Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.01075336 = product of:
  0.03226008 = sum of:
    0.03226008 = product of:
      0.09678023 = sum of:
        0.09678023 = weight(_text_:22 in 4162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09678023 = score(doc=4162,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17867287 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4162, 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=4162)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Indexer. 22(2001) no.4, S.191-194

0.0077401884 = product of:
  0.023220565 = sum of:
    0.023220565 = product of:
      0.06966169 = sum of:
        0.06966169 = weight(_text_:online in 5050) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06966169 = score(doc=5050,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.4498688 = fieldWeight in 5050, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5050)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Majority opinions are often observed in the process of social interaction in online communities, but few studies have addressed this issue with empirical data. To identify an appropriate theoretical lens for explaining majority opinions in online environments, this study investigates the skewness statistic, which indicates how many "Likes" are skewed to major comments on a Facebook post; 3489 posts are gathered from the New York Times Facebook page for 100 days. Results show that time is not an influential factor for skewness increase, but the number of comments has a logarithmic relation to skewness increase. Regression models and Chow tests show that this relationship differs depending on topic contents, but majority opinions are significant in overall. These results suggest that the bandwagon effect due to social affordance can be a suitable mechanism for explaining majority opinion formation in an online environment and that majority opinions in online communities can be misperceived due to overestimation.

0.006144777 = product of:
  0.01843433 = sum of:
    0.01843433 = product of:
      0.055302992 = sum of:
        0.055302992 = weight(_text_:22 in 3607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055302992 = score(doc=3607,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17867287 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3607, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3607)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

1. 8.1996 22:08:06

0.00537668 = product of:
  0.01613004 = sum of:
    0.01613004 = product of:
      0.048390117 = sum of:
        0.048390117 = weight(_text_:22 in 1423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048390117 = score(doc=1423,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17867287 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1423, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1423)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.0028845975 = product of:
  0.008653793 = sum of:
    0.008653793 = product of:
      0.025961377 = sum of:
        0.025961377 = weight(_text_:online in 5755) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025961377 = score(doc=5755,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.16765618 = fieldWeight in 5755, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5755)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This paper discusses the Hornbostel-Sachs Classification of Musical Instruments. This classification system was originally designed for musical instruments and books about instruments, and was first published in German in 1914. Hornbostel-Sachs has dominated organological discourse and practice since its creation, and this article analyses the scheme's context, background, versions and impact. The position of Hornbostel-Sachs in the history and development of instrument classification is explored. This is followed by a detailed analysis of the mechanics of the scheme, including its decimal notation, the influential broad categories of the scheme, its warrant and its typographical layout. The version history of the scheme is outlined and the relationships between versions is visualised, including its translations, the introduction of the electrophones category and the Musical Instruments Museums Online (MIMO) version designed for a digital environment. The reception of Hornbostel-Sachs is analysed, and its usage, criticism and impact are all considered. As well as dominating organological research and practice for over a century, it is shown that Hornbostel-Sachs also had a significant influence on the bibliographic classification of music.

0.0022925164 = product of:
  0.006877549 = sum of:
    0.006877549 = product of:
      0.020632647 = sum of:
        0.020632647 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4198) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020632647 = score(doc=4198,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.13368362 = fieldWeight in 4198, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4198)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to understand the classification of musical medium, which is a critical part of music classification. It considers how musical medium is currently classified, provides a theoretical understanding of what is currently problematic, and proposes a model which rethinks the classification of medium and resolves these issues. Design/methodology/approach The analysis is drawn from existing classification schemes, additionally using musicological and knowledge organization literature where relevant. The paper culminates in the design of a model of musical medium. Findings The analysis elicits sub-facets, orders and categorizations of medium: there is a strict categorization between vocal and instrumental music, a categorization based on broad size, and important sub-facets for multiples, accompaniment and arrangement. Problematically, there is a mismatch between the definitiveness of library and information science vocal/instrumental categorization and the blurred nature of real musical works; arrangements and accompaniments are limited by other categorizations; multiple voices and groups are not accommodated. So, a model with a radical new structure is proposed which resolves these classification issues. Research limitations/implications The results could be used to further understanding of music classification generally, for Western art music and other types of music. Practical implications The resulting model could be used to improve and design new classification schemes and to improve understanding of music retrieval. Originality/value Deep theoretical analysis of music classification is rare, so this paper's approach is original. Furthermore, the paper's value lies in studying a vital area of music classification which is not currently understood, and providing explanations and solutions. The proposed model is novel in structure and concept, and its original structure could be adapted for other knotty subjects.