Search (22 results, page 1 of 2)

0.008108814 = product of:
  0.0608161 = sum of:
    0.008049765 = product of:
      0.01609953 = sum of:
        0.01609953 = weight(_text_:online in 5477) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01609953 = score(doc=5477,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.096027054 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031640913 = queryNorm
            0.16765618 = fieldWeight in 5477, 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=5477)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.052766338 = weight(_text_:site in 5477) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052766338 = score(doc=5477,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1738463 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.494352 = idf(docFreq=493, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.3035229 = fieldWeight in 5477, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.494352 = idf(docFreq=493, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5477)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine motivators that drive Black Wikipedia contribution. The authors explore motivations around content contribution, effects of gender on motivations and self-perceptions of Black Wikipedia labor. Design/methodology/approach A total of 318 Black American Wikipedia contributors completed an online survey. The authors employed both quantitative and qualitative methods in the study including descriptive statistics, multivariate (MANOVA) and univariate (ANOVA) analysis of variance to examine gender differences in Wikipedia content contribution. In addition, open-ended responses were evaluated, through content analysis, to make inferences on their perceptions of Wikipedia labor. Findings This paper identifies racial identity and perceptions of information quality as strong motivators in content contribution among Black Wikipedians. Motivators are gender variant; men are more motivated than women with the lone exception being racial identity. Additionally, the study identifies Wikipedia as a contested space among Black contributors and is a site of resistance. Originality/value Black Wikipedians information activity is a relatively new and understudied phenomenon. This paper presents new insight and a deeper understanding of Black Wikipedians' motivations for information sharing behaviors in the most popular encyclopedia on the internet.

0.007409331 = product of:
  0.05556998 = sum of:
    0.013942603 = product of:
      0.027885206 = sum of:
        0.027885206 = weight(_text_:online in 537) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027885206 = score(doc=537,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.096027054 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031640913 = queryNorm
            0.29038906 = fieldWeight in 537, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=537)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.041627377 = weight(_text_:web in 537) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041627377 = score(doc=537,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.10326045 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.40312994 = fieldWeight in 537, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=537)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)

Abstract

The Internet has substantially increased the online accessibility of scholarly publications and allowed researchers to access relevant information efficiently across different journals and databases (Costa & Meadows, ). Because of online accessibility, academic researchers tend to read more, and reading has become more superficial (Olle & Borrego, ), such that information overload has become an important issue. Given this circumstance, how the Internet affects knowledge transfer, or, more specifically, the citation behavior of researchers, has become a recent focus of interest. This study assesses the effects of the Internet on citation patterns in terms of 4 characteristics of cited documents: topic relevance, author status, journal prestige, and age of references. This work hypothesizes that academic scholars cite more topically relevant articles, more articles written by lower status authors, articles published in less prestigious journals, and older articles with online accessibility. The current study also hypothesizes that researcher knowledge level moderates such Internet effects. We chose the "IT and Group" subject area and collected 241 documents published in the pre-web period (1991-1995) and 867 documents published in the web-prevalent period (2006-2010) in the Web of Science database. The references of these documents were analyzed to test the proposed hypotheses, which are significantly supported by the empirical results.

0.0040595494 = product of:
  0.060893238 = sum of:
    0.060893238 = weight(_text_:evaluation in 5541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060893238 = score(doc=5541,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13272417 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.4587954 = fieldWeight in 5541, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5541)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

Any classification system should be evaluated with respect to a variety of philosophical and practical concerns. This paper explores several distinct issues: the nature of a work, the value of a statement, the contribution of information science to philosophy, the nature of hierarchy, ethical evaluation, pre- versus postcoordination, the lived experience of librarians, and formalization versus natural language. It evaluates a particular approach to classification in terms of each of these but draws general lessons for philosophical evaluation. That approach to classification emphasizes the free combination of basic concepts representing both real things in the world and the relationships among these; works are also classified in terms of theories, methods, and perspectives applied.

