Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0028266364 = product of:
  0.005653273 = sum of:
    0.005653273 = product of:
      0.011306546 = sum of:
        0.011306546 = weight(_text_:a in 603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011306546 = score(doc=603,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051314447 = queryNorm
            0.19109234 = fieldWeight in 603, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=603)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose Serendipitous information discovery has become a unique and important approach to discovering and obtaining information, which has aroused a growing interest for serendipity in human information behavior. Despite numerous publications, few have systematically provided an overview of current state of serendipity research. Consequently, researchers and practitioners are less able to make effective use of existing achievements, which limits them from making advancements in this domain. Against this backdrop, we performed a systematic literature review to explore the world of serendipity and to recapitulate the current states of different research topics. Design/methodology/approach Guided by a prior designed review protocol, this paper conducted both automatic and manual search for available studies published from January 1990 to December 2020 on seven databases. A total of 207 serendipity studies closely related to human information behavior form the literature pool. Findings We provide an overview of distinct aspects of serendipity, that is research topics, potential benefits, related concepts, theoretical models, contextual factors and data collection methods. Based on these findings, this review reveals limitations and gaps in the current serendipity research and proposes an agenda for future research directions. Originality/value By analyzing current serendipity research, developing a knowledge framework and providing a research agenda, this review is of significance for researchers who want to find new research questions or re-align current work, for beginners who need to quickly understand serendipity, and for practitioners who seek to cultivate serendipity in information environments.

Type

a

0.0026381938 = product of:
  0.0052763876 = sum of:
    0.0052763876 = product of:
      0.010552775 = sum of:
        0.010552775 = weight(_text_:a in 62) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010552775 = score(doc=62,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051314447 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 62, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=62)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The paper discusses the challenges of categorising documents and "items of the world" to promote knowledge sharing in large communities of interest. We present the DOCMA method (Document and Item-based Model for Action) dedicated to end-users who have minimal or no knowledge of information science. Community members can elicit structure and indexed business items stemming from their query including projects, actors, products, places of interest, and geo-situated objects. This hybrid method was applied in a collaborative Web portal in the field of sustainability for the past two years.

Type

a

0.001884424 = product of:
  0.003768848 = sum of:
    0.003768848 = product of:
      0.007537696 = sum of:
        0.007537696 = weight(_text_:a in 1204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007537696 = score(doc=1204,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051314447 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 1204, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1204)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Open data as an integral part of the open science movement enhances the openness and sharing of scientific datasets. Nevertheless, the normative utilization of data journals, data papers, scientific datasets, and data citations necessitates further research. This study aims to investigate the citation practices associated with data papers and to explore the role of data papers in disseminating scientific datasets. Dataset accession numbers from NCBI databases were employed to analyze the prevalence of data citations for data papers from PubMed Central. A dataset citation practice identification rule was subsequently established. The findings indicate a consistent growth in the number of biomedical data journals published in recent years, with data papers gaining attention and recognition as both publications and data sources. Although the use of data papers as citation sources for data remains relatively rare, there has been a steady increase in data paper citations for data utilization through formal data citations. Furthermore, the increasing proportion of datasets reported in data papers that are employed for analytical purposes highlights the distinct value of data papers in facilitating the dissemination and reuse of datasets to support novel research.

