Dietary practices are governed by a mix of ethnographic aspects, such as social, cultural and environmental factors. These aspects need to be taken into consideration during an analysis of food-related queries. Queries are usually ambiguous. It is essential to understand, analyse and refine the queries for better search and retrieval. The work is focused on identifying the explicit, implicit and hidden facets of a query, taking into consideration the context – culinary domain. This article proposes a technique for query understanding, analysis and refinement based on a domain specific knowledge model. Queries are conceptualised by mapping the query term to concepts defined in the model. This allows an understanding of the semantic point of view of a query and an ability to determine the meaning of its terms and their interrelatedness. The knowledge model acts as a backbone providing the context for query understanding, analysis and refinement and outperforms other models, such as Schema.org, BBC Food Ontology and Recipe Ontology.
KuhlthauCC. Inside the search process: information seeking from the user’s perspective. J Am Soc Inform Sci1991; 42(5): 361–371.
2.
VélezBWeissRSheldonMA, et al. Fast and effective query refinement. In: Proceedings of the 20th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval, Philadelphia, PA, 27–31 July 1997.
3.
SkinnerMKallumadiS. E-commerce query classification using product taxonomy mapping: a transfer learning approach. In: Proceedings of the SIGIR 2019 eCom workshop, Paris, 21–25 July 2019.
4.
LivingstonKMBadaMBaumgartnerWA, et al. KaBOB: ontology-based semantic integration of biomedical databases. BMC Bioinformatics2015; 16(1): 1–21.
5.
LiWWuLXieZ, et al. Ontology-based question understanding with the constraint of Spatio-temporal geological knowledge. Earth Sci Inform2019; 12(4): 599–613.
6.
KumarSPolitiR. Understanding user query intent and target terms in legal domain. In: Proceedings of the international conference on applications of natural language to information systems, Salford, 26–28 June 2019, pp. 41–53. Cham: Springer.
7.
NakadeVMusaevAAtkisonT. Preliminary research on thesaurus-based query expansion for Twitter data extraction. In: Proceedings of the ACMSE 2018 conference, Richmond, KY, 29–31 March 2018, pp. 1–4. New York: ACM.
8.
RanganathanSR. Prolegomena to library classification. Bombay, NY: Asia Publishing House, 1967.
9.
AzadHKDeepakA. Query expansion techniques for information retrieval: a survey. Inform Process Manag2019; 56(5): 1698–1735.
10.
SelvaretnamBBelkhatirM. A linguistically driven framework for query expansion via grammatical constituent highlighting and role-based concept weighting. Inform Process Manag2016; 52(2): 174–192.
11.
ChatterjeeUGiunchigliaFMadalliDP, et al. Modeling recipes for online search. In: Proceedings of the OTM confederated international conferences ‘on the move to meaningful internet systems’, Rhodes, 24–28 October 2016, pp. 625–642. Cham: Springer.
12.
SeherIGinigeAShahrestaniSA. A personalized query expansion approach using context. In: Proceedings of the 2007 3rd IET international conference on intelligent environments, Ulm, 24–25 September 2007, pp. 383–390. New York: IEEE.
13.
LiddyEDPaikWYuES, et al. An overview of DR-LINK and its approach to document filtering. In: Proceedings of the workshop on human language technology, Plainsboro, NJ, 21–24 March 1993, pp. 358–362. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL).
14.
BorrajoMLRomeroRIglesiasEL, et al. Improving imbalanced scientific text classification using sampling strategies and dictionaries. J Integr Bioinform2011; 8(3): 176.
15.
HirschmanLYehABlaschkeC, et al. Overview of BioCreAtIvE: critical assessment of information extraction for biology. BMC Bioinformatics2005; 6: S1.
16.
KimJOhtaTTsuruokaY, et al. Introduction to the bio-entity recognition task at JNLPBA. In: Proceedings of the international joint workshop on natural language processing in biomedicine and its applications (JNLPBA’2004; ed CollierNRuchPNazarenkoA), Geneva, 28–29 August 2004, p. 18. Morristown, NJ: Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL).
17.
ApweilerRBairochAWuCH, et al. UniProt: the Universal Protein knowledgebase. Nucleic Acids Res2004; 32(suppl. 1): D115–D119.
18.
LevowGAOardDWResnikP. Dictionary-based techniques for cross-language information retrieval. Inform Process Manag2005; 41(3): 523–547.
19.
