Slight updates to the report

Author: CodingTil

report/main.pdf

@@ -11,8 +11,8 @@
 
 \begin{document}
 
-\title{Information retrieval and Text Mining : Group Project \\
-\large Group \#5}
+\title{Evaluation of Conversational Search Engines}
+\subtitle{Group ID: \#5}
 
 % AUTHORS:
 \author{Til Mohr}
@@ -70,6 +70,10 @@ \section{Problem Statement}\label{sec:problem}
 \end{figure}
 
 
+\section{Related Work}\label{sec:related}
+Identify and discuss related work (5-10 relevant papers).
+
+
 \section{Baseline Method}\label{sec:baseline}
 Our baseline method is inspired by the baseline method presented by Łajewska et al. \cite{Lajewska:2023:ECIR}. Our baseline method is structured in the following sequence:
 \begin{enumerate}
@@ -130,13 +134,15 @@ \section{Results}\label{sec:results}
 	\begin{tabular}{l|rrrr}
 			& R@1000 & MAP & MRR & NDCG\_Cut@3 \\
 		\hline
-		Reference System & ??? & ??? & ??? & ??? \\
+		Reference System & ??? & 0.07 & ??? & 0.09 \\
 		Baseline Method & $0.1746$ & $0.3230$ & $0.5705$ & $0.2461$ \\
 	\end{tabular}
 	\label{table:1}
 \end{center}
 \end{table}
 
+As can be seen in table \ref{table:1}, our baseline method is at least as efficient as the reference system provided by the project owners. Thus, our baseline method fulfills the hard requirement of the project.
+
 \section{Discussion and Conclusions}
 
 Summarize and discuss different challenges you faced and how you solved those. Include interpretations of the key facts and trends you observed and pointed out in the Results section. Which method performed best, and why? Speculate: What could you have done differently, and what consequences would that have had?