0.002899678 = product of:
  0.043495167 = sum of:
    0.043495167 = weight(_text_:evaluation in 5054) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043495167 = score(doc=5054,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13272417 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.327711 = fieldWeight in 5054, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5054)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

Reading Comprehension tests are commonly used to assess the degree to which people comprehend what they read. This is why we work with the hypothesis that it is reasonable to use these tests to assess the degree to which a machine "comprehends" what it is reading. In this work, we evaluate Question Answering systems using Reading Comprehension tests from exams to enter University. This article analyses the datasets generated, the kind of inferences required, the methodology followed in three evaluation campaigns, the approaches presented by participants and current results. Besides, we study the evolution of systems and the main lessons learned in this evaluation process. We also show how current technologies are unable to pass university-entrance exams. This is because these tests require a deep understanding of texts, as well as detecting the similar meaning of phrases with different words. Future directions focused on these ideas seem more promising than including a massive amount of data for training systems, what has allowed systems to obtain outstanding results in Reading Comprehension tests with more straightforward questions. We think this study helps to increase the knowledge about how to develop better Question Answering systems.

0.0020503819 = product of:
  0.030755727 = sum of:
    0.030755727 = weight(_text_:evaluation in 4477) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030755727 = score(doc=4477,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13272417 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.23172665 = fieldWeight in 4477, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4477)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

This exploratory study contributes to research on relevance assessment by specifying criteria that are used in the judgment of information quality and credibility in Internet discussion forums. To this end, 4,739 messages posted to 160 Finnish discussion threads were analyzed. Of the messages, 20.5% contained explicit judgments of the quality of information and credibility in other messages. In the judgments, the forum participants employed both positive criteria such as validity of information and negative criteria such as dishonesty in argumentation. In the evaluation of the quality of the message's information content, the most frequently used criteria pertained to the usefulness, correctness, and specificity of information. In the judgment of information credibility, the main criteria included the reputation, expertise, and honesty of the author of the message. Since Internet discussion forums tend to emphasize the role of disputational discourse questioning rather than accepting the views presented by others, mainly negative criteria were used in the judgments. The generality of our claims is limited because we chose forums that focused on sensitive and value-laden topics; future work could explore credibility and quality judgment in other forums and forumlike venues such as question and answer sites as well as exploring how quality and credibility judgments interact with other aspects of forum use.

0.0020503819 = product of:
  0.030755727 = sum of:
    0.030755727 = weight(_text_:evaluation in 1529) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030755727 = score(doc=1529,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13272417 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.23172665 = fieldWeight in 1529, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1529)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

Anyone who has clarified a thought or prompted a response during a conversation by drawing a picture has exploited the potential of image making to convey information. Images are increasingly ubiquitous in daily communication due to advances in visually enabled information and communication technologies (ICT), such as information visualization applications, image retrieval systems, and virtual collaborative work tools. Although images are often used in social contexts, information science research concerned with the visual representation of information typically focuses on the image artifact and system building. To learn more about image making as a form of social interaction and as a form of information practice, a qualitative study examined face-to-face conversations involving the creation of ad hoc visualizations (i.e., "napkin drawings"). Interactional sociolinguistic concepts of conversational involvement and coordination guided multimodal analysis of video-recorded interactions that included spontaneous drawing. Findings show patterns in communicative activities associated with the visual representation of information. Furthermore, the activity of mark making contributes to the maintenance of conversational involvement in ways that are not always evident in the drawn artifact. This research has implications for the design and evaluation of visually enabled virtual collaboration environments, visual information extraction and retrieval systems, and data visualization tools.

