Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

The Information Retrieval Group at the University of Duisburg-Essen

  • Datenbankgruppen vorgestellt
  • Published:
Datenbank-Spektrum Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This document describes the IR research group at the University of Duisburg-Essen, which works on quantitative models of interactive retrieval, social media analysis, multilingual argument retrieval and validity of IR experiments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. https://www.collinsdictionary.com/woty.

  2. See Silverman’s story on Buzzfeed about fake election news outperforming real news on Facebook https://bzfd.it/2oPK9XZ.

  3. https://www.acm.org/data-software-reproducibility.

  4. https://www.acm.org/publications/policies/artifact-review-badging.

References

  1. Aker A, Derczynski L, Bontcheva K (2017) Simple open stance classification for rumour analysis. CoRR abs/1708.05286. http://arxiv.org/abs/1708.05286

    Google Scholar 

  2. Aker A, Kanoulas E, Gaizauskas RJ (2012) A light way to collect comparable corpora from the web. LREC, Citeseer, pp 15–20

    Google Scholar 

  3. Aker A, Paramita ML, Gaizauskas RJ (2013) Extracting bilingual terminologies from comparable corpora. ACL 2013 – 51st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Proceedings of the Conference. 1, pp 402–411

    Google Scholar 

  4. Aker A, Zhang H (2017) Projection of argumentative corpora from source to target languages. Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Argument Mining, pp 67–72

    Google Scholar 

  5. Aker A, Sliwa A, Ma Y, Lui R, Borad N, Ziyaei S, Ghobadi M (2017) What works and what does not: classifier and feature analysis for argument mining. Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Argument Mining, pp 91–96

    Google Scholar 

  6. Allcott H, Gentzkow M (2017) Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. J Econ Perspect 31(2):211–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Douglas K, Ang CS, Deravi F (2017) Farewell to truth? conspiracy theories and fake news on social media. Psychologist. https://kar.kent.ac.uk/60679/1/Douglas%20Sutton%20Deravi.pdf

  8. Dungs S, Fuhr N (2017) Advanced hidden markov models for recognizing search phases. Proceedings Of The 3rd ACM International Conference on the Theory of Information Retrieval., ICTIR ’17. ACM, New York, pp 1–1 https://doi.org/10.1145/3121050.3121090

    Google Scholar 

  9. Dungs S, Aker A, Bontche K, Fuhr N (2018) Stance based rumour veracity prediction. Proceedings Of COLING.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ferro N, Fuhr N, Jarvelin K, Kando N, Lippold M, Zobel J (2016) Increasing reproducibility in ir: findings from the dagstuhl seminar on ”reproducibility of data-oriented experiments in e‑science”. SIGIR Forum 50(1):68–82 (http://sigir.org/files/forum/2016J/p068.pdf)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ferro N, Fuhr N, Grefenstette G, Konstan JA, Castells P, Daly EM, Declerck T, Ekstrand MD, Geyer W, Gonzalo J, Kuflik T, Linden K, Magnini B, Nie JY, Perego R, Shapira B, Soboroff I, Tintarev N, Verspoor K, Willemsen MC, Zobel J (2018a) The Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop on performance modeling and prediction. SIGIR Forum 52(1): https://www.dagstuhl.de/en/program/calendar/semhp/?semnr=17442

  12. Ferro N, Fuhr N, Grefenstette G, Konstan JA, Castells P, Daly EM, Declerck T, Ekstrand MD, Geyer W, Gonzalo J, Kuflik T, Linden K, Magnini B, Nie JY, Perego R, Shapira B, Soboroff I, Tintarev N, Verspoor K, Willemsen MC, Zobel J (2018b) Building a predictive science for performance of information retrieval, natural language processing, and recommender systems applications (dagstuhl perspectives workshop 17442). Dagstuhl Manifestos 8

    Google Scholar 

  13. Freire J, Fuhr N, Rauber A (2016) Reproducibility of data-oriented experiments in e‑science. Dagstuhl Rep 6(1):108–159

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fuhr N (1992) Probabilistic models in information retrieval. Comput J 35(3):243–255

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Fuhr N (2008) A probability ranking principle for interactive information retrieval. Inf Retr Boston 11(3):251–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10791-008-9045-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Fuhr N (2017) Some common mistakes in ir evaluation, and how they can be avoided. SIGIR Forum 51(3):32–41 (http://sigir.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/p032.pdf)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Fuhr N, Rölleke T (1998) HySpirit – a probabilistic inference engine for hypermedia retrieval in large databases. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Extending Database Technology (EDBT). Springer, Heidelberg, pp 24–38

    Google Scholar 

  18. Fuhr N, Giachanou A, Grefenstette G, Gurevych I, Hanselowski A, Jarvelin K, Jones R, Liu Y, Mothe J, Nejdl W et al (2018) An information nutritional label for online documents. ACM SIGIR Forum 51:46–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hu M, Liu S, Wei F, Wu Y, Stasko J, Ma KL (2012) Breaking news on twitter. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, Austin, TX, pp 2751–2754

