you fill this need of information? A book just about cats? Think about it. If I told you, I want information about dogs and cats. For example, do you think that a book just about dogs? About dogs and cats. Because somebody can say, I want a book on dogs and a book on cats, and you do it to set up a book, and then you can also, you can also, you can also put a book on, that's about dogs and cats. Perfect. But how do you express in a Boolean operator this sentence? R or not? R, N or R? But the trick is that you say, I want information about dogs and cats. And the first thing is, okay, dogs and cats, but it's R, dogs or cats. Information about dog training, it's just dog training. Well, but you have two words here, dog and training. How do you combine these words? Dog and training, dog or training, dog and not training. Dog training, it means dog and training. Dog and training, correct. So, you have 30 women on television and on cinema. It's the same about dogs and, yeah. What's sorry, information about? Women on television and on cinema, it's the same of dogs on TV or radio. Women or dogs and cats and dogs and radio. Radio, no, it's cinema. But I think that there is another word that could be included in the sentence. But for example, it's woman, in television or cinema, in any kind of aspects or in a sub-topic. For example, it's about the number of women in television or in cinema. Stereotypes. Stereotypes. The police and operators have the same. It's the same, yeah. It's better include this word. What's the information about dogs on TV or radio? Dog and radio. Dogs on TV or no. Dogs and TV or radio. It could be, but it's easier the sentence. Dogs and TV or radio. It's easier. Can you go please? I knew you would come up. Sorry. What about this one? Literature, not friends, not all. But why? So complicated. But why? Because it's just information about friends' literature. So it's just written and... Yeah. And it. This is like completely wrong. I think it's... This is better. Friends' and literature. No, no, it's correct. Okay. Okay. Let's check the answers. What's your name? I don't remember. Which one? Dog and train. Dog and train. Correct. Dog and train. Tell me. What about the... Yeah. There is another way to... There is the easiest way to do it. But you are just with the Boolean operators. Okay. The stars. Even with the exact phrase. It would be better. Dog training between... It's true that there is... With other options, there is another way to find this information. But now we are just with the Boolean operators. Okay. I don't remember. Jessica. Friends' and literature. Friends' and literature. Okay. For me, this is the most difficult. Very well. Very well. Because the trick is that, normally the user expresses the need for information. I want information about dogs and cats. And some people say, ah, dogs and cats. Not because if we write... Why is wrong? Dogs and cats. Because they get married. That would... Wait, wait, wait. But this, you would have like the document. We got the two animals together. We want information about both of them. For example, these will be for books that are dogs and cats together. And this is for books, dogs and cats together, or a book about dogs, or a book about cats. Okay. The next one. Information about dogs on radio and on television or radio. Dogs and... books or radio. Dogs and cats together. Dogs and cats together. Dogs and cats together. Okay. What's the difference between this sentence and this one? If the wrong is first and second or... What's the difference? Why this is not correct? Because we got the information about dogs, and we got the book and all the radio. If we make this sentence, we retrieve documents about dogs and TV in the same document, and all the documents about radio. Radio about with another subjects. Laura. Number six. Between parenthesis, if you're cinema, and between parenthesis to your types, and all of them. Okay. Sorry. Wait. Are you agree? Yes. Is there a difference if you just sterilize them first? Is the same that if you... Yes. Is the same. Also in parenthesis, there are types of... Also in parenthesis, yes. Is the same, yes. The same. It doesn't matter. And the last one. Very simple. Okay. Before to make the 8, 9, 10, let's see... Let's see how Google expresses the Boolean operators, and how PAMMET does it. In Google, Google uses natural sentences to express an or not. For example, an is all the words, head and diseases. That means that it's the same that head and diseases. Any of these words, here is a mistake, is head diseases, all any of these words will be head or diseases. And none of these words, and all these words, that mean head, not diseases. This is the reason that I told you that it's necessary to know every tool, how to express the different options to search. In PAMMET, it's more simple. You have here a box, when you open this box, you have the operator N, the operator OR, or the operator NOT. It's very simple. Here is head and diseases, out or head or diseases, out or head or not diseases. Okay. Another very interesting option is the EXAT phrase. The EXAT phrase means that when we use this option, the systems retrieve documents that include the words in the same order that we put the words in brackets. The same word as we wrote the term in brackets. It's very useful if you know that this concept is not a disease, it's a disease. It's a disease. It's a disease. It's a disease. It's a disease. It's useful if you know that this concept, the term, is always written in the document in the same way. Okay. If not, it's dangerous because head injury just... fine, just head injury. Okay. Normally, to define this option as the bracket. Okay. Then, with this info, make the number 8 and use both EXAT phrase and Boolean operators, the number 8. Okay. It's a little bit more complicated, but use also the EXAT phrase. Do you think that there is any term that normally is expressed in the same way of one of this one? Probably. Which one? This one. There's got to be some short cut. But for example, the concept of open access, what do you think? Is it open access or there is a... This term here, free access. Yeah, but free access is a synonym. I said just... The restricted spaces, like the military is something. No, but for example, if you write open access, you fall in the EXAT sentence, you are sure that you retrieve open access, not open an access in another place, always together. Yeah, maybe. It's in the legislation. Yeah, but this means that it's always open access legislation, in my opinion. Yeah, it could be. It's better maybe like this open access in the phrase and legislation and that's in the brackets. And then another brackets and not in the letter. Well, yes. See, it's better with... Here, and here. Yeah, I have it. Ah, okay, sorry. Because open access is a term that normally always appears open access, in this way. Open access, all together. Okay. Laya, the number eight. Information about open access legislation in Scandinavian countries except Finland. Open access legislation in exact place. Er... In exact place. And in exact phrase, it's Scandinavian countries. What do you think? Yes. Well, I have another opinion, but... I think that there is a part of the first exact phrase that is too narrow, in my opinion. No, first, this part of here. Open access legislation, that means that, for example, in a document appears, open access is... in Spain, has in Spain a legislation, as the legislation is not near open access. The system doesn't retrieve this document. I think it's better, yes, open access, because open access is always a concept. In my opinion, it's better... Open access, yes, because open access is a concept. That legislation, that means that the document is viewed as an open access as a phrase. Legislation also as a word. Tell me. But in change yet, least relevant documents. Yes. In change yet, open access and legislation. And legislation. Legislation. Say. This one. Yes. Least relevant. Least? Sorry. Least relevant. What? I don't understand you. Relevance. Relevance. Relevance. But... Relevance. Relevance. Yes. Daddy, we are not talking about relevance. Relevance is more and more and more complicated than Boolean operators. One is that when you write a Boolean sentence, the systems recover 10, 20 documents, and another is that the systems order these documents with some criteria. And one of them is the relevance. But this is very complicated concept of relevance. Okay. The number nine. You can use here also the limitation by field. Remember that you can search a word, meaning this word to some field. For example, I want to search head just in the field of author. I want to search this other word head in the field of subject. Well, for example, this could be. Author as a field equal John Smith and in the field subject, European history. That means that the systems look for John Smith just in the field of author and the European history just in the field of subject. Narrow research. Tell me. Can I ask a question? Yes. For example, the story of history, what would be better if you put Europe with the star and history so you get more results? Europe. Yeah, no, no, it's better, but the problem is that it's an excess light. The two kitchen. I haven't explained yet the two kitchen. Sorry. But this is at location. Okay. That means that the systems find all the documents that include all the words that has the root Europe. European, Europe, Europe, anything. Okay. And the last one. Well, we can limit to the author. Subject. And title. Okay. We can limit the search to the author, to the subject, and to the title. It's more precise search. As you can see, the Boolean operators are a powerful tool to search, but it's true that sometimes it's difficult to use them properly because the combination of the words are difficult. The location is a very famous operator. Look, if I search with an asterisk at the end, the system look for documents that include any word that begin with the root, head, head, head, head, head, head, head, head, head, head, headmaster. This is very interesting because, for example, if I want to search information about libraries, maybe I should write library or libraries or librarianship or et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. One way is to use the asterisk to write library and the system will find library, library, et cetera. What is looking this example? What is the con? The problem with that we have to be aware with this kind of truncation. For example, if we want information about head. What is the problem? Headmaster, headstone. The problem is that you have to be very careful that not include other words that are not relevant for the program. Wow, I can open the door. We are finishing. This kind of search is very, very different. It's called exploratory search. I know if you have a good connection or not. Okay. There are some sources of information, some systems that allows us to search information about following some list of thirds that are ordered in a heretic way. That means that, for example, here is the most, if I want information about arts, I can click here, arts. Then the system show me subcategories. For example, I want information about art history. For example, about artists or art historians. At the end of the categories, that's called navigation, at the end, the system show me a selected document. The organization of the institution that maintains these kinds of systems. The problem is that, as you see, it's very, very easy to search. You have to type any word, any boolean, any exact phrase, anything. Just click the words. Okay. Also, perfect, the systems know. What do you think are the cons of this kind of system, of this kind of search? You have to add that to what? The kind of search of the engine. More than the engine? Add up to who? Or to what? To the hazardous. Correct, perfect. To the categories. Okay. Because these categories are elaborated by an institution, an organization, following their opinion, because they say that art is a subject, it's movies, television, music, game style. That means that maybe it's difficult to find the subject that I want to search in this category. Sometimes it's difficult to know if something is in the news. Why there is news here and business and health? It's difficult. For example, I want information about tourists. In this category, do you think that we'll find information about tourists? Society? But it's difficult to know it. Okay. And this is one, perfect, and the second one comes with one. It's at the end. Who choose these documents, these resources? We don't know. Are these documents the most important in this topic? I don't know. Then it's easy to search, but you have to adapt to the terms, and the results are selected, but not by me, but some institution. Well, the last step of the search process is to evaluate the results. After analyzing the program, select the word to search. Searching in Google and PubMed is all on zone. We retrieve 10, 20, 30 documents. Which one of these documents are more relevant for the user, for the need of information? The last one criteria is this one. It's called subjective relevance. That means that at the end is the user who decides