Patent claim processing for readability: structure analysis and term explanation
PATENT '03 Proceedings of the ACL-2003 workshop on Patent corpus processing - Volume 20
A study of search tactics for patentability search: a case study on patent engineers
Proceedings of the 1st ACM workshop on Patent information retrieval
Evaluating patent retrieval in the third NTCIR workshop
Information Processing and Management: an International Journal - Special issue: Formal methods for information retrieval
CLEF-IP 2009: retrieval experiments in the intellectual property domain
CLEF'09 Proceedings of the 10th cross-language evaluation forum conference on Multilingual information access evaluation: text retrieval experiments
Automatically generating queries for prior art search
CLEF'09 Proceedings of the 10th cross-language evaluation forum conference on Multilingual information access evaluation: text retrieval experiments
UAIC: participation in CLEF-IP track
CLEF'09 Proceedings of the 10th cross-language evaluation forum conference on Multilingual information access evaluation: text retrieval experiments
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
In this paper we describe our participation in the 2009 CLEFIP task, which was targeted at prior-art search for topic patent documents. We opted for a baseline approach to get a feeling for the specifics of the task and the documents used. Our system retrieved patent documents based on a standard bag-of-words approach for both the Main Task and the English Task. In both runs, we extracted the claim sections from all English patents in the corpus and saved them in the Lemur index format with the patent IDs as DOCIDs. These claims were then indexed using Lemur's BuildIndex function. In the topic documents we also focused exclusively on the claims sections. These were extracted and converted to queries by removing stopwords and punctuation.We did not perform any term selection or query expansion. We retrieved 100 patents per topic using Lemur's RetEval function, retrieval model TF-IDF. Compared to the other runs submitted to the track, we obtained good results in terms of nDCG (0.46) and moderate results in terms of MAP (0.054).