    Google Scholar 

  20. Klein DO, Wueller JR (2017) Fake news: a legal perspective. J Internet Law 20(10):6–13

    Google Scholar 

  21. Levy R, Bilu Y, Hershcovich D, Aharoni E, Slonim N (2014) Context dependent claim detection

    Google Scholar 

  22. Lippi M, Torroni P (2015) Context-independent claim detection for argument mining. Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp 185–191

    Google Scholar 

  23. Lippi M, Torroni P (2016a) Argument mining from speech: detecting claims in political debates. Proceedings of the Thirtieth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-16), pp 2979–2985

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lippi M, Torroni P (2016b) Argumentation mining: state of the art and emerging trends. ACM Trans Internet Technol 16(2):10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. McClain CR (2017) Practices and promises of facebook for science outreach: becoming a nerd of trust. PLoS Biol 15(6):e2002020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Mendoza M, Poblete B, Castillo C (2010) Twitter under crisis: can we trust what we rt? Proceedings of the first workshop on social media analytics. ACM, Washington DC, pp 71–79

    Google Scholar 

  27. Nguyen HV, Litman DJ (2015) Extracting argument and domain words for identifying argument components in texts. Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Argumentation Mining, pp 22–28

    Google Scholar 

  28. Peldszus A, Stede M (2015) An annotated corpus of argumentative microtexts. Proceedings of the First Conference on Argumentation, Lisbon

    Google Scholar 

  29. Pennycook G, Cannon TD, Rand DG (2017) Prior exposure increases perceived accuracy of fake news. J Exp Psychol Gen. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2958246 (http://ssrn.com/abstract=2958246)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Pfeifer U, Fuhr N, Huynh T (1995) Searching structured documents with the enhanced retrieval functionality of freeWAIS-sf and SFgate. Proceedings of the third International World-Wide Web Conference. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 1027–1036

    Google Scholar 

  31. Qazvinian V, Rosengren E, Radev DR, Mei Q (2011) Rumor has it: identifying misinformation in microblogs. Proceedings of EMNLP, pp 1589–1599

    Google Scholar 

  32. Reed C, Mochales Palau R, Rowe G, Moens MF (2008) Language resources for studying argument. Proceedings of the 6th conference on language resources and evaluation-LREC 2008. ELRA, Marrakech, pp 91–100

    Google Scholar 

  33. Sardianos C, Katakis IM, Petasis G, Karkaletsis V (2015p) Argument extraction from news. NAACL HLT 2015, p 56

    Google Scholar 

  34. Schaefer A, Jordan M, Klas CP, Fuhr N (2005) Active support for query formulation in virtual digital libraries: a case study with DAFFODIL. In: Rauber A, Christodoulakis C, Tjoa AM (eds) Proc. ECDL. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  35. Sliwa A, Ma Y, Liu R, Borad N, Fatemeh Ziyaei S, Ghobadi M, Sabbah F (2018) Multi-lingual argumentative corpora in english, turkish, greek, albanian, croatian, serbian, macedonian, bulgarian, romanian and arabic. LREC 2018 Proceedings.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Suciu D, Olteanu D, Ré C, Koch C (2011) Probabilistic databases. Synthesis lectures on data management. Morgan & Claypool Publishers, San Rafael, California

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. Swanson R, Ecker B, Walker M (2015) Argument mining: extracting arguments from online dialogue. Proceedings of 16th Annual Meeting of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue (SIGDIAL 2015), pp 217–227

    Google Scholar 

  38. Tran VT, Fuhr N (2012) Using eye-tracking with dynamic areas of interest for analyzing interactive information retrieval. In: Hersh WR, Callan J, Maarek Y, Sanderson M (eds) Proc. SIGIR. ACM, Prague, pp 1165–1166

    Google Scholar 

  39. Tran VT, Fuhr N (2013) Markov modeling for user interaction in retrieval. SIGIR 2013 Workshop on Modeling User Behavior for Information Retrieval Evaluation (MUBE 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  40. Tran V, Maxwell D, Fuhr N, Azzopardi L (2017) Personalised search time prediction using markov chains. Proceedings Of The 3rd ACM International Conference on the Theory of Information Retrieval., ICTIR ’17. ACM, New York, pp 1–1 https://doi.org/10.1145/3121050.3121085

    Google Scholar 

  41. Tyers FM, Alperen MS (2010) South-east european times: a parallel corpus of balkan languages. Proceedings of the LREC Workshop on Exploitation of Multilingual Resources and Tools for Central and (South‑) Eastern European Languages, pp 49–53

    Google Scholar 

  42. Zobel J (2017) What we talk about when we talk about information retrieval. SIGIR Forum 51(3):18–26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3190580.3190584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Zubiaga A, Aker A, Bontcheva K, Liakata M, Procter R (2017) Detection and resolution of rumours in social media: a survey. ACM Comput Surv. https://doi.org/10.1145/3161603

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Engineering Sciences, University of Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, Germany

    Ahmet Aker & Norbert Fuhr

Authors
  1. Ahmet Aker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Norbert Fuhr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ahmet Aker.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aker, A., Fuhr, N. The Information Retrieval Group at the University of Duisburg-Essen. Datenbank Spektrum 18, 113–119 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13222-018-0290-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13222-018-0290-0

Keywords