that the documents are relevant or not. But we have nothing to do with this. Between the 20, 30 documents, we can choose the most important, keep in mind these criteria, these elements. For example, the authorship. If I have two documents about medicine, and one is the author is a Nobel Prize winner of medicine, and the other one is the author is a known author. Which one is better? The article of the Nobel Prize winner. No? That means authorship, the prestigious of the author. More prestigious, in theory, the content of the document is better. Another element to analyze the content of the documents. If the content is more related to the topic of the need of information, better. We will select the documents that are more related to the content. Updating. This is very important in some areas. For example, in computer science. If I retrieve information about Internet, 20 documents about Internet. For a user that is making an investigation about Internet. If one of them is, for example, 2000, has been published in 2000, is in theory is less relevant than another one document that has been published now in 2018. It's not so important in all areas. For example, in humanities, in history, in another areas, the date of publication is not so important. Authority of publication. For example, two documents, two articles. One of them has been published in the journal Nature. And the other one in a journal of the village when I was born. A small village or in a journal, an unknown journal. Which one do you select? The first one, the authoritative of the publication. They say that these documents are more relevant, more important. And access. Remember that not all users can access to all the information. For example, I retrieve 30 documents and the user can't access to subscription by payment. I just select the documents that are free or open access. Well, these are the small part of the subject that Thomas explained about retrieval information. The search process, remember the four steps, the four phases. That the most important is the first one. Analyze, analyze very well the user, the need, the situation. And that means that we will choose a very good places to search. We will make a very good searching and we have Qiterias to evaluate the results. Thank you very much.
 Well, good afternoon.  First of all, I would like to thank the organization for the invitation to stay here,  to explain a part of the lesson of Thomas, the specific part of the search process.  My name is Andrés Hulé, I'm from the University of Barcelona in Spain.  And I will explain the methodology that the information retrieval professional used to search information,  but not search information, it's not the most relevant information for a program.  It's called also a need of information.  Usually these phases, these steps are divided in four phases.  Know what is needed, where to search, how to search and evaluate the results.  Each step, each phase, condition the next one.  That means that, for example, we don't make correctly the analysis of the problem,  it's probably that we choose incorrectly the ways where to search and how to search in this place, in this site,  even that we, unless we choose the incorrect documents.  And therefore, that means that the most important step is the first one.  It's the first that when we analyze the problem, the need of information.  The goal, the objective of the purpose of this first phase is to identify clearly what the problem is.  That means sometimes that seems very easy, but it's not easy because sometimes even the user doesn't know very well what he wants.  The professional uses two kinds of analysis, the subject analysis and the situation analysis.  And at the end, write a list of steps that we'll use to search in the catalogs,  repositories, databases, Google, Google Scholar, anywhere.  The idea when we talk the best information, the most relevant information, as Thomas explained,  is that to find the document information, the resources that are relevant for a problem.  We'll do a practice, the number one, the exercise number one,  when we will see two problems with the same subject, the information about the Patriot Act,  but we will see that the user, the situation are so different that the tools that we have to search  and evaluate the results, everything is different.  The idea is to avoid, to find irreverent information, it's technically called noise,  and avoid the lack of relevant information in technically silence.  I would like that you read in a minute carefully the two cases in the first exercise.  No, no, wait, wait, just read.  Just read.  Let's make the first part of the analysis, the subject analysis.  Usually this kind of analysis and the other one, the situation analysis,  the professional usually make an interpersonal interview with the user and ask questions.  For example, we use these cases to compare.  The subject analysis, the purpose is to define, to identify with precision what is the topic,  or sometimes the subtopics that involve the problem.  Some questions could be to identify the generic subject, a specific aspect of the subject,  panel view, very important in this case, geographic scope, or chronological scope.  With this information that we will find in the case, help us to decide where to search,  for example, if we have to search in database, in Google, or anywhere, and how to search,  because we identify the words more important.  For example, what's your name?  Ricardo.  Ricardo, sorry, thank you.  What's the generic subject of case one and the generic subject of case two?  I think the generic subject of case one is a critical show.  This is not the topic.  This is maybe the panel view, the purpose, but what is the topic of the...  Patriotic act.  Patriotic act, the low.  And the second one?  Is to analyze the patriotic.  Both cases is the same.  Generic.  Cecilia.  Do you identify a specific aspect in case one or in case two?  That means, okay, it's a patriotic act in both cases, but with some specific topics in the case one, for example?  In the case one, for example, the victim of a terrorist attack.  Terrorist attack just could be, but for example...  Politics.  Politics, but for example, when the journalists want to know the application of the patriotic act where?  In New York?  No, in American libraries.  Okay.  Yes?  So, the specific aspect in the generic aspect is patriotic act, but when the specific is American libraries.  Your name please?  Sara.  Sara.  The subject topic.  Something...  The comparison with other law.  Okay, the interpretation.  In fact, I think, in my opinion, there is not any specific topic.  I said specific or sub-topic is the law itself in the second case.  That is true that the user wants to compare with other laws, jurisdiction, etc.  Okay. Your name?  Jessica.  The view. Don't have you means... well, means don't have you. I don't know if it's clear or not.  Because...  Journalist.  Journalist, perfect.  And the case to law student.  Law student academic.  In the university, in the school, work.  Yes? It's important because both are different.  Your name?  Julia.  Geographic scope are different?  Yes. In the first case, it's New York for a city.  Yes?  Well, I think it's not in New York.  The journalist is working in New York.  But...  A radio talk show.  If the journalist go to a radio talk show to talk about the Patriot Act, where?  In America.  In America. Okay.  In the second, do you remember that the Patriot Act is an American law?  It's not an international law.  And the second?  It's not really clear. It's not explicit.  It's not explicit but...  It's the same.  The same but...  Your friend, you say something...  Not specified.  Not specified but...  The second one wants to compare.  The law with...  In other countries.  That means that the geographical scope of the needs is bigger.  The journal is just in America, but the students wants to compare this law with the law in other countries.  That the geographical scope of the needs in these cases, bigger.  Chronological scope.  What's your name?  Pietro.  Pietro.  That means the information is needed from the Patriot Act is from 2001.  Different chronological scope.  This week.  What?  From the beginning of the Patriot Act.  From the beginning of the Patriot Act to now.  Maybe the second case, as the students want a comparative analysis,  maybe one that is older, laws related with the Patriot Act.  This is what we call the subject analysis.  This helps us to decide, for example,  where to search in Google, or maybe not in Wikipedia,  or maybe in a law database, or maybe in a repository of a university law, etc.  How to search?  Also because when we see how to search, we see that we have to type words.  And these words are related with this one.  For example,  Ponevue.  Laura.  I know him because he's from my school.  Laura.  Ponevue, the first one is a journalist.  If you read the case, what kind of resources, documentation,  do you think that the journalist needs to go to talk in the radio?  What kind of information?  Well, he needs information that could be...  I don't understand it.  Understands by the police and the radio.  Correct me.  But he's a law journalist and he could know the databases of journalism.  Yes, but do you think that, for example, the journalists need a very, very special...  No.  No.  No, because he's a television.  Is the radio just a talk?  Yes.  To make arguments with the other participant in the talk, but it's not necessary.  Maybe searching in Google for news.  Articles, blogs.  Articles, blogs or anything.  And Carla, the other one, the student.  Yes.  It's an academic point of view.  What kind of documents?  If the students are working in his last project in the master.  He needs an academic document.  Documents.  He has to look for in a database, specific database.  Articles of journals, papers, congress.  That means that this helps us to know that we have to search in a low database.  Okay?  The first one.  The second one.  It's called...  There are some different names, but sometimes it's called situational analysis.  There is two.  The first is the situation itself.  We will see later.  And the other is related with the person.  The person, for example, the most clear condition is the language that the person can read.  If the journalist just can read in English, I look for documentation just in English.  And if the student just can read in Spanish, I have to look for documentation in Spanish.  Okay?  Access to information.  That means that, as you know, not all information is free.  It's in open access.  If the database has no access to databases by payment, we can't offer him articles that  are in a payment database.  Okay?  Related with the situation itself, that means that the situation, the purpose.  The purpose.  What's the purpose?  What's the user?  What's the information for?  For what?  Sorry?  Why is he doing that?  Yes.  Level of accessibility doesn't mean that the user needs all the documents that has been  published about this topic or not.  It's not necessary.  It's a few documents that give him or her the basic information about the topic is enough  or not.  Type of resources.  Video, audio, pictures, text with page, thesis, etc., etc.  And the situation itself times that the user has to read the information, analyze the information.  If the user, this one is related with level of accessibility because if the user has  many time, much time to read, we can offer him or her more documents.  Let's analyze.  It's one of these in each case.  Laya.  Purpose.  What is the purpose of the first user?  The first case.  In the first case?  What's the one he wants the information for?  For to prepare the talk show.  Okay, perfect.  And the second one?  To make the final master portion.  Perfect.  What's your name?  Tina.  Related with the purpose is the level of accessibility.  What do you think about the level of accessibility in the case one?  Is the user needs all the information published about the topic or not?  No.  Just the basic information.  Even in my opinion, the most updated information because if he is going to talk in a radio with other participants,  needs to have the information about, for example, the records of government to American libraries this year,  not 10 years ago.  Catarina.  Type of resource, type of documents in the case one.  What do you think?  Audio.  Audio could be?  Interview.  For example, audio of interview with user of the library or with the personnel that is in church of the libraries.  There's no information.  Yes, for example, news.  Also, maybe some blogs.  Okay. And in the second case, what type of documents?  Some articles.  Those articles, news section, congress.  And your name?  Maya.  Time allowed in the first case.  Three days.  Very short time.  That means that we as professionals, we have to search and prepare very relevant information.  And few documents.  Okay. That is difficult.  And the second?  Nine months.  Nine months.  Many times.  Okay.  Aldi.  Aldi.  Aldi?  No, Aldi is sorry.  Aldi, okay. Thank you.  Well, education level and knowledge about the subject.  What do you think about the third one?  