ClinchantSRendersJM. Query translation through dictionary adaptation. In: Proceedings of the workshop of the cross-language evaluation forum for European languages, Budapest, 19–21 September 2007, pp. 182–187. Berlin; Heidelberg: Springer.
20.
JonesS. A thesaurus data model for an intelligent retrieval system. J Inf Sci1993; 19(3): 167–178.
21.
QiuYFreiHP. Concept based query expansion. In: Proceedings of the 16th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval, Pittsburgh, PA, 27 June–1 July 1993, pp. 160–169. New York: ACM.
22.
KapidakisSMastoraAPeponakisM. Query expansion of zero-hit subject searches: using a thesaurus in conjunction with NLP techniques. In: Proceedings of the international conference on theory and practice of digital libraries, Paphos, Cyprus, 22–26 September 2012, pp. 433–438. Berlin; Heidelberg: Springer.
23.
ShiriARevieCW. Query expansion behaviour within a thesaurus-enhanced search environment: a user-centered evaluation. J Am Soc Inf Sci Tec2006; 57(4): 462–478.
WuY. Enriching a thesaurus as a better question-answering tool and information retrieval aid. J Inf Sci2018; 44(4): 512–525.
26.
MandalaRTokunagaTTanakaH. Combining multiple evidence from different types of thesaurus for query expansion. In: Proceedings of the 22nd annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval (SIGIR’99), Berkeley, CA, 15–19 August 1999, pp. 15–19. New York: ACM.
27.
MandalaRTokunagaTTanakaH. Query expansion using heterogeneous thesauri. Inform Process Manag2000; 36(3): 361–378.
28.
TudhopeDBindingCBlocksD, et al. Query expansion via conceptual distance in thesaurus indexed collections. J Doc2006; 62(4): 509–533.
29.
SmeatonAKelledyFO’DonnellR. TREC-4 experiments at Dublin City University: Thresholding posting lists, query expansion with WordNet and POS tagging of Spanish. In: HarmanD (ed) Proceedings of the Fourth Text REtrieval Conference (TREC), 1995.
30.
VoorheesEM. Query expansion using lexical-semantic relations. In: CroftBWVan RijsbergenCJ (eds) SIGIR’94. London: Springer, 1994, pp. 61–69.
31.
MillerGABeckwithRFellbaumC, et al. Introduction to WordNet: an on-line lexical database. Int J Lexicogr1990; 3(4): 235–244.
32.
ShinKHanSY. Improving information retrieval in MEDLINE by modulating MeSH term weights. In: Proceedings of the international conference on application of natural language to information systems, Salford, 23–25 June 2004, pp. 388–394. Berlin; Heidelberg: Springer.
33.
RivasARIglesiasELBorrajoL. Study of query expansion techniques and their application in the biomedical information retrieval. Sci World J2014; 2014: 132158.
34.
BhogalJMacFarlaneASmithP. A review of ontology based query expansion. Inform Process Manag2007; 43(4): 866–886.
35.
FuGJonesCBAbdelmotyAI. Ontology-based spatial query expansion in information retrieval. In: Proceedings of the OTM confederated international conferences ‘on the move to meaningful internet systems’, Ayia Napa, Cyprus, 31 October–4 November 2005, pp. 1466–1482. Berlin; Heidelberg: Springer.
36.
NilssonKHjelmHOxhammarH. SuiS–cross-language ontology-driven information retrieval in a restricted domain. In: Proceedings of the 15th Nordic conference of computational linguistics (NODALIDA’2005), Joensuu, 20–21 May 2005, pp. 139–145. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL).
37.
HahmGJYiMYLeeJH, et al. A personalized query expansion approach for engineering document retrieval. Adv Eng Inform2014; 28(4): 344–359.
38.
ZhouDWuXZhaoW, et al. Query expansion with enriched user profiles for personalized search utilizing folksonomy data. IEEE T Knowl Data En2017; 29(7): 1536–1548.
39.
CuréOCMaurerHShahNH, et al. A formal concept analysis and semantic query expansion cooperation to refine health outcomes of interest. BMC Med Inform Decis2015; 15(1): S8.
40.
TudhopeDBindingC. Still quite popular after all those years – the continued relevance of the information retrieval thesaurus. Knowl Organ2016; 43(3): 174–179.
41.
SihvonenAVakkariP. Subject knowledge, thesaurus-assisted query expansion and search success. In: Proceedings of the coupling approaches, coupling media and coupling languages for information retrieval, Vaucluse, 26–28 April 2004, pp. 393–404.’Paris: Le Centre de Hautes Etudes Internationales D’informatique Documentaire.