Type

a

0.0016854804 = product of:
  0.0033709607 = sum of:
    0.0033709607 = product of:
      0.0067419214 = sum of:
        0.0067419214 = weight(_text_:a in 4800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0067419214 = score(doc=4800,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051314447 = queryNorm
            0.11394546 = fieldWeight in 4800, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4800)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The usefulness of online geological maps is hindered by linguistic barriers. Multilingual geoscience thesauri alleviate linguistic barriers of geological maps. However, the benefits of multilingual geoscience thesauri for online geological maps are less studied. In this regard, we developed a multilingual thesaurus of geological time scale (GTS) to alleviate linguistic barriers of GTS records among online geological maps. We extended the Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) model to represent the ordinal hierarchical structure of GTS terms. We collected GTS terms in seven languages and encoded them into a thesaurus by using the extended SKOS model. We implemented methods of characteristic-oriented term retrieval in JavaScript programs for accessing Web Map Services (WMS), recognizing GTS terms, and making translations. With the developed thesaurus and programs, we set up a pilot system to test recognitions and translations of GTS terms in online geological maps. Results of this pilot system proved the accuracy of the developed thesaurus and the functionality of the developed programs. Therefore, with proper deployments, SKOS-based multilingual geoscience thesauri can be functional for alleviating linguistic barriers among online geological maps and, thus, improving their interoperability.

Type

a

0.0016319593 = product of:
  0.0032639187 = sum of:
    0.0032639187 = product of:
      0.0065278374 = sum of:
        0.0065278374 = weight(_text_:a in 1367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0065278374 = score(doc=1367,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051314447 = queryNorm
            0.11032722 = fieldWeight in 1367, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1367)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

VDL (Visual Distinctive Language)-based iconic know ledge tags are graphically structured icons for knowledge representation. VDL was developed and assessed to enhance the connection of iconic tags and the connection of tagged knowledge. The purpose of this paper is to present further investigation on an arrangement method for these special tags as well as the characteristics of better tag presentation in knowledge organization systems (KOS). An online experiment was conducted to compare tagging results of four types of iconic tag presentations: two types of iconic tags (VDL-based iconic tags and iconic tags without explicit structure) under two arrangement methods respectively (random arrangement and semantic arrangement). Tagging quality and tagging speed were measured to identify how users locate and locate again appropriate iconic tags for knowledge tagging. A supplementary test on tag structure identification was also carried out for each tag presentation. Semantic arrangement of VDL-based icons helped users to tag given articles with more appropriate tags in less time. Users identified better tag structure in this type of tag presentation. This in-depth work of VDL-based iconic tags is among the first to investigate how to visually structure knowledge tags, a problem neglected by previous studies on icon knowledge representation.

Type

a

0.0013324892 = product of:
  0.0026649784 = sum of:
    0.0026649784 = product of:
      0.0053299568 = sum of:
        0.0053299568 = weight(_text_:a in 232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0053299568 = score(doc=232,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051314447 = queryNorm
            0.090081796 = fieldWeight in 232, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=232)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Previous studies on crisis knowledge organization mostly focused on the categorization of crisis knowledge without regarding its dynamic trend and temporal-spatial features. In order to emphasize the dynamic factors of crisis collaboration, a fine-grained crisis knowledge model is proposed by integrating temporal-spatial analysis based on ontology, which is one of the commonly used methods for knowledge organization. The reconstruction of ontologybased crisis knowledge will be implemented through three steps: analyzing temporal-spatial features of crisis knowledge, reconstructing crisis knowledge ontology, and verifying the temporal-spatial ontology. In the process of ontology reconstruction, the main classes and properties of the domain will be identified by investigating the crisis information resources. Meanwhile the fine-grained crisis ontology will be achieved at the level of characteristic representation of crisis knowledge including temporal relationship, spatial relationship, and semantic relationship. Finally, we conducted case addition and system implementation to verify our crisis knowledge model. This ontology-based knowledge organization method theoretically optimizes the static organizational structure of crisis knowledge, improving the flexibility of knowledge organization and efficiency of emergency response. In practice, the proposed fine-grained ontology is supposed to be more in line with the real situation of emergency collaboration and management. Moreover, it will also provide the knowledge base for decision-making during rescue process.

Type

a

9.42212E-4 = product of:
  0.001884424 = sum of:
    0.001884424 = product of:
      0.003768848 = sum of:
        0.003768848 = weight(_text_:a in 664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.003768848 = score(doc=664,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.059167966 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051314447 = queryNorm
            0.06369744 = fieldWeight in 664, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=664)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a