Search (32 results, page 1 of 2)

0.07612099 = product of:
  0.11418148 = sum of:
    0.08555462 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1806) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08555462 = score(doc=1806,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.43012467 = fieldWeight in 1806, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1806)
    0.028626861 = product of:
      0.057253722 = sum of:
        0.057253722 = weight(_text_:classification in 1806) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057253722 = score(doc=1806,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 1806, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1806)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Series

IFLA series on bibliographic control; vol. 42

Source

Subject access: preparing for the future. Conference on August 20 - 21, 2009 in Florence, the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section sponsored an IFLA satellite conference entitled "Looking at the Past and Preparing for the Future". Eds.: P. Landry et al

0.059022807 = product of:
  0.17706841 = sum of:
    0.17706841 = sum of:
      0.08015521 = weight(_text_:classification in 3247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08015521 = score(doc=3247,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.49260917 = fieldWeight in 3247, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3247)
      0.096913196 = weight(_text_:22 in 3247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.096913196 = score(doc=3247,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3247, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3247)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Object

DDC-22

0.050590973 = product of:
  0.15177292 = sum of:
    0.15177292 = sum of:
      0.06870447 = weight(_text_:classification in 3985) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06870447 = score(doc=3985,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 3985, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3985)
      0.08306845 = weight(_text_:22 in 3985) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08306845 = score(doc=3985,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3985, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3985)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

25.11.2005 18:37:22

Footnote

Rez. in: Cataloging and classification quarterly 23(1996) no.1, S.127-130 (L. Kuyper-Rushing)

0.048066594 = product of:
  0.07209989 = sum of:
    0.05133277 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05133277 = score(doc=2205,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 2205, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2205)
    0.020767113 = product of:
      0.041534226 = sum of:
        0.041534226 = weight(_text_:22 in 2205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041534226 = score(doc=2205,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2205, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2205)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Form subdivisions have always been an important part of the Library of Congress Subject Headings. However, when the MARC format was developed, no separate subfield code to identify form subdivisions was defined. Form and topical subdivisions were both included within a general subdivision category. In 1995, the USMARC Advisory Group approved a proposal defining subfield v for form subdivisions, and in 1999 the Library of Congress (LC) began identifying form subdivisions with the new code. However, there are millions of older bibliographic records lacking the explicit form subdivision coding. Identifying form subdivisions retrospectively is not a simple task. An algorithmic method was developed to identify form subdivisions coded as general subdivisions. The algorithm was used to identify 2,563 unique form subdivisions or combinations of form subdivisions in OCLC's WorldCat. The algorithm proved to be highly accurate with an error rate estimated to be less than 0.1%. The observed usage of the form subdivisions was highly skewed with the 100 most used form subdivisions or combinations of subdivisions accounting for 90% of the assignments.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.045672596 = product of:
  0.06850889 = sum of:
    0.05133277 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05133277 = score(doc=2181,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 2181, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2181)
    0.017176118 = product of:
      0.034352235 = sum of:
        0.034352235 = weight(_text_:classification in 2181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034352235 = score(doc=2181,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 2181, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2181)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Recent trends, driven to a large extent by the rapid proliferation of digital resources, are forcing changes in bibliographic control to make it easier to use, understand, and apply subject data. Subject headings are no exception. The enormous volume and rapid growth of digital libraries and repositories and the emergence of numerous metadata schemes have spurred a reexamination of the way subject data are to be provided for such resources efficiently and effectively. To address this need, OCLC in cooperation with the Library of Congress, has taken a new approach, called FAST (Faceted Application of Subject Terminology). FAST headings are based on the existing vocabulary in Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), but are applied with a simpler syntax than required by Library of Congress application policies. Adapting the LCSH vocabulary in a simplified faceted syntax retains the rich vocabulary of LCSH while making it easier to understand, control, apply, and use.

Source

New pespectives on subject indexing and classification: essays in honour of Magda Heiner-Freiling. Red.: K. Knull-Schlomann, u.a

0.038060494 = product of:
  0.05709074 = sum of:
    0.04277731 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3816) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04277731 = score(doc=3816,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.21506234 = fieldWeight in 3816, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3816)
    0.0143134305 = product of:
      0.028626861 = sum of:
        0.028626861 = weight(_text_:classification in 3816) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028626861 = score(doc=3816,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 3816, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3816)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The Library of Congress Subject Headings schema (LCSH) is by far the most commonly used and widely accepted subject vocabulary for general application. It is the de facto universal controlled vocabulary and has been a model for developing subject heading systems by many countries. However, LCSH's complex syntax and rules for constructing headings restrict its application by requiring highly skilled personnel and limit the effectiveness of automated authority control. Recent trends, driven to a large extent by the rapid growth of the Web, are forcing changes in bibliographic control systems to make them easier to use, understand, and apply, and subject headings are no exception. The purpose of adapting the LCSH with a simplified syntax to create FAST is to retain the very rich vocabulary of LCSH while making the schema easier to understand, control, apply, and use. The schema maintains upward compatibility with LCSH, and any valid set of LC subject headings can be converted to FAST headings.

Source

Subject retrieval in a networked environment: Proceedings of the IFLA Satellite Meeting held in Dublin, OH, 14-16 August 2001 and sponsored by the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section, the IFLA Information Technology Section and OCLC. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine

0.033678018 = product of:
  0.101034045 = sum of:
    0.101034045 = sum of:
      0.059499815 = weight(_text_:classification in 3842) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.059499815 = score(doc=3842,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.3656675 = fieldWeight in 3842, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3842)
      0.041534226 = weight(_text_:22 in 3842) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041534226 = score(doc=3842,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3842, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3842)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The Library of Congress Classification (LCC), originally designed for classifying the Library's own collection, is now used in a wide range of libraries, both in the United States and abroad. This entry recounts its history and development from its genesis to the present time, leading up to an explanation of LCC structure, tables, and notation. It then considers the system's potential for wider application in the online age, through speculation on using LCC as a tool for (a) partitioning large files; (b) generating domain-specific taxonomies; and (c) integrating classification and controlled subject terms for improved retrieval in the online public access catalog (OPAC) and the Internet. Finally, analyzing both its strong and relatively weak features, it addresses the question of whether in its current state LCC is in all respects ready for playing such roles

Date

27. 8.2011 14:22:42

0.025295487 = product of:
  0.07588646 = sum of:
    0.07588646 = sum of:
      0.034352235 = weight(_text_:classification in 5920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034352235 = score(doc=5920,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 5920, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5920)
      0.041534226 = weight(_text_:22 in 5920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041534226 = score(doc=5920,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5920, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5920)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

27. 5.2001 16:22:21

Series

Cataloging and classification quarterly; vol.29, nos.1/2

0.019962747 = product of:
  0.059888236 = sum of:
    0.059888236 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059888236 = score(doc=492,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 492, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=492)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

An analysis of a sample of 9.442 headings assigned by the LoC to bibliographic records disclosed 2 types of invalid headings: those that were erroneous and those that were obsolete. Each type revealed recurring patterns. Errors and obsolete elements occuring in assigned heading involve MARC coding, terminology in main headings and subdivisions, application of subdivisions, and in mechanical elements such as punctuation and capitalization. Different headings (e.g. personal name, corporate name, topical, etc.) display different patterns as well as predominance of errors and obsoleteness. Although the overall error rate is low, an awareness and understanding of patterns of errors and obsolescnce in subject heading strings should contribute to improvement in subject heading assignment and subject authority control

0.018892765 = product of:
  0.05667829 = sum of:
    0.05667829 = product of:
      0.11335658 = sum of:
        0.11335658 = weight(_text_:classification in 3165) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11335658 = score(doc=3165,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.69665456 = fieldWeight in 3165, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3165)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

The future of classification. Ed. R. Marcella u. A. Maltby

0.018105218 = product of:
  0.054315653 = sum of:
    0.054315653 = product of:
      0.108631305 = sum of:
        0.108631305 = weight(_text_:classification in 5541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108631305 = score(doc=5541,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.66761446 = fieldWeight in 5541, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5541)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The Library of Congress Classification (LCC), being a system originally and specifically designed for the Library's own collection, generally eschews alternatives. Within the LCC schedules, alternatives are found occasionally in earlier editions; there are no alternative numbers in recently developed or revised schedules. On the other hand, many alternative numbers representing different treatment of specific types of materials such as bibliographies and monographic series are provided in LC MARC records. Such numbers may be used by other libraries that prefer the alternative treatment. In addition, many LC MARC records also include class or call numbers based on other classification schemes, including the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), the National Library of Medicine Classification (NLM), and the Superintendent of Documents Classification. The alternative class numbers assigned from other classification systems are provided as services to libraries not using the Library of Congress Classification.