0.0020503819 = product of:
  0.030755727 = sum of:
    0.030755727 = weight(_text_:evaluation in 5039) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030755727 = score(doc=5039,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13272417 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.23172665 = fieldWeight in 5039, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5039)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Series

Literary research, practice and evaluation; 9

0.0018339625 = product of:
  0.027509436 = sum of:
    0.027509436 = weight(_text_:software in 3397) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027509436 = score(doc=3397,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12552431 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.21915624 = fieldWeight in 3397, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3397)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

What we consider to be the influence of philosophy on scientific thinking largely depends on how science perceives itself. The understanding and conscious human-oriented design of the relationship between the computer and the creatively active person - i.e. the design of a formal model and the non-formal, natural and social environment - is always more readily recognized as the fundamental philosophical, theoretical and methodological problem of informatics (computer science and information systems). Informatics/computer science results from the necessity to overcome the tension between technology-based automation, which is based on a purely syntactic interpretation and transformation of information, and creative and active people who carry out semantic information processing based on their knowledge. It is this tension that requires the development and use of user-oriented software and the formal operations to be integrated into complex human work processes. Conceptual strategies that foster the development and integration of modern information technologies into social organization are currently the topic of vivid philosophical and methodological discussions, reflecting the influence of different philosophical schools. The utilization of information technologies has significantly changed both employee working conditions and the relationship between organizations and their environment. The development of humanity-oriented computer science is a necessary condition for integrating computational systems into social contexts and for largely adapting these systems to the users' needs.

0.0018339625 = product of:
  0.027509436 = sum of:
    0.027509436 = weight(_text_:software in 296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027509436 = score(doc=296,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12552431 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.21915624 = fieldWeight in 296, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=296)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

Purpose The concept of information is central to several fields of research and professional practice. So many definitions have been put forward that complete inventory is unachievable while authors have failed to reach a consensus. In the face of the present impasse, innovative proposals could rouse information theorists to action, but literature surveys tend to emphasize the common traits of definitions. Reviewers are inclined to iron out originality in information models; thus the purpose of this paper is to discover the creativity of authors attempting to define the concept of information and to stimulate the progress of studies in this field. Design/methodology/approach Because the present inquiry could be influenced and distorted by personal criteria and opinions, the authors have adopted precise criteria and guidelines. It could be said the present approach approximates a statistical methodology. Findings The findings of this paper include (1) The authors found 32 original definitions of information which sometimes current surveys have overlooked. (2) The authors found a relation between information theories and advances in information technology. (3) Overall, the authors found that researchers take account of a wide variety of perspectives yet overlook the notion of information as used by computing practitioners such as electronic engineers and software developers. Research limitations/implications The authors comment on some limitations of the procedure that was followed. Results 1 and 3 open up new possibilities for theoretical research in the information domain. Originality/value This is an attempt to conduct a bibliographical inquiry driven by objective and scientific criteria; its value lies in the fact that final report has not been influenced by personal choice or arbitrary viewpoints.

0.0016403055 = product of:
  0.024604581 = sum of:
    0.024604581 = weight(_text_:evaluation in 5040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024604581 = score(doc=5040,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13272417 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.18538132 = fieldWeight in 5040, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5040)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Series

Literary research, practice and evaluation; 9

0.0014671701 = product of:
  0.02200755 = sum of:
    0.02200755 = weight(_text_:software in 3407) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02200755 = score(doc=3407,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12552431 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.17532499 = fieldWeight in 3407, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3407)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Content

