Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

7.852253E-4 = product of:
  0.011778379 = sum of:
    0.011778379 = product of:
      0.023556758 = sum of:
        0.023556758 = weight(_text_:22 in 2464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023556758 = score(doc=2464,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2464, 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=2464)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Source

Library trends. 48(1999) no.1, S.22-47

4.3507366E-4 = product of:
  0.0065261046 = sum of:
    0.0065261046 = product of:
      0.013052209 = sum of:
        0.013052209 = weight(_text_:information in 824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013052209 = score(doc=824,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.256578 = fieldWeight in 824, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=824)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

We discuss the issues of resolving the information-retrieval problem in large digital collections through the identification and use of document genres. Explicit identification of genre seems particularly important for such collections because any search usually retrieves documents with a diversity of genres that are undifferentiated by obvious clues as to their identity. Also, because most genres are characterized by both form and purpose, identifying the genre of a document provides information as to the document's purpose and its fit to the user's situation, which can be otherwise difficult to assess. We begin by outlining the possible role of genre identification in the information-retrieval process. Our assumption is that genre identification would enhance searching, first because we know that topic alone is not enough to define an information problem and, second, because search results containing genre information would be more easily understandable. Next, we discuss how information professionals have traditionally tackled the issues of representing genre in settings where topical representation is the norm. Finally, we address the issues of studying the efficacy of identifying genre in large digital collections. Because genre is often an implicit notion, studying it in a systematic way presents many problems. We outline a research protocol that would provide guidance for identifying Web document genres, for observing how genre is used in searching and evaluating search results, and finally for representing and visualizing genres.

3.9466174E-4 = product of:
  0.005919926 = sum of:
    0.005919926 = product of:
      0.011839852 = sum of:
        0.011839852 = weight(_text_:information in 242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011839852 = score(doc=242,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 242, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=242)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

We report on the process and difficulties of building a taxonomy of genres of digital documents. The taxonomy is being created to be used in the experimental phase of an ongoing study to learn about the usefulness of providing genre information to support information-seeking tasks. To build the taxonomy, we conducted field studies to collect webpage-genre information from 55 respondents: K-12 teachers, journalists, and engineers, who routinely use the web for information seeking. Challenges described in this paper include the difficulties respondents experienced in identifying and naming genres and that the researchers faced in unambiguously linking the genre identifications with clues to genre attributes and purposes.

2.79068E-4 = product of:
  0.0041860198 = sum of:
    0.0041860198 = product of:
      0.0083720395 = sum of:
        0.0083720395 = weight(_text_:information in 122) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0083720395 = score(doc=122,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 122, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=122)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

This paper reports on a portion of a larger ongoing project. We address the issues of information organization and retrieval in large, active commercial websites. More specifically, we address the use of classification for providing access to the contents of such sites. We approach this analysis by describing the functionality and structure of the classification scheme of one such representative, large, active, commercial websites: eBay.com, a web-based auction site for millions of users and items. We compare eBay's classification scheme with the Art & Architecture Thesaurus, which is a tool for describing and providing access to material culture.

Theme

Information Resources Management

2.3255666E-4 = product of:
  0.0034883497 = sum of:
    0.0034883497 = product of:
      0.0069766995 = sum of:
        0.0069766995 = weight(_text_:information in 5641) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0069766995 = score(doc=5641,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 5641, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5641)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

No matter how immutable a classification may seem, it is, after all, an artifact of the human imagination and functions in a particular place and time. The author describes her personal inquiry into classification as a knowledge-representation process. She traces her changing perspectives on how classifications should be viewed and evaluated by posing the following questions: 1) How does the classification process enable or constrain knowing about something or discovering something we did not already know?; 2) In what ways might we develop classifications that enhance our ability to discover meaningful information in the information stores that form a part of our scholarly as well as our everyday lives?; and 3) How might classifications mask or distort knowledge, and how might they serve to disenfranchise people and ideas? These questions are considered through a discussion of classification structures, personal classification, the link of classification to theory, everyday working classifications, translation of classifications, cognitive aspects, browsing, genres, warrant, and the difficulties of navigating complex ontological commitments. The through thread is the importance of context, because classifications can only be seen with respect to the human endeavors that generate them.

1.9733087E-4 = product of:
  0.002959963 = sum of:
    0.002959963 = product of:
      0.005919926 = sum of:
        0.005919926 = weight(_text_:information in 5517) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005919926 = score(doc=5517,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 5517, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5517)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Content

Beitrag eines Themenheftes "Knowledge organization and classification in international information retrieval"

1.9733087E-4 = product of:
  0.002959963 = sum of:
    0.002959963 = product of:
      0.005919926 = sum of:
        0.005919926 = weight(_text_:information in 3531) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005919926 = score(doc=3531,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3531, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3531)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

We compare two separate but related classification schemes in the area of medical information in order to better understand how they might be used together and inform one another. First we examine a "professional" scheme, the thesaurus of Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) produced by the U.S. National Library of Medicine. We contrast this with the "naïve" scheme used by the consumer health website, WebMD.com. Using the term autism we compared the strengths and limitations from the perspective of vocabulary, syntax and classificatory structure, context, and warrant. We conclude that in terms of vocabulary and concepts, MeSH may benefit from WebMD's approach to ongoing updates and currency as well as the contextualization of terms. At the same time, WebMD may benefit from some form of vocabulary control for richer expansion of terms and archival retrieval.

1.3155391E-4 = product of:
  0.0019733086 = sum of:
    0.0019733086 = product of:
      0.0039466172 = sum of:
        0.0039466172 = weight(_text_:information in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0039466172 = score(doc=2652,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 2652, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2652)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Source

Knowledge organization and the global information society: Proceedings of the 8th International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004, London, UK. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine