Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0034032175 = product of:
  0.006806435 = sum of:
    0.006806435 = product of:
      0.01361287 = sum of:
        0.01361287 = weight(_text_:s in 519) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01361287 = score(doc=519,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.2718094 = fieldWeight in 519, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=519)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Program. 34(2000) no.4, S.341-373

0.0030080476 = product of:
  0.006016095 = sum of:
    0.006016095 = product of:
      0.01203219 = sum of:
        0.01203219 = weight(_text_:s in 6136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01203219 = score(doc=6136,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.24024783 = fieldWeight in 6136, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6136)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Editor

Chowdhury, S.

Footnote

Rez. in: Online Information Review 26(2002) no.3, S.221 (Keary, M.); Library review 51(2002) nos.5/6, S.312-313 (R. O'Beirne)

Pages

192 S

0.0010635054 = product of:
  0.0021270108 = sum of:
    0.0021270108 = product of:
      0.0042540217 = sum of:
        0.0042540217 = weight(_text_:s in 4466) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0042540217 = score(doc=4466,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.08494043 = fieldWeight in 4466, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4466)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Reference services have taken a central place in library and information services. They are also regarded as personalised services since in most cases a personal discussion takes place between a user and a reference librarian. Based on this, the librarian points to the sources that are considered to be most appropriate to meet the specific information need(s) of the user. Since the Web and digital libraries are meant for providing direct access to information sources and services without the intervention of human intermediaries, the pertinent question that appears is whether we need reference services in digital libraries, and, if so, how best to offer such services. Current digital libraries focus more on access to, and retrieval of, digital information, and hardly lay emphasis on the service aspects. This may have been caused by the narrower definitions of digital libraries formulated by digital library researchers. This paper looks at the current state of research in personalised information services in digital libraries. It first analyses some representative definitions of digital libraries in order to establish the need for personalised services. It then provides a brief overview of the various online reference and information services currently available on the Web. The paper also briefly reviews digital library research that specifically focuses on the personalisation of digital libraries and the provision of digital reference and information services. Finally, the paper proposes some new areas of research that may be undertaken to improve the provision of personalised information services in digital libraries.

Source

Journal of documentation. 58(2002) no.3, S.258-283

0.0010420184 = product of:
  0.0020840368 = sum of:
    0.0020840368 = product of:
      0.0041680736 = sum of:
        0.0041680736 = weight(_text_:s in 2643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0041680736 = score(doc=2643,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.0832243 = fieldWeight in 2643, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2643)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

1. Introduction Web search engines and digital libraries usually expect the users to use search terms that most accurately represent their information needs. Finding the most appropriate search terms to represent an information need is an age old problem in information retrieval. Keyword or phrase search may produce good search results as long as the search terms or phrase(s) match those used by the authors and have been chosen for indexing by the concerned information retrieval system. Since this does not always happen, a large number of false drops are produced by information retrieval systems. The retrieval results become worse in very large systems that deal with millions of records, such as the Web search engines and digital libraries. Vocabulary control tools are used to improve the performance of text retrieval systems. Thesauri, the most common type of vocabulary control tool used in information retrieval, appeared in the late fifties, designed for use with the emerging post-coordinate indexing systems of that time. They are used to exert terminology control in indexing, and to aid in searching by allowing the searcher to select appropriate search terms. A large volume of literature exists describing the design features, and experiments with the use, of thesauri in various types of information retrieval systems (see for example, Furnas et.al., 1987; Bates, 1986, 1998; Milstead, 1997, and Shiri et al., 2002).