Well, in case one, the journalist has to do really good research because it's a tough topic.  But then he has, I mean, he or she, we don't know if it's her.  Don't worry.  This person has a professional librarian, a conservative politician and a left-wing politician.  And also the family member of the group.  So that kind of heterogeneous people who he or she is going to talk to just asks for a lot of love, research and good education.  Yes.  Maybe we don't hate so much know about the subject.  Totally agree.  Okay.  And the second case?  The other hand, a person who let's take it as starting point, a person is researching that topic.  So it doesn't know everything, but should have some big basis knowledge.  Cororally.  Yeah.  You could know if he or she could do what's essential.  Yes.  Probably you need to be an expert for the second case because you have to expose and you have to present addresses or...  But I think you will be an expert at the end of the work.  Not at the beginning.  Okay.  Normally.  Yes.  Mario.  Mario.  Languages?  Well, first case, I am for sure English.  Yes, sure English.  But I would also consider that we talk about US, so it tend to be pretty straight on discussing what happens only in US.  Also the provenance of these documents should only be...  I mean, it can also be Europe, but they're not really interested.  So most likely the guy who just be looking at US only articles, media, history, happened in the last 17 years and definitely the language will be...  English.  Yeah.  Even if the journalist can read in another language, probably it's just necessary documents in English.  Yeah.  Exactly.  And the second one?  Well, the second one actually...  It's again a bit...  Well, because it's the law and it's always a...  It's the only...  Spain only thing, so probably it has to do with Spanish but also some English.  Some English, sure, because...  Yeah, you have to see...  I mean, the Patriot Act is something which is American, so you have to compare it to other...  Yes. ...rejections.  In the second case, if the students can read English, he choose the wrong subject for the research, because...  No sense.  And...  Yacin, by easy.  Access to information.  What do you think?  It's not very clear, but you can suppose more or less...  What kind of information?  No, access.  For example, it's the access...  In theory, when you search in Google, it's free access.  You can read the information, but some databases are about payment, and you have to be subscribed to access the information for articles that are in the database.  What do you think the journalist has information to the databases by payment or not?  What do you think?  No, not really. You can search in Google, and a lot of information gets about the meeting and the public.  And...  Do you agree?  What do you think?  What's your opinion?  Our opinions too.  Case one.  I think maybe, no journalist came in with some article, and you can interact with the score or open access databases.  It's probably, yeah?  And the second case?  Second case, I think much more channels close to the house, there was a Norse library in his or her campus, and can you subscribe to the site?  Okay, that's true. That's the normal way.  Okay, when we have all this information, we have more information to select where to search and to evaluate the results.  For example, very clear language that can read when we search and we retrieve 20 documents, one criteria to select is the language.  Okay?  And then the professional make a list of terms similar to this.  Make a list of the terms more relevant for the topic, for the problem, in the language that the user can read.  For example, English, German, and Spanish, suppose, and not just the most important terms, factor tag, theories, jurisprudence, library, library user, information privacy,  if not also the synonyms.  Why?  Because normally, a concept can be expressed in several terms.  For example, information privacy, data privacy, data protection are the same concept but expressed in three different ways.  And then when we search, for example, in Google, we need to search in all of these terms because it adjusts search information privacy, adjusts find documents that contain these two words.  Then no other documents that contain data protection, for example.  That means that I have to make different ways.  And as Thomas explained, also equivalent in other language.  For example, if I want documents in English and Spanish, I need to search, theories and terrorism and libraries and bibliothecas.  Because if not, I just search with English words, I just retrieve English documents.  Then we have that the situation and the subject analysis determine where to search, how to search, and the evaluation of the results.  Second step, where to search.  I have identified clearly the topic, the subjects, the subtopics, the situation, the personal characteristics.  Now the problem is where to search.  The problem for us, for as a professional, is that there are thousands of tools where to search.  Thousands, there are many, many places where we can go to search.  From Google, to Wikipedia, to databases, catalogs, blogs, many, many, many things.  That is one of the reasons that the professional of retrieval information usually specializes in one topic or in two.  Because it's the only way that a person knows very well where to search about this topic and how to search these tools.  Because the third step is how to search in the tools, but it's very difficult in some cases to know how to search in the tools.  Things that we have to analyze when of a source, information, a tool.  It's the authority, subject specialization, level of accessibility, type of resources, languages, access, chronological scope.  Authority means the organization or the institution that creates or maintains the system.  For example, in Google, the authority is Google itself.  But there's a database of medicine.  The authority are two of the most relevant prestigious institutions in the state.  The prestigious of the institution, the authorities, is important because the prestigious usually means that the documents that we can find in this system will be also prestigious.  Good documents.  Obviously, subject specialization.  We have to know if we want information about law.  We have to know if our tool is a system, is it a specific in law or not.  Level of accessibility.  That means if the system where I want to search has the access to all the information about the subject or not, or maybe just the more relevant or the videos, just pictures, etc.  Language of the resources that we can find in these tools.  Access to information, if when we search in a tool, in a system, the information will be free, open access or not, chronological scope or geographical scope.  Let's see.  This analysis applied to Google and to PubMed.  Google is type of information is secondary.  That means that they is not a dictionary when we search in Google, Google told us that there is documents where we can find information.  Authority Google, subject is general.  We can find information in Google about any topic.  Level of accessibility is all web that are indexed in Google are there.  And that accessibility is full of the documents that are in the web.  Type of resources, type of documents was all kind.  With pages, PDF, new maps, pictures, videos, language or language, access, mainly free open access, mainly because sometimes Google has links to documents that you have to have the subscription to access them.  And chronological scope, tool and geographical scope, all.  PubMed is a, I don't know, do you know PubMed is a database?  Medicine.  Medicine, life science, yes.  Secondary type of source because when you receive articles, then you go to the article.  The article is a primary source that the database is secondary.  Authority, subject is specialization, life science, level of accessibility, selective.  Why? Because there you just find the articles of some kind of journals.  Not everything.  In theory, here you find the articles of the most relevant journals in medicine.  That means that if I search in PubMed, I normally, I know that the articles are good articles.  The documents are good, are prestigious.  Okay?  It's important, for example, for the second case, if it was a low database.  Type of documents, mainly article journals.  Remember, if we need videos, PubMed is not a good tool to search.  Access to information, open.  Some articles are open, but other are in subscription access.  Chronological scope is the middle of the last century to now, from, and the scope is mainly the American, the USA.  Okay?  Then, when we know these characteristics of several systems, several sources of information,  then we can select which one is best for each situation, each problem.  Okay?  First, analyze the problem.  Second, select where to search.  When I select the word to search, I have to search.  Then, search is not an easy work.  It's complicated and more in some tools that, for example, like PubMed, that are complicated.  Google is easier, but has some cons.  Okay, here are the options of search more common.  There are others, but these are the more common.  Simple search, advanced search, field search, Boolean operators, exit phrase, location, exploratory search.  Okay?  Each one is not good or bad.  Each one has pros and cons, and it's important to know these pros and cons, because if we know this,  we know where to use simple, advanced, field search, etc.  There are two problems about this third step.  One is that every tool, every system, every source of information has its own way to express the simple search,  the advanced search, the Boolean operators, the exit phrase.  That means that it's not enough to know how Google expresses the exit phrase or the Boolean or.  Because in another way, in another tool, it's different.  That means that the professional has to know very good how to search in each tool.  The first one, the simple search.  The simple search is the easiest way to search in every tool.  And usually it's a box that you type words here and make a retool and the system retrieves documents.  Then the pros is that it's very easy.  The cons is that when we put right words here in the box,  the system retrieves documents that contain, include these words in any part of the document.  Okay?  For example,  if I search South Africa in Google, Google retrieves this page.  Why?  Because South Africa is in the title, but also Baguette is in the text.  Okay?  If I make this similar search in PubMed, it says,  I search,  head, because I want information about head.  Okay.  Look, retrieve this document because the word head appears in the title,  appears in the keywords, but also because it's difficult to see,  but because there is an author, it's called head.  Okay?  That means that, for example, if there is an article that is written,  but an author that is called head, but is about shoulder,  we recover also this article.  That means that the simple search is easy, but usually produces noise.  Retrieves documents that are not relevant for the program.  Okay?  And it's true that it's the easiest way to do it.  How to narrow the search?  That means how to make a search that gives us more precise results.  For example, with the advanced search.  Google, the advanced search allows us to search words in a part of the document.  For example, I can search, I want to search this word just in the title.  Or I want to search this word just in the author, or just in the keywords,  or just in the, etc.  Okay?  Google has an advanced search interface.  It's here sitting, advanced search.  And here, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.  Here, you can see, there, I put, so, Africa.  And allows me to limit the words to anywhere in the page, in the title, in the text, in the URL, or in the links.  If I want that, to retrieve documents that include South Africa in the title,  I can limit with this option.  Panmet has more options.  Ah, look at that.  But if not here.  Panmet in the advanced search has these books that you can choose where to search the word.  In the title, in the author, in the many places.  The advanced search is very interesting because if you know where to search, for example, if I want, search articles  that the author is called head, with the advanced search limiting the word to the author field,  I narrow, I retrieve just the articles that has as an author head.  Okay?  Like you can see here.  It's about another subject, but the important is the author is head.  Let's go ahead.  Okay.  The third group of operators are the Boolean operators, maybe one of the most famous operators.  The operators, there are three.  And, or, or not.  Those are those as to decide which one of those of the words once that operates include the documents.  For example, it's in the box.  I type travel and tourist.  The system retrieves just the documents that include the two words.  For example, a document that just includes the word travel won't be retrieved.  And another document that just includes the word tourist won't be retrieved.  Those documents that include both terms.  That means this is a narrow search.  