42.
HudonM. NISO: guidelines for the construction, format, and management of monolingual thesauri: ANSI/NISO Z39 19–1993. Knowl Organ1995; 22: 180–181.
43.
IngwersenPWormellI. Ranganathan in the perspective of advanced information retrieval. Libri1992; 42(3): 184–201.
44.
GiunchigliaFDuttaBMalteseV. From knowledge organization to knowledge representation. Knowl Organ2014; 41(1): 44–56.
45.
BhattacharyyaG. POPSI its fundamentals and procedure based on a general theory of subject indexing languages. SRELS J Inf Manag1979; 16(1): 1–34.
46.
BroughtonV. Essential classification. London: Facet Publishing, 2004, p. 34.
47.
DawsonABrownDBroughtonV. The need for a faceted classification as the basis of all methods of information retrieval. Aslib Proc2006; 58: 49–72.
48.
PrissU. Lattice-based information retrieval. Knowl Organ2000; 27(3): 132–142.
49.
ÖztürkÖÖzacarT. A case study for block-based linked data generation: recipes as jigsaw puzzles. J Inf Sci2020; 46(3): 419–433.
50.
EllisDVasconcelosA. The relevance of facet analysis for World Wide Web subject organization and searching. J Internet Cat2000; 2(3–4): 96–114.
51.
Van RijsbergenCJ. Towards an information logic. ACM SIGIR Forum1989; 23: 77–86.
52.
AkrivasGWallaceMAndreouG, et al. Context-sensitive semantic query expansion. In: Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE international conference on artificial intelligence systems (ICAIS’2002), Divnomorskoe, Russia, 5–10 September 2002, pp. 109–114. New York: IEEE.
53.
WoodsWA. Knowledge representation: what’s important about it? In: CerconeNMcCallaG (eds) The knowledge frontier. New York: Springer, 1987, pp. 44–79.
54.
ShokouhiM. Learning to personalize query auto-completion. In: Proceedings of the 36th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval, Dublin, 28 July–1 August 2013, pp. 103–112. New York: ACM.
55.
VickeryBC. Faceted classification: a guide to construction and use of special schemes. London: ASLIB, 1960.
GiunchigliaFMalteseVDuttaB. Domains and context: first steps towards managing diversity in knowledge. J Web Semant2012; 12–13: 53–63.
58.
BroughtonV. Facet analytical theory as a basis for a knowledge organization tool in a subject portal. In: Lopez-HuertasMJMunoz-FernandezFJ (eds) Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: integration of knowledge across boundaries – proceedings of the 7th international conference of the International Society for Knowledge Organization, Granada, Spain, 10–13 July 2002 (Advances in Knowledge Organization), vol. 8. Würzburg: Ergon, 2002, pp. 135–141.
SamMKrisnadhiAWangC, et al. An ontology design pattern for cooking recipes: classroom created. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on ontology and semantic web patterns (WOP), Riva del Garda, 19 October 2014, pp. 49–60. New York: ACM.
61.
DeMiguelJPlazaLDíaz-AgudoB.ColibriCook: A CBR System for OntologyBased Recipe Retrieval and Adaptation. In: SchaafM (ed) Workshop Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, University of Trier, 2008, pp. 199–208.
62.
WangZZhaoKWangH, et al. Query understanding through knowledge-based conceptualization. In: Proceedings of the 24th international joint conference on artificial intelligence, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 25–31 July 2015.
63.
LeeTWangZWangH, et al. Attribute extraction and scoring: a probabilistic approach. In: Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE 29th international conference on data engineering (ICDE), Brisbane, QLD, Australia, 8–12 April 2013, pp. 194–205. New York: IEEE.
64.
KittlerPGSucherKP. Food and culture in America: a nutrition handbook. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc., 1998.
65.
LewinK. Forces behind food habits and methods of change. B Natl Res Counc1943; 8(1043): 35–65.
66.
HeimanAGordonBZilbermanD. Food beliefs and food supply chains: the impact of religion and religiosity in Israel. Food Policy2019; 83: 363–369.
67.
LymanB. A psychology of food: more than a matter of taste. Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media, 2012.
68.
LeungGStannerS. Diets of minority ethnic groups in the UK: influence on chronic disease risk and implications for prevention. Nutr Bull2011; 36(2): 161–198.
69.
Lozano-TelloAGómez-PérezA. ONTOMETRIC: a method to choose the appropriate ontology. J Database Manage2004; 15(2): 1–18.
