Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Wheatley, A."
  1. Wheatley, A.: Subject trees on the Internet : a new role for bibliographic classification? (2000) 0.00 
    0.004855188 = product of:
  0.019420752 = sum of:
    0.019420752 = weight(_text_:information in 6108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019420752 = score(doc=6108,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 6108, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6108)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Internet information retrieval is largely the preserve of search engines and the even more popular subject trees. Subject trees have adapted principles of conventional bibliographic classification for structuring hierarchic browsing interfaces, thus providing easily used pathways to their selected resources. This combination of browsing and selectivity is especially valuable to untrained users. For the forseeable future, it appears that subject trees will remain the Internet's only practicable use of classificatory methods for information retrieval
  2. Wheatley, A.; Armstrong, C.J.: Metadata, recall, and abstracts : can abstracts ever be reliable indicators of document value? (1997) 0.00 
    0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=824,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 824, 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=824)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Abstracts from 7 Internet subject trees (Euroferret, Excite, Infoseek, Lycos Top 5%, Magellan, WebCrawler, Yahoo!), 5 Internet subject gateways (ADAM, EEVL, NetFirst, OMNI, SOSIG), and 3 online databases (ERIC, ISI, LISA) were examined for their subject content, treatment of various enriching features, physical properties such as overall length, anf their readability. Considerable differences were measured, and consistent similarities among abstracts from each type of source were demonstrated. Internet subject tree abstracts were generally the shortest, and online database abstracts the longest. Subject tree and online database abstracts were the most informative, but the level of coverage of document features such as tables, bibliographies, and geographical constraints were disappointingly poor. On balance, the Internet gateways appeared to be providing the most satisfactory abstracts. The authors discuss the continuing role in networked information retrieval of abstracts and their functional analoques such as metadata

Years

Themes