To broaden the search, we use the or.  That means that travel or tourist retrieves every document that includes or travel or tourist or the two words.  Tourist and travel.  The last one not is the less frequent.  That means that travel, not tourist, retrieves all the documents that include the word travel and not the word tourist.  Okay.  Now we will do the exercise.  With the parentheses, we can force which one of the operators when there is more than one run before.  Okay.  For example, we have travel or tourist on an N and web.  Sorry.  When I put in brackets travel or tourist, that means that the first to run is or.  And the second one is an.  Here travel and tourist, not tourist.  That means that the first will be travel and tourist.  And the second not tourist.  Okay.  Then let's make the second exercise.  Okay.  Just the number one.  Okay.  No.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  I think it's more difficult, this one.  Yes.  Could you explain your.  No.  Do you have the same?  Okay.  Is the first condition, R or B, will be all this area.  R or B.  The second condition is that also include the C.  And that is just this area.  Okay.  Okay.  The third one.  A or B, not C.  A or B, but not C.  Correct.  Perfect.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.  Now let's make the number.  Okay.  Just using Boolean operators, and or not.  Just Boolean operators.  Can you slide?  Yes.  Sorry.  Okay.  Take care with the fourth.  The fourth is a little bit complicated, because the way that we express the needs is,  we use dogs and cats, but think about what we really need, what we really want.  Information about dogs and cats, but what information, what is that we really want?  If you put an, normally, what do you think?  For example, a book about cats, will you fill this need of information?  A book just about cats?  Think about it.  If I told you, I want information about dogs and cats.  For example, do you think that a book just about dogs?  About dogs and cats.  Because somebody can say, I want a book on dogs and a book on cats, and you do it to set up a book,  and then you can also, you can also, you can also put a book on, that's about dogs and cats.  Perfect. But how do you express in a Boolean operator this sentence?  R or not?  R, N or R?  But the trick is that you say, I want information about dogs and cats.  And the first thing is, okay, dogs and cats, but it's R, dogs or cats.  Information about dog training, it's just dog training.  Well, but you have two words here, dog and training.  How do you combine these words?  Dog and training, dog or training, dog and not training.  Dog training, it means dog and training.  Dog and training, correct.  So, you have 30 women on television and on cinema. It's the same about dogs and, yeah.  What's sorry, information about?  Women on television and on cinema, it's the same of dogs on TV or radio.  Women or dogs and cats and dogs and radio.  Radio, no, it's cinema.  But I think that there is another word that could be included in the sentence.  But for example, it's woman, in television or cinema, in any kind of aspects or in a sub-topic.  For example, it's about the number of women in television or in cinema.  Stereotypes.  Stereotypes.  The police and operators have the same.  It's the same, yeah. It's better include this word.  What's the information about dogs on TV or radio?  Dog and radio.  Dogs on TV or no.  Dogs and TV or radio.  It could be, but it's easier the sentence.  Dogs and TV or radio.  It's easier.  Can you go please?  I knew you would come up.  Sorry.  What about this one?  Literature, not friends, not all.  But why? So complicated.  But why?  Because it's just information about friends' literature.  So it's just written and...  Yeah.  And it.  This is like completely wrong.  I think it's...  This is better.  Friends' and literature.  No, no, it's correct.  Okay.  Okay.  Let's check the answers.  What's your name?  I don't remember.  Which one?  Dog and train.  Dog and train.  Correct.  Dog and train.  Tell me.  What about the...  Yeah.  There is another way to...  There is the easiest way to do it.  But you are just with the Boolean operators.  Okay.  The stars.  Even with the exact phrase.  It would be better.  Dog training between...  It's true that there is...  With other options,  there is another way to find this information.  But now we are just with the Boolean operators.  Okay.  I don't remember.  Jessica.  Friends' and literature.  Friends' and literature.  Okay.  For me, this is the most difficult.  Very well.  Very well.  Because the trick is that,  normally the user expresses the need for information.  I want information about dogs and cats.  And some people say,  ah, dogs and cats.  Not because if we write...  Why is wrong?  Dogs and cats.  Because they get married.  That would...  Wait, wait, wait.  But this, you would have like the document.  We got the two animals together.  We want information about both of them.  For example,  these will be for books that are dogs and cats together.  And this is for books,  dogs and cats together,  or a book about dogs,  or a book about cats.  Okay.  The next one.  Information about dogs on radio  and on television or radio.  Dogs and...  books or radio.  Dogs and cats together.  Dogs and cats together.  Dogs and cats together.  Okay.  What's the difference  between this sentence  and this one?  If the wrong is first and second or...  What's the difference?  Why this is not correct?  Because we got the information about dogs,  and we got the book and all the radio.  If we make this sentence,  we retrieve documents about dogs and TV  in the same document,  and all the documents about radio.  Radio about with another subjects.  Laura.  Number six.  Between parenthesis,  if you're cinema,  and  between parenthesis to your types,  and all of them.  Okay.  Sorry.  Wait.  Are you agree?  Yes.  Is there a difference if you just sterilize them first?  Is the same that if you...  Yes.  Is the same.  Also in parenthesis, there are types of...  Also in parenthesis, yes.  Is the same, yes.  The same.  It doesn't matter.  And the last one.  Very simple.  Okay.  Before to make the 8, 9, 10,  let's see...  Let's see how Google expresses  the Boolean operators,  and how PAMMET does it.  In Google,  Google uses natural sentences  to express an or not.  For example, an is all the words,  head and diseases.  That means that it's the same that head and diseases.  Any of these words,  here is a mistake,  is head diseases,  all any of these words will be head or diseases.  And none of these words,  and all these words, that mean head, not diseases.  This is the reason that I told you that it's necessary  to know every tool,  how to express the different options to search.  In PAMMET,  it's more simple.  You have here a box,  when you open this box,  you have the operator N,  the operator OR,  or the operator NOT.  It's very simple.  Here is head and diseases,  out or head or diseases,  out or head or not diseases.  Okay.  Another very interesting option is the EXAT phrase.  The EXAT phrase means that  when we use this option,  the systems retrieve documents  that include the words in the same order  that we put the words in brackets.  The same word as we wrote the term in brackets.  It's very useful if you know  that this concept is not a disease,  it's a disease.  It's a disease.  It's a disease.  It's a disease.  It's a disease.  It's useful if you know that this concept,  the term, is always written in the document in the same way.  Okay.  If not, it's dangerous because  head injury just...  fine, just head injury.  Okay.  Normally,  to define this option as the bracket.  Okay.  Then, with this info,  make the number 8  and use both EXAT phrase  and Boolean operators, the number 8.  Okay.  It's a little bit more complicated,  but use also the EXAT phrase.  Do you think that there is any term  that normally is expressed in the same way  of one of this one?  Probably.  Which one?  This one.  There's got to be some short cut.  But for example, the concept of open access,  what do you think?  Is it open access or there is a...  This term here, free access.  Yeah, but free access is a synonym.  I said just...  The restricted spaces, like the military is something.  No, but for example, if you write open access,  you fall in the EXAT sentence,  you are sure that you retrieve open access,  not open an access in another place, always together.  Yeah, maybe.  It's in the legislation.  Yeah, but this means that it's always open access legislation,  in my opinion.  Yeah, it could be.  It's better maybe like this open access in the phrase  and legislation and that's in the brackets.  And then another brackets and not in the letter.  Well, yes.  See, it's better with...  Here, and here.  Yeah, I have it.  Ah, okay, sorry.  Because open access is a term that normally always appears  open access, in this way.  Open access, all together.  Okay.  Laya, the number eight.  Information about open access legislation  in Scandinavian countries except Finland.  Open access legislation in exact place.  Er...  In exact place.  And in exact phrase, it's Scandinavian countries.  What do you think?  Yes.  Well, I have another opinion, but...  I think that there is a part of the first exact phrase  that is too narrow, in my opinion.  No, first, this part of here.  Open access legislation, that means that, for example,  in a document appears, open access is...  in Spain, has in Spain a legislation,  as the legislation is not near open access.  The system doesn't retrieve this document.  I think it's better, yes, open access,  because open access is always a concept.  In my opinion, it's better...  Open access, yes, because open access is a concept.  That legislation, that means that the document  is viewed as an open access as a phrase.  Legislation also as a word.  Tell me.  But in change yet, least relevant documents.  Yes.  In change yet, open access and legislation.  And legislation.  Legislation.  Say.  This one.  Yes.  Least relevant.  Least?  Sorry.  Least relevant.  What?  I don't understand you.  Relevance.  Relevance.  Relevance.  But...  Relevance.  Relevance.  Yes.  Daddy, we are not talking about relevance.  Relevance is more and more and more complicated  than Boolean operators.  One is that when you write a Boolean sentence,  the systems recover 10, 20 documents,  and another is that the systems order these documents  with some criteria.  And one of them is the relevance.  But this is very complicated concept of relevance.  Okay.  The number nine.  You can use here also the limitation by field.  Remember that you can search a word,  meaning this word to some field.  For example, I want to search head just in the field of author.  I want to search this other word head in the field of subject.  Well, for example, this could be.  Author as a field equal John Smith and in the field subject,  European history.  That means that the systems look for John Smith just in the field of author  and the European history just in the field of subject.  Narrow research.  Tell me.  Can I ask a question?  Yes.  For example, the story of history,  what would be better if you put Europe with the star and history  so you get more results?  Europe.  Yeah, no, no, it's better, but the problem is that it's an excess light.  The two kitchen.  I haven't explained yet the two kitchen.  Sorry.  But this is at location.  Okay.  That means that the systems find all the documents that include all the words  that has the root Europe.  European, Europe, Europe, anything.  Okay.  And the last one.  Well, we can limit to the author.  Subject.  And title.  Okay.  We can limit the search to the author, to the subject, and to the title.  It's more precise search.  As you can see, the Boolean operators are a powerful tool to search,  but it's true that sometimes it's difficult to use them properly  because the combination of the words are difficult.  The location is a very famous operator.  Look, if I search with an asterisk at the end,  the system look for documents that include any word that begin with the root,  head, head, head, head, head, head, head, head, head, head, headmaster.  This is very interesting because, for example, if I want to search information about libraries,  maybe I should write library or libraries or librarianship or et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.  One way is to use the asterisk to write library and the system will find library, library, et cetera.  What is looking this example?  What is the con?  The problem with that we have to be aware with this kind of truncation.  For example, if we want information about head.  What is the problem?  Headmaster, headstone.  The problem is that you have to be very careful that not include other words that are not relevant for the program.  Wow, I can open the door.  We are finishing.  This kind of search is very, very different.  It's called exploratory search.  I know if you have a good connection or not.  Okay.  There are some sources of information, some systems that allows us to search information about following some list of thirds  that are ordered in a heretic way.  