Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0041003237 = product of:
  0.01230097 = sum of:
    0.01230097 = product of:
      0.02460194 = sum of:
        0.02460194 = weight(_text_:of in 589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02460194 = score(doc=589,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043811057 = queryNorm
            0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 589, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=589)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Q-analysis is a methodology for investigating a wide range of structural phenomena. Strutures are defined in terms of relations between members of sets and their salient features are revealed using techniques of algebraic topology. However, the basic method can be mastered by non-mathematicians. Q-analysis has been applied to problems as diverse as discovering the rules for the diagnosis of a rare disease and the study of tactics in a football match. Other applications include some of interest to librarians and information scientists. In bibliometrics, Q-analysis has proved capable of emulating techniques such as bibliographic coupling, co-citation analysis and co-word analysis. It has also been used to produce a classification scheme for television programmes based on different principles from most bibliographic classifications. This paper introduces the basic ideas of Q-analysis. Applications relevant to librarianship and information science are reviewed and present limitations of the approach described. New theoretical advances including some in other fields such as planning and design theory and artificial intelligence may lead to a still more powerful method of investigating structure

Source

Journal of documentation. 41(1985) no.4, S.221-246

0.003865822 = product of:
  0.011597466 = sum of:
    0.011597466 = product of:
      0.023194931 = sum of:
        0.023194931 = weight(_text_:of in 3443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023194931 = score(doc=3443,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043811057 = queryNorm
            0.33856338 = fieldWeight in 3443, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3443)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The Medical Film and Video Library (MFVL) of the Wellcome Trust in London, UK, has recently developed an online catalogue of nearly all the audiovisual holdings of the Wellcome Trust. Describes how this small audiovisual collection has managed to develop an automated online catalogue using existing software and in-house expertise focusing on: principal considerations in choosing library software; development of the database; addition of the MFVL database to the WISDOM service, and piloting

0.0031564306 = product of:
  0.009469291 = sum of:
    0.009469291 = product of:
      0.018938582 = sum of:
        0.018938582 = weight(_text_:of in 1091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018938582 = score(doc=1091,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043811057 = queryNorm
            0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 1091, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1091)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.0031564306 = product of:
  0.009469291 = sum of:
    0.009469291 = product of:
      0.018938582 = sum of:
        0.018938582 = weight(_text_:of in 3895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018938582 = score(doc=3895,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043811057 = queryNorm
            0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 3895, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3895)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Journal of librarianship. 15(1983), S.47-65

0.0031564306 = product of:
  0.009469291 = sum of:
    0.009469291 = product of:
      0.018938582 = sum of:
        0.018938582 = weight(_text_:of in 5169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018938582 = score(doc=5169,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043811057 = queryNorm
            0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 5169, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5169)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Open system protocols for search and retrieval have not provided explicit ways in which to implement thesaurus-aided searching. A number of different approaches within the existing protocols, as well as a proposed service, are evaluated. A general approach to implementing thesaurus-aided searching, particularly during consultation of a thesaurus, requires an entirely new service, whose main features are described

Source

Knowledge organization and change: Proceedings of the Fourth International ISKO Conference, 15-18 July 1996, Library of Congress, Washington, DC. Ed.: R. Green

0.0027618767 = product of:
  0.00828563 = sum of:
    0.00828563 = product of:
      0.01657126 = sum of:
        0.01657126 = weight(_text_:of in 3874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01657126 = score(doc=3874,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043811057 = queryNorm
            0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 3874, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3874)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Knowledge can be created by drawing inferences from what is already known. Often some of the requisite information is lacking and has to be gathered by whatever research techniques are appropriate, e.g. experiments, surveys etc. Even if the information has all been published already, unless it is retrieved no inferences will be drawn from it and consequently there will exist some knowledge that is implicit in the literature and yet is not known by anyone. ... This paper reviews previous work on producing knowledge by information retrieval or classification and describes techniques by which hidden knowledge may be retrieved, e.g. serendipity in browsing, use of appropriate search strategies and, possibly in the future, nethods based on Farradane's relational indexing or artificial intelligence.

Source

Journal of documentation. 45(1989), S.273-301

0.0024161388 = product of:
  0.007248416 = sum of:
    0.007248416 = product of:
      0.014496832 = sum of:
        0.014496832 = weight(_text_:of in 3269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014496832 = score(doc=3269,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043811057 = queryNorm
            0.21160212 = fieldWeight in 3269, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3269)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The thought is canvassed that any reasonably heterogeneous collection of philosophy books accessible to any public is best shelved in strict alphabetical order by the author/editor names that appear on their spines, as we often find in public libraries with open access for a general reading public. The positive good that such an arrangement seeks is philosophical neutrality, given the highly controversial and fissiparous nature of the activities that are embraced under the rubric 'philosophy.' For the rest, support for our hypothesis is mainly negative, and derives from considerations concerning the difficulties that arise in persevering with any of the obvious alternative classifications. Though some of the ordering principles that motivate more adventurous and helpful arrangements can be applied to many philosophy books, the hard cases are so hard, so many and so prominent, that they would require any conscientious cataloguer to be continuously making make choices. The upshots of such choices cannot be predicted and hence make for arbitrariness. Someone who knows their own way around will find what they are looking for; and someone who doesn't is beyond help.

Footnote

Beitrag eines Themenheftes "The philosophy of classifying philosophy"