1. THE SMART RETRIEVAL
EXPERIMENT
I.LOGIDHASAN
DLIS 2ND YEAR
PONDICHERRY UNIVERSITY
PONDICHERRY

2. INTRODUCTION
The SMART system was designed in 1964, largely as an
experimental tool for the evaluation of the effectiveness of
many different types of analysis and search procedures. Salton
characterizes the system through the following steps of its
function.
It is used to:
 Take documents and search queries posed in English
 Perform a fully automatic content analysis of texts
 Match analyzed search statements and contents of documents
 Retrieve the stored items which are most similar to the
queries.

3. SMART system overview
 Thesaurus look-up procedures
 Phrase generation methods
 Statistical term associations
 Hierarchical term expansion, and so on.

4. Evaluation procedures
 Through the original SMART experiments
were conducted in a laboratory environment,
the basic aim was to develop a prototype for
a fully automated information retrieval
system.
 The evaluation procedures incorporated into
the system lent themselves into a pair-wise
comparison of the effectiveness of two or
more processing methods.

5. Cont..
The following evaluation measures were
generated by the SMART system:
 A recall-precision graph reflecting the average
precision value at ten discrete recall points-from
a recall of 0.1 to a recall of 1.0 in intervals of 0.1
 To global measure, known as normalized recall
and normalized precision, which together reflect
the overall performance level of the system
 Two simplified global measures, known as rank
recall and log precision, respectively.

6. Methodology
 A collection of 1268 abstracts in the field of library
science and documentation, comprising about
131,500 English text words, was used for this
experiment.
 The collection contained articles mainly published
in American documentation in 1963 and 1964, and
also in other journals in the given subject area.

7. Cont..
 Thus, for each of the 48 queries, a set of four
different document sets became available, each
consisting of the items termed relevant by a
different set of people as follows:
A set – relevance assessed by the query author
B set – relevance assessed by outside subject expert
C set- relevance assessed by either A or B assessor
D set- relevance asserted by both A and B assessor.

8. cont…
The relevance judgment groupings were as follows:
Group judges Function
A
Original group of query authors. Each person in the
A group made relevance for his or her six queries.
B
Non-author judges. Each person in the B group made
relevance judgments for six queries corresponding to
six different authors from the A group.
C
The document is relevant to a given query if either the
A judge or B judge termed it relevant.
D
The document is relevant to a given query if both A
and B judges termed it relevant.

9. Results
It was found that, under normal circumstances,
an evaluation of performance for a variety of
processing methods required an examination
of the ranking of the corresponding recallprecision curves, rather than a detailed
comparison of the actual recall and precision
values. From a ranking of the recall-precision
graphs obtained from the several processing
methods it was noted that

10. THANK YOU