Introduction: Philosophy's Relevance in Computing and Information Science - Ruth Hagengruber and Uwe V.Riss Part I: Philosophy of Computing and Information 1 The Fourth Revolution in our Self-Understanding - Luciano Floridi -- 2 Information Transfer as a Metaphor - Jakob Krebs -- 3 With Aristotle towards a Differentiated Concept of Information? - Uwe Voigt -- 4 The Influence of Philosophy on the Understanding of Computing and Information - Klaus Fuchs-Kittowski -- Part II: Complexity and System Theory 5 The Emergence of Self-Conscious Systems: From Symbolic AI to Embodied Robotics - Klaus Mainzer -- 6 Artificial Intelligence as a New Metaphysical Project - Aziz F. Zambak Part III: Ontology 7 The Relevance of Philosophical Ontology to Information and Computer Science - Barry Smith -- 8 Ontology, its Origins and its Meaning in Information Science - Jens Kohne -- 9 Smart Questions: Steps towards an Ontology of Questions and Answers - Ludwig Jaskolla and Matthias Rugel Part IV: Knowledge Representation 10 Sophisticated Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Requires Philosophy - Selmer Bringsjord, Micah Clark and Joshua Taylor -- 11 On Frames and Theory-Elements of Structuralism Holger Andreas -- 12 Ontological Complexity and Human Culture David J. Saab and Frederico Fonseca Part V: Action Theory 13 Knowledge and Action between Abstraction and Concretion - Uwe V.Riss -- 14 Action-Directing Construction of Reality in Product Creation Using Social Software: Employing Philosophy to Solve Real-World Problems - Kai Holzweifiig and Jens Krüger -- 15 An Action-Theory-Based Treatment ofTemporal Individuals - Tillmann Pross -- 16 Four Rules for Classifying Social Entities - Ludger Jansen Part VI: Info-Computationalism 17 Info-Computationalism and Philosophical Aspects of Research in Information Sciences - Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic -- 18 Pancomputationalism: Theory or Metaphor ? - Vincent C. Mutter Part VII: Ethics 19 The Importance of the Sources of Professional Obligations - Francis C. Dane

0.0014041315 = product of:
  0.021061972 = sum of:
    0.021061972 = weight(_text_:web in 5097) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021061972 = score(doc=5097,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10326045 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.2039694 = fieldWeight in 5097, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5097)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

Previous research investigated how to leverage the new type of social data available on the web, e.g., tags, ratings and reviews, in recommending and personalizing information. However, previous works mainly focused on predicting ratings using collaborative filtering or quantifying personalized ranking quality in simulations. As a consequence, the effect of social information in user's information search and information-selection behavior remains elusive. The objective of our research is to investigate the effects of social information on users' interactive search and information-selection behavior. We present a computational method and a system implementation combining different graph overlays: social, personal and search-time user input that are visualized for the user to support interactive information search. We report on a controlled laboratory experiment, in which 24 users performed search tasks using three system variants with different graphs as overlays composed from the largest publicly available social content and review data from Yelp: personal preferences, tags combined with personal preferences, and tags and social ratings combined with personal preferences. Data comprising search logs, questionnaires, simulations, and eye-tracking recordings show that: 1) the search effectiveness is improved by using and visualizing the social rating information and the personal preference information as compared to content-based ranking. 2) The need to consult external information before selecting information is reduced by the presentation of the effects of different overlays on the search results. Search effectiveness improvements can be attributed to the use of social rating and personal preference overlays, which was also confirmed in a follow-up simulation study. With the proposed method we demonstrate that social information can be incorporated to the interactive search process by overlaying graphs representing different information sources. We show that the combination of social rating information and personal preference information improves search effectiveness and reduce the need to consult external information. Our method and findings can inform the design of interactive search systems that leverage the information available on the social web.

0.0012410887 = product of:
  0.01861633 = sum of:
    0.01861633 = weight(_text_:web in 3163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01861633 = score(doc=3163,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10326045 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 3163, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3163)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

Purpose Arts-informed, visual research was conducted to document the pictorial metaphors that appear among original drawings of information. The purpose of this paper is to report the diversity of these pictorial metaphors, delineate their formal qualities as drawings, and provide a fresh perspective on the concept of information. Design/methodology/approach The project utilized pre-existing iSquare drawings of information that were produced by iSchool graduate students during a draw-and-write activity. From a data set of 417 images, 125 of the strongest pictorial metaphors were identified and subjected to cognitive metaphor theory. Findings Overwhelmingly, the favored source domain for envisioning information was nature. The most common pictorial metaphors were: Earth, web, tree, light bulb, box, cloud, and fishing/mining, and each brings different qualities of information into focus. The drawings were often canonical versions of objects in the world, leading to arrays of pictorial metaphors marked by their similarity. Research limitations/implications Less than 30 percent of the data set qualified as pictorial metaphors, making them a minority strategy for representing information as an image. The process to identify and interpret pictorial metaphors was highly subjective. The arts-informed methodology generated tensions between artistic and social scientific paradigms. Practical implications The pictorial metaphors for information can enhance information science education and fortify professional identity among information professionals. Originality/value This is the first arts-informed, visual study of information that utilizes cognitive metaphor theory to explore the nature of information. It strengthens a sense of history, humanity, nature, and beauty in our understanding of information today, and contributes to metaphor research at large.

