Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.049563773 = product of:
  0.099127546 = sum of:
    0.043315165 = weight(_text_:library in 7716) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043315165 = score(doc=7716,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.32867232 = fieldWeight in 7716, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7716)
    0.055812385 = product of:
      0.11162477 = sum of:
        0.11162477 = weight(_text_:project in 7716) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11162477 = score(doc=7716,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.52762264 = fieldWeight in 7716, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7716)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Library users continue to experience difficulty in using the online catalog, particularly in the area of subject access. This project describes a test of a new design for subject access to online catalogs. The new design requires a wide range of subject searching capabilities and search trees to govern the system's selection of searching capabilities in response to user queries. Is the performance of search trees superior to subject searching approaches chosen at random? This project is geared to make that determination

Source

Library hi tech. 12(1994) no.1, S.67-76,86

0.0219043 = product of:
  0.0438086 = sum of:
    0.01914278 = weight(_text_:library in 4382) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01914278 = score(doc=4382,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 4382, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4382)
    0.024665821 = product of:
      0.049331643 = sum of:
        0.049331643 = weight(_text_:project in 4382) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049331643 = score(doc=4382,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23317845 = fieldWeight in 4382, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4382)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This article describes the findings of a research project that tested a new subject-access design in an experimental online catalog that had a wide range of subject-searching capabilities and search trees to govern the system's selection of searching capabilities in response to user queries. Library users at 2 academic libraries searched this experimental catalog for topics of their own choosing, judges the usefulness of retrieved titles, and answered post-search questions about their searching experiences. Mixed results from a quantitative analysis (i.e., precision scores) were supplemented with the more conclusive results from a qualitative analysis (i.e., failure analysis). Overall, analyses demonstrated that the new subject-access design that featured search trees was more effective in selecting a subject-searching approach that would prooduce useful information for the subjects users seek than users would select on their own. The qualitative analysis was especially helpful in providing recommendations for improving specific subject-searching approaches to increase their effenciency, increase user perseverance, and encourage browsing. It also suggested enhancements to the new subject-searching design to enable systems to respond to the wide variety of user queries for subjects

0.008633038 = product of:
  0.034532152 = sum of:
    0.034532152 = product of:
      0.069064304 = sum of:
        0.069064304 = weight(_text_:project in 7435) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.069064304 = score(doc=7435,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.32644984 = fieldWeight in 7435, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7435)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Describes the comparative approach to system evaluation used in this research project which delegated the administartion of an online retrieval test to an experimental online catalogue to produce data for evaluating the effectiveness of a new subject access design. Describes the methods enlisted to sort out problem test administration, e.g. to identify out-of-scope queries, incomplete system administration, and suspect post-search questionnaire responses. Covers how w the researchers handled problem search administrations and what actions they would use to reduce or eliminate the occurrence of such administrations in future online retrieval tests that delegate control of retrieval tests to online systems

0.004785695 = product of:
  0.01914278 = sum of:
    0.01914278 = weight(_text_:library in 5973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01914278 = score(doc=5973,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 5973, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5973)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Library resources and technical services. 40(1996) no.2, S.113-132