That means that, for example, here is the most, if I want information about arts, I can click here, arts.  Then the system show me subcategories.  For example, I want information about art history.  For example, about artists or art historians.  At the end of the categories, that's called navigation,  at the end, the system show me a selected document.  The organization of the institution that maintains these kinds of systems.  The problem is that, as you see, it's very, very easy to search.  You have to type any word, any boolean, any exact phrase, anything.  Just click the words.  Okay.  Also, perfect, the systems know.  What do you think are the cons of this kind of system, of this kind of search?  You have to add that to what?  The kind of search of the engine.  More than the engine?  Add up to who?  Or to what?  To the hazardous.  Correct, perfect.  To the categories.  Okay.  Because these categories are elaborated by an institution, an organization,  following their opinion, because they say that art is a subject,  it's movies, television, music, game style.  That means that maybe it's difficult to find the subject that I want to search in this category.  Sometimes it's difficult to know if something is in the news.  Why there is news here and business and health?  It's difficult.  For example, I want information about tourists.  In this category, do you think that we'll find information about tourists?  Society?  But it's difficult to know it.  Okay.  And this is one, perfect, and the second one comes with one.  It's at the end.  Who choose these documents, these resources?  We don't know.  Are these documents the most important in this topic?  I don't know.  Then it's easy to search, but you have to adapt to the terms,  and the results are selected, but not by me, but some institution.  Well, the last step of the search process is to evaluate the results.  After analyzing the program, select the word to search.  Searching in Google and PubMed is all on zone.  We retrieve 10, 20, 30 documents.  Which one of these documents are more relevant for the user, for the need of information?  The last one criteria is this one.  It's called subjective relevance.  That means that at the end is the user who decides that the documents are relevant or not.  But we have nothing to do with this.  Between the 20, 30 documents, we can choose the most important,  keep in mind these criteria, these elements.  For example, the authorship.  If I have two documents about medicine,  and one is the author is a Nobel Prize winner of medicine,  and the other one is the author is a known author.  Which one is better?  The article of the Nobel Prize winner.  No?  That means authorship, the prestigious of the author.  More prestigious, in theory, the content of the document is better.  Another element to analyze the content of the documents.  If the content is more related to the topic of the need of information,  better.  We will select the documents that are more related to the content.  Updating.  This is very important in some areas.  For example, in computer science.  If I retrieve information about Internet,  20 documents about Internet.  For a user that is making an investigation about Internet.  If one of them is, for example, 2000,  has been published in 2000,  is in theory is less relevant than another one document that has been published now in 2018.  It's not so important in all areas.  For example, in humanities, in history, in another areas,  the date of publication is not so important.  Authority of publication.  For example, two documents, two articles.  One of them has been published in the journal Nature.  And the other one in a journal of the village when I was born.  A small village or in a journal, an unknown journal.  Which one do you select?  The first one, the authoritative of the publication.  They say that these documents are more relevant, more important.  And access.  Remember that not all users can access to all the information.  For example, I retrieve 30 documents and the user can't access to subscription by payment.  I just select the documents that are free or open access.  Well, these are the small part of the subject that Thomas explained about retrieval information.  The search process, remember the four steps, the four phases.  That the most important is the first one.  Analyze, analyze very well the user, the need, the situation.  And that means that we will choose a very good places to search.  We will make a very good searching and we have Qiterias to evaluate the results.  Thank you very much.
Retrieval-Information-1024x576_0_815.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_816_2939.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_2940_4163.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_4164_6119.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_6120_6179.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_6180_6227.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_6228_7091.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_7092_8519.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_8520_8603.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_8604_23519.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_23520_41315.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_41316_44279.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_44280_44327.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_44328_44375.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_44376_44423.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_44424_44579.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_44580_44627.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_44628_44675.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_44676_45227.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_45228_45287.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_45288_46739.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_46740_47591.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_47592_47711.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_47712_48467.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_48468_49871.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_49872_49943.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_49944_51563.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_51564_54527.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_54528_56531.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_56532_57899.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_57900_58103.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_58104_59243.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_59244_59447.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_59448_59519.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_59520_59567.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_59568_59627.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_59628_60047.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_60048_60131.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_60132_60191.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_60192_60359.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_60360_60431.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_60432_60479.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_60480_61859.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_61860_61907.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_61908_63167.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_63168_63239.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_63240_63287.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_63288_63467.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_63468_63587.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_63588_63635.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_63636_63923.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_63924_63971.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_63972_64043.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_64044_64175.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_64176_64223.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_64224_64271.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_64272_64331.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_64332_64571.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_64572_64931.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_64932_64979.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_64980_65099.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_65100_65159.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_65160_65219.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_65220_65291.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_65292_66875.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_66876_71243.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_71244_71291.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_71292_71339.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_71340_71423.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_71424_85223.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_85224_85355.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_85356_86291.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_86292_95039.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_95040_104591.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_104592_104687.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_104688_104939.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_104940_105611.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_105612_106043.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_106044_106247.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_106248_106343.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_106344_108059.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_108060_108827.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_108828_111323.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_111324_112115.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_112116_112163.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_112164_115439.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_115440_125867.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_125868_125915.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_125916_128531.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_128532_129035.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_129036_129083.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_129084_129155.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_129156_129203.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_129204_130115.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_130116_130163.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_130164_130439.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_130440_130487.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_130488_130643.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_130644_130691.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_130692_132299.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_132300_132359.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_132360_134387.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_134388_134435.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_134436_134495.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_134496_134543.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_134544_135359.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_135360_135419.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_135420_135467.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_135468_142031.png Retrieval-Information-1024x576_142032_142956.png
