Search (68 results, page 2 of 4)

0.016315361 = product of:
  0.0815768 = sum of:
    0.0815768 = weight(_text_:policy in 918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0815768 = score(doc=918,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22950763 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.35544267 = fieldWeight in 918, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=918)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Examines how societal changes influence the involvement of libraries as resources in the learning processes of adults. Libraries are instruments for socialisation, so that when ideologies change they influence libraries. The changes are apparent not only in acquisition policy but also in registration and retrieval. Examines the Swedish classification system as an example of a system with a humanistic signature based on idealism, and Marxist systems based on materialism in former East block countries and China. With computerised information systems, the ideal of international information dissemination without borders, available to all has materialised. The resulting knowledge organisation reflect post-modern ideas. Modern databases using descriptors exemplify the fragmentation which the new information technology creates. Each user shapes a personal view with the help of a chosen search logic and a concept combination. Asks what effect this will have on knowledge organisation, development of cultural traditions and local librarians as agents of change

0.016315361 = product of:
  0.0815768 = sum of:
    0.0815768 = weight(_text_:policy in 703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0815768 = score(doc=703,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22950763 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.35544267 = fieldWeight in 703, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=703)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This paper introduces the concept of 'social quality' as a measure of quality-of-life and it sets out a framework for identifying social indicators of the relationship between information and social quality. Social quality has four elements: socio - economic security, social inclusion, social cohesion and empowerment. Illustrative indicators are identified at both national (Demos) and community (Ethnos) level for four different aspects of each social quality element: input, process, outcome and impact. Then the distribution of information and social quality between Demos and Ethnos levels is investigated. It is concluded that usable indicators of all aspects of each element of social quality can be identified and that analysis of informational social quality at Demos and Ethnos level can add to knowledge about information provision and policy, particularly with reference to minority and marginal communities.

0.016315361 = product of:
  0.0815768 = sum of:
    0.0815768 = weight(_text_:policy in 5713) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0815768 = score(doc=5713,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22950763 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.35544267 = fieldWeight in 5713, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5713)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to draw on the philosophy of information, specifically the work of Luciano Floridi, to argue that digital civics must fully comprehend the implications of the digital environment, and consequently an informational ontology, to deliver to students an education that will prepare them for full participation as citizens in the infosphere. Design/methodology/approach Introducing this philosophy for use in education, the research discusses the ethical implications of ontological change in the digital age; informational organisms and their interconnectivity; and concepts of agency, both organic and artificial in digitally mediated civic interactions and civic education. Findings With the provision of a structural framework rooted in the philosophy of information, robust mechanisms for civics initiatives can be enacted. Originality/value The paper allows policy makers and practitioners to formulate healthy responses to digital age challenges in civics and civics education.

0.014994288 = product of:
  0.07497144 = sum of:
    0.07497144 = weight(_text_:great in 1991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07497144 = score(doc=1991,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24101958 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.31105953 = fieldWeight in 1991, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1991)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This book tells the story of Emanuel Goldberg, a chemist, inventor, and industrialist who contributed to almost every aspect of imaging technology in the first half of the 20th century. An incredible story emerges as Buckland unearths forgotten documents and rogue citations to show that Goldberg created the first desktop search engine, developed microdot technology, and designed the famous Contax 35 mm camera. It is a fascinating tribute to a great mind and a crucial period in the history of information science and technology.

0.014994288 = product of:
  0.07497144 = sum of:
    0.07497144 = weight(_text_:great in 3394) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07497144 = score(doc=3394,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24101958 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.31105953 = fieldWeight in 3394, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3394)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

To oversimplify, science has two fundamental ways of changing our understanding. One may be called extrovert, or about the world, and the other introvert, or about ourselves. Three scientific revolutions in the past had great impact both extrovertly and introvertly. In changing our understanding of the external world, they also modified our conception of who we are, that is, our self-understanding. The story is well known, so I shall recount it rather quickly. We used to think that we were at the centre of the universe, nicely placed there by a creator God. It was a most comfortable and reassuring position to hold. In 1543, Nicolaus Copernicus published his treatise on the movements of planets around the sun. It was entitled On the Revolutions of Celestial Bodies (De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium). Copernicus probably did not mean to start a 'revolution' in our self-understanding as well. Nonetheless, his heliocentric cosmology forever displaced the earth from the centre of the universe and made us reconsider, quite literally, our own place and role in it. It caused such a profound change in our views of the universe that the word 'revolution' begun to be associated with radical scientific transformation. We have been dealing with the consequences of the Copernican revolution since its occurrence. Indeed, it is often remarked that one of the significant achievements of our space explorations has been a matter of external and comprehensive reflection on our human condition.

0.013596135 = product of:
  0.06798068 = sum of:
    0.06798068 = weight(_text_:policy in 3260) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06798068 = score(doc=3260,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22950763 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.29620224 = fieldWeight in 3260, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3260)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

At a time when competition for scarce resources is tougher than ever, policy makers, decision makers, and information specialists alike, can no longer be satisfied with general assumptions which describe the role of information in the achievement of individual, organizational and societal goals as being 'a critical resource'. An international project called 'Impact of the information on development' is carried out by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC, Canada) with a view to test suitable apporaches for the assessment of the benefits derived from all types of information activities in the devloping countries. This effort aims at assembling more solid evidence of the benefits associated with information. Presents the rationale for the project and its progress to date. Discusses the main features of the suggested problem and its progress to date. Discusses the main features of the suggested problem and constituency centred approach to impact assessment. Future developments,in the project call for the establishment of a decentralized research network. While the IDRC project has to be focused exclusively on developing countries, the issues raised are infact of universal significance. On the basis of the outcome of the project so far, attempts at presenting a review, from a personal perspective, of the many research questions related to the concepts of information and development, the impact of information and the methodological and practical constraints in its assessment

0.013596135 = product of:
  0.06798068 = sum of:
    0.06798068 = weight(_text_:policy in 3003) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06798068 = score(doc=3003,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22950763 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.29620224 = fieldWeight in 3003, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3003)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The article discusses the relationship between the concepts of information and IT literacy, both being labeled as «the ultimate literacy in the information society». While IT literacy is mainly defined as a skill-based literacy, information literacy embraces a whole conglomerate of values, attitudes, skills, knowledge and perspectives directed towards enabling critical thinking, self-directed learning and the responsible consume of information, necessary for intelligent existence in the information age. Through a survey, the authors will explore personal meanings and perceptions of information literacy among graduate LIS students. For this population, information literacy is a central issue since it is a prerequisite for academic success, but also because information literacy will be a pervasive aspect of every day work in their future professions. A comparison with an earlier study showed how the information literacy conception has developed, from a more technological, tool-based approach to a concept based approach. The structure of the earlier study, as well as the result of the actual study, will be analyzed in the light of the contemporary features of Croatia's information policy, which is mainly directed towards the technical information infrastructure but not sufficient to let citizens use the benefits of information society.

0.010602563 = product of:
  0.053012814 = sum of:
    0.053012814 = weight(_text_:great in 1182) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053012814 = score(doc=1182,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.24101958 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.21995232 = fieldWeight in 1182, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1182)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Although the Alexandria Digital Library provides far richer data than the TGN (5.9 vs. 1.3 million names), its added size lowers, rather than increases, the accuracy of most geographic name identification systems for historical documents: most of the extra 4.6 million names cover low frequency entities that rarely occur in any particular corpus. The TGN is sufficiently comprehensive to provide quite enough noise: we find place names that are used over and over (there are almost one hundred Washingtons) and semantically ambiguous (e.g., is Washington a person or a place?). Comprehensive knowledge sources emphasize recall but lower precision. We need data with which to determine which "Tribune" or "John Brown" a particular passage denotes. Secondly and paradoxically, our reference works may not be comprehensive enough. Human actors come and go over time. Organizations appear and vanish. Even places can change their names or vanish. The TGN does associate the obsolete name Siam with the nation of Thailand (tgn,1000142) - but also with towns named Siam in Iowa (tgn,2035651), Tennessee (tgn,2101519), and Ohio (tgn,2662003). Prussia appears but as a general region (tgn,7016786), with no indication when or if it was a sovereign nation. And if places do point to the same object over time, that object may have very different significance over time: in the foundational works of Western historiography, Herodotus reminds us that the great cities of the past may be small today, and the small cities of today great tomorrow (Hdt. 1.5), while Thucydides stresses that we cannot estimate the past significance of a place by its appearance today (Thuc. 1.10). In other words, we need to know the population figures for the various Washingtons in 1870 if we are analyzing documents from 1870. The foundations have been laid for reference works that provide machine actionable information about entities at particular times in history. The Alexandria Digital Library Gazetteer Content Standard8 represents a sophisticated framework with which to create such resources: places can be associated with temporal information about their foundation (e.g., Washington, DC, founded on 16 July 1790), changes in names for the same location (e.g., Saint Petersburg to Leningrad and back again), population figures at various times and similar historically contingent data. But if we have the software and the data structures, we do not yet have substantial amounts of historical content such as plentiful digital gazetteers, encyclopedias, lexica, grammars and other reference works to illustrate many periods and, even if we do, those resources may not be in a useful form: raw OCR output of a complex lexicon or gazetteer may have so many errors and have captured so little of the underlying structure that the digital resource is useless as a knowledge base. Put another way, human beings are still much better at reading and interpreting the contents of page images than machines. While people, places, and dates are probably the most important core entities, we will find a growing set of objects that we need to identify and track across collections, and each of these categories of objects will require its own knowledge sources. The following section enumerates and briefly describes some existing categories of documents that we need to mine for knowledge. This brief survey focuses on the format of print sources (e.g., highly structured textual "database" vs. unstructured text) to illustrate some of the challenges involved in converting our published knowledge into semantically annotated, machine actionable form.

0.009278951 = product of:
  0.046394754 = sum of:
    0.046394754 = product of:
      0.09278951 = sum of:
        0.09278951 = weight(_text_:22 in 4368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09278951 = score(doc=4368,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4368, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4368)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

13. 7.2008 19:22:28

0.008157681 = product of:
  0.0407884 = sum of:
    0.0407884 = weight(_text_:policy in 5079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0407884 = score(doc=5079,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22950763 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.17772134 = fieldWeight in 5079, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=5079)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Discussions about the concept of information in other disciplines are very important for IS because many theories and approaches in IS have their origins elsewhere (see the section "Information as an Interdisciplinary Concept" in this chapter). The epistemological concept of information brings into play nonhuman information processes, particularly in physics and biology. And vice versa: the psychic and sociological processes of selection and interpretation may be considered using objective parameters, leaving aside the semantic dimension, or more precisely, by considering objective or situational parameters of interpretation. This concept can be illustrated also in physical terms with regard to release mechanisms, as we suggest. Our overview of the concept of information in the natural sciences as well as in the humanities and social sciences cannot hope to be comprehensive. In most cases, we can refer only to fragments of theories. However, the reader may wish to follow the leads provided in the bibliography. Readers interested primarily in information science may derive most benefit from the section an "Information in Information Science," in which we offer a detailed explanation of diverse views and theories of information within our field; supplementing the recent ARIST chapter by Cornelius (2002). We show that the introduction of the concept of information circa 1950 to the domain of special librarianship and documentation has in itself had serious consequences for the types of knowledge and theories developed in our field. The important question is not only what meaning we give the term in IS, but also how it relates to other basic terms, such as documents, texts, and knowledge. Starting with an objectivist view from the world of information theory and cybernetics, information science has turned to the phenomena of relevance and interpretation as basic aspects of the concept of information. This change is in no way a turn to a subjectivist theory, but an appraisal of different perspectives that may determine in a particular context what is being considered as informative, be it a "thing" (Buckland, 1991b) or a document. Different concepts of information within information science reflect tensions between a subjective and an objective approach. The concept of interpretation or selection may be considered to be the bridge between these two poles. It is important, however, to consider the different professions involved with the interpretation and selection of knowledge. The most important thing in IS (as in information policy) is to consider information as a constitutive forte in society and, thus, recognize the teleological nature of information systems and services (Braman, 1989).

0.008119082 = product of:
  0.04059541 = sum of:
    0.04059541 = product of:
      0.08119082 = sum of:
        0.08119082 = weight(_text_:22 in 5772) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08119082 = score(doc=5772,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 5772, 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=5772)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Information processing and management. 22(1986) no.5, S.373-383

0.008035808 = product of:
  0.040179037 = sum of:
    0.040179037 = product of:
      0.08035807 = sum of:
        0.08035807 = weight(_text_:22 in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08035807 = score(doc=136,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.536106 = fieldWeight in 136, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=136)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 2.2007 18:56:23
22. 2.2007 19:22:13

0.0067980676 = product of:
  0.03399034 = sum of:
    0.03399034 = weight(_text_:policy in 3686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03399034 = score(doc=3686,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22950763 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.14810112 = fieldWeight in 3686, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3686)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Footnote

Lastly, chapter 10 considers possible future directions of the information literacy movement. The authors conclude "Our ability to be information literate depends an our willingness to be lifelong learners as we are challenged to master new, and as yet unknown, technologies that will surely alter the landscape of information in the future" (p. 177). Following the book's 10 chapters are a number of appendices that present information literacy standards and definitions, a timeline of the evolution of the information literacy movement, and a number of related bibliographies. Lead author Eisenberg is perhaps best known as the co-creator, with Bob Berkowitz, of the Big 6, an information literacy model. The model includes six components: Task Definition, Information Seeking Strategies, Location and Access, Use of Information, Synthesis, and Evaluation (Eisenberg, 2003). Throughout the book, Eisenberg and his co-authors show how the Big 6 model can be used to teach information literacy. For example, in chapter nine, "Technology and Information Literacy," they lay out each of the six model components, providing specific technological skills benchmarks for each, such as "Know the roles and computer expertise of the people working in the school library media center and elsewhere who might provide information or assistance" under step 3, "Location and Access" (p. 160). The many detailed descriptions of information literacy policies and programs that appear throughout the book make it most useful for educators, administrators, and policy makers involved in the teaching, planning, and development of information literacy programs, standards, and policies. Overall, this newly revised volume stands as one of the most comprehensive single available sources from which to begin a detailed investigation of the concept of information literacy."

0.0057993443 = product of:
  0.02899672 = sum of:
    0.02899672 = product of:
      0.05799344 = sum of:
        0.05799344 = weight(_text_:22 in 5735) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05799344 = score(doc=5735,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5735, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5735)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Managing information. 3(1996) no.6, S.22-23

0.0057993443 = product of:
  0.02899672 = sum of:
    0.02899672 = product of:
      0.05799344 = sum of:
        0.05799344 = weight(_text_:22 in 1201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05799344 = score(doc=1201,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1201, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1201)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

15. 7.2002 14:22:55

0.0057993443 = product of:
  0.02899672 = sum of:
    0.02899672 = product of:
      0.05799344 = sum of:
        0.05799344 = weight(_text_:22 in 2277) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05799344 = score(doc=2277,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2277, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2277)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

31. 7.2001 20:22:57

0.0057993443 = product of:
  0.02899672 = sum of:
    0.02899672 = product of:
      0.05799344 = sum of:
        0.05799344 = weight(_text_:22 in 1085) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05799344 = score(doc=1085,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1085, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1085)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

18. 8.2022 19:22:57

0.005741058 = product of:
  0.02870529 = sum of:
    0.02870529 = product of:
      0.05741058 = sum of:
        0.05741058 = weight(_text_:22 in 2746) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05741058 = score(doc=2746,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 2746, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2746)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 3.2009 18:15:22

0.0046394756 = product of:
  0.023197377 = sum of:
    0.023197377 = product of:
      0.046394754 = sum of:
        0.046394754 = weight(_text_:22 in 3558) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046394754 = score(doc=3558,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3558, 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=3558)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

7. 1.1996 22:47:52

0.0046394756 = product of:
  0.023197377 = sum of:
    0.023197377 = product of:
      0.046394754 = sum of:
        0.046394754 = weight(_text_:22 in 3901) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046394754 = score(doc=3901,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3901, 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=3901)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

11. 4.1996 14:22:40