Pages

S.133-138

9.0241426E-4 = product of:
  0.0018048285 = sum of:
    0.0018048285 = product of:
      0.003609657 = sum of:
        0.003609657 = weight(_text_:s in 4284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.003609657 = score(doc=4284,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 4284, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4284)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Annual review of information science and technology. 37(2003), S.51-90

9.0241426E-4 = product of:
  0.0018048285 = sum of:
    0.0018048285 = product of:
      0.003609657 = sum of:
        0.003609657 = weight(_text_:s in 4425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.003609657 = score(doc=4425,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 4425, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4425)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Journal of documentation. 60(2004) no.4, S.449-475

5.264083E-4 = product of:
  0.0010528166 = sum of:
    0.0010528166 = product of:
      0.0021056333 = sum of:
        0.0021056333 = weight(_text_:s in 6119) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0021056333 = score(doc=6119,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.04204337 = fieldWeight in 6119, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.013671875 = fieldNorm(doc=6119)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 55(2004) no.2, S.178-179 (M.-Y. Kan): "In their latest book, Chowdhury and Chowdhury have written an introductory text an digital libraries, primarily targeting "students researching digital libraries as part of information and library science, as well as computer science, courses" (p. xiv). It is an ambitious work that surveys many of the broad topics in digital libraries (DL) while highlighting completed and ongoing DL research in many parts of the world. With the revamping of Library and Information Science (LIS) Curriculums to focus an information technology, many LIS schools are now teaching DL topics either as an independent course or as part of an existing one. Instructors of these courses have in many cases used supplementary texts and compeed readers from journals and conference materials, possibly because they feel that a suitable textbook has yet to be written. A solid, principal textbook for digital libraries is sorely needed to provide a critical, evaluative synthesis of DL literature. It is with this in mind that I believe Introduction to Digital Libraries was written. An introductory text an any Cross-disciplinary topic is bound to have conflicting limitations and expectations from its adherents who come from different backgrounds. This is the rase in the development of DL Curriculum, in which both LIS and computer science schools are actively involved. Compiling a useful secondary source in such Cross-disciplinary areas is challenging; it requires that jargon from each contributing field be carefully explained and respected, while providing thought-provoking material to broaden student perspectives. In my view, the book's breadth certainly encompasses the whole of what an introduction to DL needs, but it is hampered by a lack of focus from catering to such disparate needs. For example, LIS students will need to know which key aspects differentiate digital library metadata from traditional metadata while computer science students will need to learn the basics of vector spare and probabilistic information retrieval. However, the text does not give enough detail an either subject and thus even introductory students will need to go beyond the book and consult primary sources. In this respect, the book's 307 pages of content are too short to do justice to such a broad field of study.
Chapter 2 examines the variety and breadth of DL implementations and collections through a well-balanced selection of 20 DLs. The authors make a useful classification of the various types of DLs into seven categories and give a brief synopsis of two or three examples from each category. These categories include historical, national, and university DLs, as well as DLs for special materials and research. Chapter 3 examines research efforts in digital libraries, concentrating an the three eLib initiatives in the UK and the two Digital Libraries Initiatives in the United States. The chapter also offers some details an joint research between the UK and the United States (the NSF/JISC jointly funded programs), Europe, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. While both of these chapters do an admirable job of surveying the DL landscape, the breadth and variety of materials need to be encapsulated in a coherent summary that illustrates the commonality of their approaches and their key differences that have been driven by aspects of their collections and audience. Unfortunately, this summary aspect is lacking here and elsewhere in the book. Chapter 2 does an admirable job of DL selection that showcases the variety of existing DLs, but 1 feel that Chapter 3's selection of research projects could be improved. The chapter's emphasis is clearly an UK-based research, devoting nine pages to it compared to six for EU-funded projects. While this emphasis could be favorable for UK courses, it hampers the chances of the text's adoption in other courses internationally. Chapter 4 begins the core part of the book by examining the DL from a design perspective. As a well-designed DL encompasses various practical and theoretical considerations, the chapter introduces much of the concepts that are elaborated an in later chapters. The Kahn/Wilensky and Lagoze/Fielding architectures are summarized in bullet points, and specific aspects of these frameworks are elaborated on. These include the choice between a federated or centralized search architecture (referencing Virginia Tech's NDLTD and Waikato's Greenstone) and level of interoperability (discussing UNIMARC and metadata harvesting). Special attention is paid to hybrid library design, with references to UK projects. A useful summary of recommended standards for DL design concludes the chapter.

Pages

359 S