Well, good afternoon. First of all, I would like to thank the organization for the invitation to stay here, to explain a part of the lesson of Thomas, the specific part of the search process. My name is Andrés Hulé, I'm from the University of Barcelona in Spain. And I will explain the methodology that the information retrieval professional used to search information, but not search information, it's not the most relevant information for a program. It's called also a need of information. Usually these phases, these steps are divided in four phases. Know what is needed, where to search, how to search and evaluate the results. Each step, each phase, condition the next one. That means that, for example, we don't make correctly the analysis of the problem, it's probably that we choose incorrectly the ways where to search and how to search in this place, in this site, even that we, unless we choose the incorrect documents. And therefore, that means that the most important step is the first one. It's the first that when we analyze the problem, the need of information. The goal, the objective of the purpose of this first phase is to identify clearly what the problem is. That means sometimes that seems very easy, but it's not easy because sometimes even the user doesn't know very well what he wants. The professional uses two kinds of analysis, the subject analysis and the situation analysis. And at the end, write a list of steps that we'll use to search in the catalogs, repositories, databases, Google, Google Scholar, anywhere. The idea when we talk the best information, the most relevant information, as Thomas explained, is that to find the document information, the resources that are relevant for a problem. We'll do a practice, the number one, the exercise number one, when we will see two problems with the same subject, the information about the Patriot Act, but we will see that the user, the situation are so different that the tools that we have to search and evaluate the results, everything is different. The idea is to avoid, to find irreverent information, it's technically called noise, and avoid the lack of relevant information in technically silence. I would like that you read in a minute carefully the two cases in the first exercise. No, no, wait, wait, just read. Just read. Let's make the first part of the analysis, the subject analysis. Usually this kind of analysis and the other one, the situation analysis, the professional usually make an interpersonal interview with the user and ask questions. For example, we use these cases to compare. The subject analysis, the purpose is to define, to identify with precision what is the topic, or sometimes the subtopics that involve the problem. Some questions could be to identify the generic subject, a specific aspect of the subject, panel view, very important in this case, geographic scope, or chronological scope. With this information that we will find in the case, help us to decide where to search, for example, if we have to search in database, in Google, or anywhere, and how to search, because we identify the words more important. For example, what's your name? Ricardo. Ricardo, sorry, thank you. What's the generic subject of case one and the generic subject of case two? I think the generic subject of case one is a critical show. This is not the topic. This is maybe the panel view, the purpose, but what is the topic of the... Patriotic act. Patriotic act, the low. And the second one? Is to analyze the patriotic. Both cases is the same. Generic. Cecilia. Do you identify a specific aspect in case one or in case two? That means, okay, it's a patriotic act in both cases, but with some specific topics in the case one, for example? In the case one, for example, the victim of a terrorist attack. Terrorist attack just could be, but for example... Politics. Politics, but for example, when the journalists want to know the application of the patriotic act where? In New York? No, in American libraries. Okay. Yes? So, the specific aspect in the generic aspect is patriotic act, but when the specific is American libraries. Your name please? Sara. Sara. The subject topic. Something... The comparison with other law. Okay, the interpretation. In fact, I think, in my opinion, there is not any specific topic. I said specific or sub-topic is the law itself in the second case. That is true that the user wants to compare with other laws, jurisdiction, etc. Okay. Your name? Jessica. The view. Don't have you means... well, means don't have you. I don't know if it's clear or not. Because... Journalist. Journalist, perfect. And the case to law student. Law student academic. In the university, in the school, work. Yes? It's important because both are different. Your name? Julia. Geographic scope are different? Yes. In the first case, it's New York for a city. Yes? Well, I think it's not in New York. The journalist is working in New York. But... A radio talk show. If the journalist go to a radio talk show to talk about the Patriot Act, where? In America. In America. Okay. In the second, do you remember that the Patriot Act is an American law? It's not an international law. And the second? It's not really clear. It's not explicit. It's not explicit but... It's the same. The same but... Your friend, you say something... Not specified. Not specified but... The second one wants to compare. The law with... In other countries. That means that the geographical scope of the needs is bigger. The journal is just in America, but the students wants to compare this law with the law in other countries. That the geographical scope of the needs in these cases, bigger. Chronological scope. What's your name? Pietro. Pietro. That means the information is needed from the Patriot Act is from 2001. Different chronological scope. This week. What? From the beginning of the Patriot Act. From the beginning of the Patriot Act to now. Maybe the second case, as the students want a comparative analysis, maybe one that is older, laws related with the Patriot Act. This is what we call the subject analysis. This helps us to decide, for example, where to search in Google, or maybe not in Wikipedia, or maybe in a law database, or maybe in a repository of a university law, etc. How to search? Also because when we see how to search, we see that we have to type words. And these words are related with this one. For example, Ponevue. Laura. I know him because he's from my school. Laura. Ponevue, the first one is a journalist. If you read the case, what kind of resources, documentation, do you think that the journalist needs to go to talk in the radio? What kind of information? Well, he needs information that could be... I don't understand it. Understands by the police and the radio. Correct me. But he's a law journalist and he could know the databases of journalism. Yes, but do you think that, for example, the journalists need a very, very special... No. No. No, because he's a television. Is the radio just a talk? Yes. To make arguments with the other participant in the talk, but it's not necessary. Maybe searching in Google for news. Articles, blogs. Articles, blogs or anything. And Carla, the other one, the student. Yes. It's an academic point of view. What kind of documents? If the students are working in his last project in the master. He needs an academic document. Documents. He has to look for in a database, specific database. Articles of journals, papers, congress. That means that this helps us to know that we have to search in a low database. Okay? The first one. The second one. It's called... There are some different names, but sometimes it's called situational analysis. There is two. The first is the situation itself. We will see later. And the other is related with the person. The person, for example, the most clear condition is the language that the person can read. If the journalist just can read in English, I look for documentation just in English. And if the student just can read in Spanish, I have to look for documentation in Spanish. Okay? Access to information. That means that, as you know, not all information is free. It's in open access. If the database has no access to databases by payment, we can't offer him articles that are in a payment database. Okay? Related with the situation itself, that means that the situation, the purpose. The purpose. What's the purpose? What's the user? What's the information for? For what? Sorry? Why is he doing that? Yes. Level of accessibility doesn't mean that the user needs all the documents that has been published about this topic or not. It's not necessary. It's a few documents that give him or her the basic information about the topic is enough or not. Type of resources. Video, audio, pictures, text with page, thesis, etc., etc. And the situation itself times that the user has to read the information, analyze the information. If the user, this one is related with level of accessibility because if the user has many time, much time to read, we can offer him or her more documents. Let's analyze. It's one of these in each case. Laya. Purpose. What is the purpose of the first user? The first case. In the first case? What's the one he wants the information for? For to prepare the talk show. Okay, perfect. And the second one? To make the final master portion. Perfect. What's your name? Tina. Related with the purpose is the level of accessibility. What do you think about the level of accessibility in the case one? Is the user needs all the information published about the topic or not? No. Just the basic information. Even in my opinion, the most updated information because if he is going to talk in a radio with other participants, needs to have the information about, for example, the records of government to American libraries this year, not 10 years ago. Catarina. Type of resource, type of documents in the case one. What do you think? Audio. Audio could be? Interview. For example, audio of interview with user of the library or with the personnel that is in church of the libraries. There's no information. Yes, for example, news. Also, maybe some blogs. Okay. And in the second case, what type of documents? Some articles. Those articles, news section, congress. And your name? Maya. Time allowed in the first case. Three days. Very short time. That means that we as professionals, we have to search and prepare very relevant information. And few documents. Okay. That is difficult. And the second? Nine months. Nine months. Many times. Okay. Aldi. Aldi. Aldi? No, Aldi is sorry. Aldi, okay. Thank you. Well, education level and knowledge about the subject. What do you think about the third one? Well, in case one, the journalist has to do really good research because it's a tough topic. But then he has, I mean, he or she, we don't know if it's her. Don't worry. This person has a professional librarian, a conservative politician and a left-wing politician. And also the family member of the group. So that kind of heterogeneous people who he or she is going to talk to just asks for a lot of love, research and good education. Yes. Maybe we don't hate so much know about the subject. Totally agree. Okay. And the second case? The other hand, a person who let's take it as starting point, a person is researching that topic. So it doesn't know everything, but should have some big basis knowledge. Cororally. Yeah. You could know if he or she could do what's essential. Yes. Probably you need to be an expert for the second case because you have to expose and you have to present addresses or... But I think you will be an expert at the end of the work. Not at the beginning. Okay. Normally. Yes. Mario. Mario. Languages? Well, first case, I am for sure English. Yes, sure English. But I would also consider that we talk about US, so it tend to be pretty straight on discussing what happens only in US. Also the provenance of these documents should only be... I mean, it can also be Europe, but they're not really interested. So most likely the guy who just be looking at US only articles, media, history, happened in the last 17 years and definitely the language will be... English. Yeah. Even if the journalist can read in another language, probably it's just necessary documents in English. Yeah. Exactly. And the second one? Well, the second one actually... It's again a bit... Well, because it's the law and it's always a... It's the only... Spain only thing, so probably it has to do with Spanish but also some English. Some English, sure, because... Yeah, you have to see... I mean, the Patriot Act is something which is American, so you have to compare it to other... Yes....rejections. In the second case, if the students can read English, he choose the wrong subject for the research, because... No sense. And... Yacin, by easy. Access to information. What do you think? It's not very clear, but you can suppose more or less... What kind of information? No, access. For example, it's the access... In theory, when you search in Google, it's free access. You can read the information, but some databases are about payment, and you have to be subscribed to access the information for articles that are in the database. What do you think the journalist has information to the databases by payment or not? What do you think? No, not really. You can search in Google, and a lot of information gets about the meeting and the public. And... Do you agree? What do you think? What's your opinion? Our opinions too. Case one. I think maybe, no journalist came in with some article, and you can interact with the score or open access databases. It's probably, yeah? And the second case? Second case, I think much more channels close to the house, there was a Norse library in his or her campus, and can you subscribe to the site? Okay, that's true. That's the normal way. Okay, when we have all this information, we have more information to select where to search and to evaluate the results. For example, very clear language that can read when we search and we retrieve 20 documents, one criteria to select is the language. Okay? And then the professional make a list of terms similar to this. Make a list of the terms more relevant for the topic, for the problem, in the language that the user can read. For example, English, German, and Spanish, suppose, and not just the most important terms, factor tag, theories, jurisprudence, library, library user, information privacy, if not also the synonyms. Why? Because normally, a concept can be expressed in several terms. For example, information privacy, data privacy, data protection are the same concept but expressed in three different ways. And then when we search, for example, in Google, we