MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143401552 · doi:10.5539/ijbm.v8n6p1

Evaluation of Search Engines: A Conceptual Model and Research Issues

2013· article· en· W2143401552 on OpenAlexaff
Ramaraj Palanisamy

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Business and Management · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSearch engineSearch analyticsConceptual modelComputer scienceKey (lock)Information retrievalSearch engine optimizationMetasearch engineWorld Wide WebWeb search queryDatabaseComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the evaluation of search engines by developing a conceptual model based on the literature.The model identifies the key factors that influence user evaluation of search engines, effective and efficientcriteria for evaluation by considering user satisfaction and usage as the search engine success variables. Themodel attempts to identify the attributes that determine a good search engine, why users repeatedly visit theirfavorite search engines, and why users switch between different search engines. The research issues are evolvedout of the conceptual model; the implications for searchers and search engine providers are given.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.785
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.128
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.299 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Business and ManagementSame topicDigital Marketing and Social MediaFrench-language works237,207