CRANV2 Test Environment chapter Cyril Cleverdon Michael Keen Cranfield An investigation supported by a grant to Aslib by the National Science Foundation. Use, reproduction, or publication, in whole or in part, is permitted for any purpose of the United States Government. -11 - From this it can be seen that quasi-synonyms were tested together with synonyms, and that synonym control was also the base from which the three levels of reduction by hierarchy were tested. The recall devices tested with the series of simple concept languages were the most comprehensive investigated. They involved one alphabetical and seven hierarchical devices, in fifteen different aggregates as shown in Fig. 2.6 (discussion on the hierarchies used and the rotated alphabetical list of concepts was given in Vol. 1, pages 74-83). It should be noted that recall devices 12, 13, and 14 of Fig. involved the use of the complete classes of terms in the various hierarchical reductions, but, with the other languages, selections, based on intellectual decisions, were made from the various classes. 2.6 ,Ill. 1 CONTROLLED TERMS t , ! III. 2 III. 3 III. 4 [.1 + NARROWER I.II.1 + BROADER III. 1 + RELATED TERMS TERMS TERMS . III. 2 + [OCRerr] [OCRerr] . [OCRerr]n. 6 [OCRerr]III.4 + III.5 FIGURE 2.7 CONTROLLED TERM INDEX LANGUAGES With the controlled terms, six index languages were tested. These consisted first of the basic terms, followed by the three classes of related terms as used in the E.J.C. Thesaurus {i.e. broader terms, narrower terms and related terms). In addition, two aggregates were tested; the six languages are listed in Fig. 2.7. Precision devices All the languages mentioned were tested for recall without any precision devices; this involved searches which accepted any one single term in the question. The fundamental precision device of coordination was also investigated in every test made, and all the basic tables of results in Chapter 4 show the coordination level in the rows of the tables. Two