need to search in all of these terms because it adjusts search information privacy, adjusts find documents that contain these two words. Then no other documents that contain data protection, for example. That means that I have to make different ways. And as Thomas explained, also equivalent in other language. For example, if I want documents in English and Spanish, I need to search, theories and terrorism and libraries and bibliothecas. Because if not, I just search with English words, I just retrieve English documents. Then we have that the situation and the subject analysis determine where to search, how to search, and the evaluation of the results. Second step, where to search. I have identified clearly the topic, the subjects, the subtopics, the situation, the personal characteristics. Now the problem is where to search. The problem for us, for as a professional, is that there are thousands of tools where to search. Thousands, there are many, many places where we can go to search. From Google, to Wikipedia, to databases, catalogs, blogs, many, many, many things. That is one of the reasons that the professional of retrieval information usually specializes in one topic or in two. Because it's the only way that a person knows very well where to search about this topic and how to search these tools. Because the third step is how to search in the tools, but it's very difficult in some cases to know how to search in the tools. Things that we have to analyze when of a source, information, a tool. It's the authority, subject specialization, level of accessibility, type of resources, languages, access, chronological scope. Authority means the organization or the institution that creates or maintains the system. For example, in Google, the authority is Google itself. But there's a database of medicine. The authority are two of the most relevant prestigious institutions in the state. The prestigious of the institution, the authorities, is important because the prestigious usually means that the documents that we can find in this system will be also prestigious. Good documents. Obviously, subject specialization. We have to know if we want information about law. We have to know if our tool is a system, is it a specific in law or not. Level of accessibility. That means if the system where I want to search has the access to all the information about the subject or not, or maybe just the more relevant or the videos, just pictures, etc. Language of the resources that we can find in these tools. Access to information, if when we search in a tool, in a system, the information will be free, open access or not, chronological scope or geographical scope. Let's see. This analysis applied to Google and to PubMed. Google is type of information is secondary. That means that they is not a dictionary when we search in Google, Google told us that there is documents where we can find information. Authority Google, subject is general. We can find information in Google about any topic. Level of accessibility is all web that are indexed in Google are there. And that accessibility is full of the documents that are in the web. Type of resources, type of documents was all kind. With pages, PDF, new maps, pictures, videos, language or language, access, mainly free open access, mainly because sometimes Google has links to documents that you have to have the subscription to access them. And chronological scope, tool and geographical scope, all. PubMed is a, I don't know, do you know PubMed is a database? Medicine. Medicine, life science, yes. Secondary type of source because when you receive articles, then you go to the article. The article is a primary source that the database is secondary. Authority, subject is specialization, life science, level of accessibility, selective. Why? Because there you just find the articles of some kind of journals. Not everything. In theory, here you find the articles of the most relevant journals in medicine. That means that if I search in PubMed, I normally, I know that the articles are good articles. The documents are good, are prestigious. Okay? It's important, for example, for the second case, if it was a low database. Type of documents, mainly article journals. Remember, if we need videos, PubMed is not a good tool to search. Access to information, open. Some articles are open, but other are in subscription access. Chronological scope is the middle of the last century to now, from, and the scope is mainly the American, the USA. Okay? Then, when we know these characteristics of several systems, several sources of information, then we can select which one is best for each situation, each problem. Okay? First, analyze the problem. Second, select where to search. When I select the word to search, I have to search. Then, search is not an easy work. It's complicated and more in some tools that, for example, like PubMed, that are complicated. Google is easier, but has some cons. Okay, here are the options of search more common. There are others, but these are the more common. Simple search, advanced search, field search, Boolean operators, exit phrase, location, exploratory search. Okay? Each one is not good or bad. Each one has pros and cons, and it's important to know these pros and cons, because if we know this, we know where to use simple, advanced, field search, etc. There are two problems about this third step. One is that every tool, every system, every source of information has its own way to express the simple search, the advanced search, the Boolean operators, the exit phrase. That means that it's not enough to know how Google expresses the exit phrase or the Boolean or. Because in another way, in another tool, it's different. That means that the professional has to know very good how to search in each tool. The first one, the simple search. The simple search is the easiest way to search in every tool. And usually it's a box that you type words here and make a retool and the system retrieves documents. Then the pros is that it's very easy. The cons is that when we put right words here in the box, the system retrieves documents that contain, include these words in any part of the document. Okay? For example, if I search South Africa in Google, Google retrieves this page. Why? Because South Africa is in the title, but also Baguette is in the text. Okay? If I make this similar search in PubMed, it says, I search, head, because I want information about head. Okay. Look, retrieve this document because the word head appears in the title, appears in the keywords, but also because it's difficult to see, but because there is an author, it's called head. Okay? That means that, for example, if there is an article that is written, but an author that is called head, but is about shoulder, we recover also this article. That means that the simple search is easy, but usually produces noise. Retrieves documents that are not relevant for the program. Okay? And it's true that it's the easiest way to do it. How to narrow the search? That means how to make a search that gives us more precise results. For example, with the advanced search. Google, the advanced search allows us to search words in a part of the document. For example, I can search, I want to search this word just in the title. Or I want to search this word just in the author, or just in the keywords, or just in the, etc. Okay? Google has an advanced search interface. It's here sitting, advanced search. And here, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Here, you can see, there, I put, so, Africa. And allows me to limit the words to anywhere in the page, in the title, in the text, in the URL, or in the links. If I want that, to retrieve documents that include South Africa in the title, I can limit with this option. Panmet has more options. Ah, look at that. But if not here. Panmet in the advanced search has these books that you can choose where to search the word. In the title, in the author, in the many places. The advanced search is very interesting because if you know where to search, for example, if I want, search articles that the author is called head, with the advanced search limiting the word to the author field, I narrow, I retrieve just the articles that has as an author head. Okay? Like you can see here. It's about another subject, but the important is the author is head. Let's go ahead. Okay. The third group of operators are the Boolean operators, maybe one of the most famous operators. The operators, there are three. And, or, or not. Those are those as to decide which one of those of the words once that operates include the documents. For example, it's in the box. I type travel and tourist. The system retrieves just the documents that include the two words. For example, a document that just includes the word travel won't be retrieved. And another document that just includes the word tourist won't be retrieved. Those documents that include both terms. That means this is a narrow search. To broaden the search, we use the or. That means that travel or tourist retrieves every document that includes or travel or tourist or the two words. Tourist and travel. The last one not is the less frequent. That means that travel, not tourist, retrieves all the documents that include the word travel and not the word tourist. Okay. Now we will do the exercise. With the parentheses, we can force which one of the operators when there is more than one run before. Okay. For example, we have travel or tourist on an N and web. Sorry. When I put in brackets travel or tourist, that means that the first to run is or. And the second one is an. Here travel and tourist, not tourist. That means that the first will be travel and tourist. And the second not tourist. Okay. Then let's make the second exercise. Okay. Just the number one. Okay. No. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. I think it's more difficult, this one. Yes. Could you explain your. No. Do you have the same? Okay. Is the first condition, R or B, will be all this area. R or B. The second condition is that also include the C. And that is just this area. Okay. Okay. The third one. A or B, not C. A or B, but not C. Correct. Perfect. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Now let's make the number. Okay. Just using Boolean operators, and or not. Just Boolean operators. Can you slide? Yes. Sorry. Okay. Take care with the fourth. The fourth is a little bit complicated, because the way that we express the needs is, we use dogs and cats, but think about what we really need, what we really want. Information about dogs and cats, but what information, what is that we really want? If you put an, normally, what do you think? For example, a book about cats, will you fill this need of information? A book just about cats? Think about it. If I told you, I want information about dogs and cats. For example, do you think that a book just about dogs? About dogs and cats. Because somebody can say, I want a book on dogs and a book on cats, and you do it to set up a book, and then you can also, you can also, you can also put a book on, that's about dogs and cats. Perfect. But how do you express in a Boolean operator this sentence? R or not? R, N or R? But the trick is that you say, I want information about dogs and cats. And the first thing is, okay, dogs and cats, but it's R, dogs or cats. Information about dog training, it's just dog training. Well, but you have two words here, dog and training. How do you combine these words? Dog and training, dog or training, dog and not training. Dog training, it means dog and training. Dog and training, correct. So, you have 30 women on television and on cinema. It's the same about dogs and, yeah. What's sorry, information about? Women on television and on cinema, it's the same of dogs on TV or radio. Women or dogs and cats and dogs and radio. Radio, no, it's cinema. But I think that there is another word that could be included in the sentence. But for example, it's woman, in television or cinema, in any kind of aspects or in a sub-topic. For example, it's about the number of women in television or in cinema. Stereotypes. Stereotypes. The police and operators have the same. It's the same, yeah. It's better include this word. What's the information about dogs on TV or radio? Dog and radio. Dogs on TV or no. Dogs and TV or radio. It could be, but it's easier the sentence. Dogs and TV or radio. It's easier. Can you go please? I knew you would come up. Sorry. What about this one? Literature, not friends, not all. But why? So complicated. But why? Because it's just information about friends' literature. So it's just written and... Yeah. And it. This is like completely wrong. I think it's... This is better. Friends' and literature. No, no, it's correct. Okay. Okay. Let's check the answers. What's your name? I don't remember. Which one? Dog and train. Dog and train. Correct. Dog and train. Tell me. What about the... Yeah. There is another way to... There is the easiest way to do it. But you are just with the Boolean operators. Okay. The stars. Even with the exact phrase. It would be better. Dog training between... It's true that there is... With other options, there is another way to find this information. But