0.0012410887 = product of:
  0.01861633 = sum of:
    0.01861633 = weight(_text_:web in 5078) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01861633 = score(doc=5078,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10326045 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 5078, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5078)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

A clear line of argument can be set out to link the (passive) intellectual freedom rights offered by Article Nineteen of the United Nations' Universal Declaration on Human Rights, to a consequent responsibility on governments, professionals and civil society activists for the (active) creation of suitable conditions for the effective exercise of intellectual freedom. Commentators on media in society and socially responsible computing are also increasingly drawing conclusions of this kind and stressing the importance of Media Literacy and Computer Literacy. This line of argument naturally directs attention towards the rationale currently offered for Information Literacy as a focus of professional activity. Whilst there are many elaborately worked-out programmes for Information Literacy instruction, these have so far been largely derived from practical perceptions of need. However, broad statements such as the Prague Declaration 'Towards an Information Literate Society' of 2003 and the Alexandria Proclamation of 2005 can be seen as beginning to point towards a rationale for Information Literacy activities rooted in human rights, Article Nineteen in particular. The contention is that starting from a human rights perspective leads towards a strong, inclusive interpretation of Information Literacy. This subsumes Media Literacy, Computer Literacy, Web Literacy and, to a considerable extent, Civic Literacy into a model that serves human needs rather than the established priorities of information professionals. The value of this approach for both practice and research is stressed.

0.0011431752 = product of:
  0.017147627 = sum of:
    0.017147627 = product of:
      0.034295253 = sum of:
        0.034295253 = weight(_text_:22 in 300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034295253 = score(doc=300,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.110801086 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031640913 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 300, 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=300)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Date

12. 7.2011 18:22:52

0.0010002783 = product of:
  0.015004174 = sum of:
    0.015004174 = product of:
      0.030008348 = sum of:
        0.030008348 = weight(_text_:22 in 1296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030008348 = score(doc=1296,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.110801086 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031640913 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1296, 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=1296)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Date

16. 6.2014 19:22:57

8.573814E-4 = product of:
  0.01286072 = sum of:
    0.01286072 = product of:
      0.02572144 = sum of:
        0.02572144 = weight(_text_:22 in 73) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02572144 = score(doc=73,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.110801086 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031640913 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 73, 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=73)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Date

27.12.2020 16:56:22

7.1448454E-4 = product of:
  0.010717267 = sum of:
    0.010717267 = product of:
      0.021434534 = sum of:
        0.021434534 = weight(_text_:22 in 1344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021434534 = score(doc=1344,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.110801086 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031640913 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1344, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1344)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Date

22. 8.2014 16:55:39

7.1448454E-4 = product of:
  0.010717267 = sum of:
    0.010717267 = product of:
      0.021434534 = sum of:
        0.021434534 = weight(_text_:22 in 4463) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021434534 = score(doc=4463,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.110801086 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031640913 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4463, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4463)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Date

29. 9.2018 11:22:09

7.1448454E-4 = product of:
  0.010717267 = sum of:
    0.010717267 = product of:
      0.021434534 = sum of:
        0.021434534 = weight(_text_:22 in 5077) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021434534 = score(doc=5077,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.110801086 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031640913 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5077, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5077)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Date

16. 3.2019 17:32:22