Overview of MuSeUM project

1. MuSeUM
Multiple-collection SEarching Using Metadata

2. Problem

3. 5% on display

4. 95% in depot

5. Only 1% (1,130 objects) online!

6. Documentation: 1,000,000 descriptions
Freed from physical limitations: can we show everything online?

7. Results

8. 3 researchers CH/CS expertise
Next: Postdoc UvA
Now: UD in Greece
(Sick-leave)

9. 40+ publications

10. 3 demo’s

11. Dozens of variants of advanced CH retrieval systems

12. Major barriers
1.5 years to finalize gM collection
2.5 years to finalize gM evaluation

13. Major Findings

14. Text retrieval is very effective on CH descriptions
Advanced CH retrieval puts the object central
Record structure helps expert searchers

15. CH retrieval requires special evaluation
Large-scale reusable test collection build
Promising results on “Automated Evaluation” using logs

16. Many technical results demonstrated on other data
Use of structure for retrieval (INEX,ECIR,WSDM,ICTIR)
Predicting where to stop in professional search (TREC,SIGIR)
Result merging for distributed search (CIKM,ICTIR)
Impact of collection size (TREC,SIGIR)
Retrieval in Historic Dutch (ECIR)
Evaluation of domain specific search (INEX,TREC,RIAO)

17. Upshot for CH

18. Upshot for Cultural Heritage Sector
Insight in CH information seeking behavior
Shown value of “hidden” documentation
Large-scale reusable test-collections for MLA
Demonstrated effectiveness of dedicated retrieval methods
Shown relative value of fields in CH descriptions

19. Expectations were high, results exceed expectations
Results open up new scientific questions...