now we are just with the Boolean operators. Okay. I don't remember. Jessica. Friends' and literature. Friends' and literature. Okay. For me, this is the most difficult. Very well. Very well. Because the trick is that, normally the user expresses the need for information. I want information about dogs and cats. And some people say, ah, dogs and cats. Not because if we write... Why is wrong? Dogs and cats. Because they get married. That would... Wait, wait, wait. But this, you would have like the document. We got the two animals together. We want information about both of them. For example, these will be for books that are dogs and cats together. And this is for books, dogs and cats together, or a book about dogs, or a book about cats. Okay. The next one. Information about dogs on radio and on television or radio. Dogs and... books or radio. Dogs and cats together. Dogs and cats together. Dogs and cats together. Okay. What's the difference between this sentence and this one? If the wrong is first and second or... What's the difference? Why this is not correct? Because we got the information about dogs, and we got the book and all the radio. If we make this sentence, we retrieve documents about dogs and TV in the same document, and all the documents about radio. Radio about with another subjects. Laura. Number six. Between parenthesis, if you're cinema, and between parenthesis to your types, and all of them. Okay. Sorry. Wait. Are you agree? Yes. Is there a difference if you just sterilize them first? Is the same that if you... Yes. Is the same. Also in parenthesis, there are types of... Also in parenthesis, yes. Is the same, yes. The same. It doesn't matter. And the last one. Very simple. Okay. Before to make the 8, 9, 10, let's see... Let's see how Google expresses the Boolean operators, and how PAMMET does it. In Google, Google uses natural sentences to express an or not. For example, an is all the words, head and diseases. That means that it's the same that head and diseases. Any of these words, here is a mistake, is head diseases, all any of these words will be head or diseases. And none of these words, and all these words, that mean head, not diseases. This is the reason that I told you that it's necessary to know every tool, how to express the different options to search. In PAMMET, it's more simple. You have here a box, when you open this box, you have the operator N, the operator OR, or the operator NOT. It's very simple. Here is head and diseases, out or head or diseases, out or head or not diseases. Okay. Another very interesting option is the EXAT phrase. The EXAT phrase means that when we use this option, the systems retrieve documents that include the words in the same order that we put the words in brackets. The same word as we wrote the term in brackets. It's very useful if you know that this concept is not a disease, it's a disease. It's a disease. It's a disease. It's a disease. It's a disease. It's useful if you know that this concept, the term, is always written in the document in the same way. Okay. If not, it's dangerous because head injury just... fine, just head injury. Okay. Normally, to define this option as the bracket. Okay. Then, with this info, make the number 8 and use both EXAT phrase and Boolean operators, the number 8. Okay. It's a little bit more complicated, but use also the EXAT phrase. Do you think that there is any term that normally is expressed in the same way of one of this one? Probably. Which one? This one. There's got to be some short cut. But for example, the concept of open access, what do you think? Is it open access or there is a... This term here, free access. Yeah, but free access is a synonym. I said just... The restricted spaces, like the military is something. No, but for example, if you write open access, you fall in the EXAT sentence, you are sure that you retrieve open access, not open an access in another place, always together. Yeah, maybe. It's in the legislation. Yeah, but this means that it's always open access legislation, in my opinion. Yeah, it could be. It's better maybe like this open access in the phrase and legislation and that's in the brackets. And then another brackets and not in the letter. Well, yes. See, it's better with... Here, and here. Yeah, I have it. Ah, okay, sorry. Because open access is a term that normally always appears open access, in this way. Open access, all together. Okay. Laya, the number eight. Information about open access legislation in Scandinavian countries except Finland. Open access legislation in exact place. Er... In exact place. And in exact phrase, it's Scandinavian countries. What do you think? Yes. Well, I have another opinion, but... I think that there is a part of the first exact phrase that is too narrow, in my opinion. No, first, this part of here. Open access legislation, that means that, for example, in a document appears, open access is... in Spain, has in Spain a legislation, as the legislation is not near open access. The system doesn't retrieve this document. I think it's better, yes, open access, because open access is always a concept. In my opinion, it's better... Open access, yes, because open access is a concept. That legislation, that means that the document is viewed as an open access as a phrase. Legislation also as a word. Tell me. But in change yet, least relevant documents. Yes. In change yet, open access and legislation. And legislation. Legislation. Say. This one. Yes. Least relevant. Least? Sorry. Least relevant. What? I don't understand you. Relevance. Relevance. Relevance. But... Relevance. Relevance. Yes. Daddy, we are not talking about relevance. Relevance is more and more and more complicated than Boolean operators. One is that when you write a Boolean sentence, the systems recover 10, 20 documents, and another is that the systems order these documents with some criteria. And one of them is the relevance. But this is very complicated concept of relevance. Okay. The number nine. You can use here also the limitation by field. Remember that you can search a word, meaning this word to some field. For example, I want to search head just in the field of author. I want to search this other word head in the field of subject. Well, for example, this could be. Author as a field equal John Smith and in the field subject, European history. That means that the systems look for John Smith just in the field of author and the European history just in the field of subject. Narrow research. Tell me. Can I ask a question? Yes. For example, the story of history, what would be better if you put Europe with the star and history so you get more results? Europe. Yeah, no, no, it's better, but the problem is that it's an excess light. The two kitchen. I haven't explained yet the two kitchen. Sorry. But this is at location. Okay. That means that the systems find all the documents that include all the words that has the root Europe. European, Europe, Europe, anything. Okay. And the last one. Well, we can limit to the author. Subject. And title. Okay. We can limit the search to the author, to the subject, and to the title. It's more precise search. As you can see, the Boolean operators are a powerful tool to search, but it's true that sometimes it's difficult to use them properly because the combination of the words are difficult. The location is a very famous operator. Look, if I search with an asterisk at the end, the system look for documents that include any word that begin with the root, head, head, head, head, head, head, head, head, head, head, headmaster. This is very interesting because, for example, if I want to search information about libraries, maybe I should write library or libraries or librarianship or et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. One way is to use the asterisk to write library and the system will find library, library, et cetera. What is looking this example? What is the con? The problem with that we have to be aware with this kind of truncation. For example, if we want information about head. What is the problem? Headmaster, headstone. The problem is that you have to be very careful that not include other words that are not relevant for the program. Wow, I can open the door. We are finishing. This kind of search is very, very different. It's called exploratory search. I know if you have a good connection or not. Okay. There are some sources of information, some systems that allows us to search information about following some list of thirds that are ordered in a heretic way. That means that, for example, here is the most, if I want information about arts, I can click here, arts. Then the system show me subcategories. For example, I want information about art history. For example, about artists or art historians. At the end of the categories, that's called navigation, at the end, the system show me a selected document. The organization of the institution that maintains these kinds of systems. The problem is that, as you see, it's very, very easy to search. You have to type any word, any boolean, any exact phrase, anything. Just click the words. Okay. Also, perfect, the systems know. What do you think are the cons of this kind of system, of this kind of search? You have to add that to what? The kind of search of the engine. More than the engine? Add up to who? Or to what? To the hazardous. Correct, perfect. To the categories. Okay. Because these categories are elaborated by an institution, an organization, following their opinion, because they say that art is a subject, it's movies, television, music, game style. That means that maybe it's difficult to find the subject that I want to search in this category. Sometimes it's difficult to know if something is in the news. Why there is news here and business and health? It's difficult. For example, I want information about tourists. In this category, do you think that we'll find information about tourists? Society? But it's difficult to know it. Okay. And this is one, perfect, and the second one comes with one. It's at the end. Who choose these documents, these resources? We don't know. Are these documents the most important in this topic? I don't know. Then it's easy to search, but you have to adapt to the terms, and the results are selected, but not by me, but some institution. Well, the last step of the search process is to evaluate the results. After analyzing the program, select the word to search. Searching in Google and PubMed is all on zone. We retrieve 10, 20, 30 documents. Which one of these documents are more relevant for the user, for the need of information? The last one criteria is this one. It's called subjective relevance. That means that at the end is the user who decides that the documents are relevant or not. But we have nothing to do with this. Between the 20, 30 documents, we can choose the most important, keep in mind these criteria, these elements. For example, the authorship. If I have two documents about medicine, and one is the author is a Nobel Prize winner of medicine, and the other one is the author is a known author. Which one is better? The article of the Nobel Prize winner. No? That means authorship, the prestigious of the author. More prestigious, in theory, the content of the document is better. Another element to analyze the content of the documents. If the content is more related to the topic of the need of information, better. We will select the documents that are more related to the content. Updating. This is very important in some areas. For example, in computer science. If I retrieve information about Internet, 20 documents about Internet. For a user that is making an investigation about Internet. If one of them is, for example, 2000, has been published in 2000, is in theory is less relevant than another one document that has been published now in 2018. It's not so important in all areas. For example, in humanities, in history, in another areas, the date of publication is not so important. Authority of publication. For example, two documents, two articles. One of them has been published in the journal Nature. And the other one in a journal of the village when I was born. A small village or in a journal, an unknown journal. Which one do you select? The first one, the authoritative of the publication. They say that these documents are more relevant, more important. And access. Remember that not all users can access to all the information. For example, I retrieve 30 documents and the user can't access to subscription by payment. I just select the documents that are free or open access. Well, these are the small part of the subject that Thomas explained about retrieval information. The search process, remember the four steps, the four phases. That the most important is the first one. Analyze, analyze very well the user, the need, the situation. And that means that we will choose a very good places to search. We will make a very good searching and we have Qiterias to evaluate the results. Thank you very much.
the same subject, the information about the there is an article that is written, but an author that is called head, but is about European history just in the field of subject. head, headmaster. This is very interesting