Series

Cataloging and classification quarterly; vol.19, nos.3/4

Source

Classification: options and opportunities. Ed.: A.R. Thomas

0.017672563 = product of:
  0.053017687 = sum of:
    0.053017687 = product of:
      0.106035374 = sum of:
        0.106035374 = weight(_text_:classification in 5560) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.106035374 = score(doc=5560,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.6516607 = fieldWeight in 5560, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5560)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Suggests that recent developments in the way information is generated, packaged amd accessed have broadened and changed the nature and application of classification in library and information networks. Examines the role of classification by posing the following questions: what, how and why do we classify? Within this context the expanding role of classification is examined with regard to how classification affects accessing, browsing, identifying, navigating, mapping and evaluating information and how it is and may be used in collection and database management, controlled vocabulary construction and development, and research

Footnote

Paper presented at the 36th Allerton Institute, 23-25 Oct 94, Allerton Park, Monticello, IL: "New Roles for Classification in Libraries and Information Networks: Presentation and Reports"

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 21(1995) no.2, S.5-17

0.017069763 = product of:
  0.051209286 = sum of:
    0.051209286 = product of:
      0.10241857 = sum of:
        0.10241857 = weight(_text_:classification in 477) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10241857 = score(doc=477,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.6294329 = fieldWeight in 477, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=477)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Advantages and disadvantages of on-line classification access are presented with special attention to Library of Congress Classification (LCC) features for subject browsing, known item-searching, enhancement of keyword and controlled vocabulary searching, and other unique retrieval capabilities.

Footnote

Paper presented at the 2nd Annette Lewis Phinazee Symposium on Classification as an enhancement of intellectual access to information in an online environment, held at the School of Library and Information Sciences, North Carolina Central University, Durham, North Carolina.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 11(1990) no.1, S.7-25

0.015267659 = product of:
  0.045802977 = sum of:
    0.045802977 = product of:
      0.091605954 = sum of:
        0.091605954 = weight(_text_:classification in 307) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.091605954 = score(doc=307,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.5629819 = fieldWeight in 307, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=307)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.015267659 = product of:
  0.045802977 = sum of:
    0.045802977 = product of:
      0.091605954 = sum of:
        0.091605954 = weight(_text_:classification in 393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.091605954 = score(doc=393,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.5629819 = fieldWeight in 393, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=393)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

An informal survey was conducted for the purpose of identifying instructional materials used in teaching cataloging and classification in library and information science programs in the United States and Canada. Based on responses from instructors in these areas, three groups of instructional materials were identified: cataloging and classification tools, textbooks, and background and supplementary reading materials.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 7(1987) no.4, S.131-144

0.013494832 = product of:
  0.040484495 = sum of:
    0.040484495 = product of:
      0.08096899 = sum of:
        0.08096899 = weight(_text_:classification in 4488) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08096899 = score(doc=4488,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.49761042 = fieldWeight in 4488, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4488)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Dewey Decimal Classification: Edition 21 and International perspectives: papers from a workshop presented at the General Conference of the International Deferation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA), Beijing, China, August 29, 1996. Ed.: L.M. Chan and J.S. Mitchell

0.013359202 = product of:
  0.040077604 = sum of:
    0.040077604 = product of:
      0.08015521 = sum of:
        0.08015521 = weight(_text_:classification in 1145) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08015521 = score(doc=1145,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.49260917 = fieldWeight in 1145, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1145)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.013359202 = product of:
  0.040077604 = sum of:
    0.040077604 = product of:
      0.08015521 = sum of:
        0.08015521 = weight(_text_:classification in 8555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08015521 = score(doc=8555,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.49260917 = fieldWeight in 8555, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=8555)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.013359202 = product of:
  0.040077604 = sum of:
    0.040077604 = product of:
      0.08015521 = sum of:
        0.08015521 = weight(_text_:classification in 4307) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08015521 = score(doc=4307,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.49260917 = fieldWeight in 4307, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4307)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.011450745 = product of:
  0.034352235 = sum of:
    0.034352235 = product of:
      0.06870447 = sum of:
        0.06870447 = weight(_text_:classification in 2118) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06870447 = score(doc=2118,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 2118, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2118)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)