Search (56 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"OPAC"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Whitney , C.; Schiff, L.: ¬The Melvyl Recommender Project : developing library recommendation services (2006) 0.12 
    0.117629126 = product of:
  0.15683883 = sum of:
    0.051698197 = weight(_text_:digital in 1173) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051698197 = score(doc=1173,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.26148933 = fieldWeight in 1173, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1173)
    0.045942668 = weight(_text_:library in 1173) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045942668 = score(doc=1173,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 1173, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1173)
    0.059197973 = product of:
      0.11839595 = sum of:
        0.11839595 = weight(_text_:project in 1173) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11839595 = score(doc=1173,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.5596283 = fieldWeight in 1173, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1173)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    Popular commercial on-line services such as Google, e-Bay, Amazon, and Netflix have evolved quickly over the last decade to help people find what they want, developing information retrieval strategies such as usefully ranked results, spelling correction, and recommender systems. Online library catalogs (OPACs), in contrast, have changed little and are notoriously difficult for patrons to use (University of California Libraries, 2005). Over the past year (June 2005 to the present), the Melvyl Recommender Project (California Digital Library, 2005) has been exploring methods and feasibility of closing the gap between features that library patrons want and have come to expect from information retrieval systems and what libraries are currently equipped to deliver. The project team conducted exploratory work in five topic areas: relevance ranking, auto-correction, use of a text-based discovery system, user interface strategies, and recommending. This article focuses specifically on the recommending portion of the project and potential extensions to that work.
  2. Golderman, G.M.; Connolly, B.: Between the book covers : going beyond OPAC keyword searching with the deep linking capabilities of Google Scholar and Google Book Search (2004/05) 0.06 
    0.059401147 = product of:
  0.07920153 = sum of:
    0.043081827 = weight(_text_:digital in 731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043081827 = score(doc=731,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.21790776 = fieldWeight in 731, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=731)
    0.01914278 = weight(_text_:library in 731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01914278 = score(doc=731,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 731, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=731)
    0.016976917 = product of:
      0.033953834 = sum of:
        0.033953834 = weight(_text_:22 in 731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033953834 = score(doc=731,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 731, 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=731)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    One finding of the 2006 OCLC study of College Students' Perceptions of Libraries and Information Resources was that students expressed equal levels of trust in libraries and search engines when it came to meeting their information needs in a way that they felt was authoritative. Seeking to incorporate this insight into our own instructional methodology, Schaffer Library at Union College has attempted to engineer a shift from Google to Google Scholar among our student users by representing Scholar as a viable adjunct to the catalog and to snore traditional electronic resources. By attempting to engage student researchers on their own terms, we have discovered that most of them react enthusiastically to the revelation that the Google they think they know so well is, it turns out, a multifaceted resource that is capable of delivering the sort of scholarly information that will meet with their professors' approval. Specifically, this article focuses on the fact that many Google Scholar searches link hack to our own Web catalog where they identify useful book titles that direct OPAC keyword searches have missed.
    Date
    2.12.2007 19:39:22
    Footnote
    Beitrag eines Themenheftes "Profiles in digital information"
  3. Poo, D.C.C.; Khoo, C.S.G.: Online Catalog Subject Searching (2009) 0.06 
    0.05644991 = product of:
  0.11289982 = sum of:
    0.073112294 = weight(_text_:digital in 3851) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.073112294 = score(doc=3851,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.36980176 = fieldWeight in 3851, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3851)
    0.039787523 = weight(_text_:library in 3851) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039787523 = score(doc=3851,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.30190483 = fieldWeight in 3851, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3851)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The Online Public Access Catalog (OPAC) is an information retrieval system characterized by short bibliographic records, mainly of books, journals, and audiovisual materials available in a particular library. This, coupled with a Boolean search interface and a heterogeneous user population with diverse needs, presents special problems for subject searching by end users. To perform effective subject searching in the OPAC system requires a wide range of knowledge and skills. Various approaches to improving the OPAC design for subject searching have been proposed and are reviewed in this entry. The trend toward Web-based OPAC interfaces and the developments in Internet and digital library technologies present fresh opportunities for enhancing the effectiveness of the OPAC system for subject searching.
    Content
    Digital unter: http://dx.doi.org/10.1081/E-ELIS3-120008863. Vgl.: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/book/10.1081/E-ELIS3.
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates
  4. Hajdu Barát, A.: Usability and the user interfaces of classical information retrieval languages (2006) 0.06 
    0.05604878 = product of:
  0.11209756 = sum of:
    0.085297674 = weight(_text_:digital in 232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.085297674 = score(doc=232,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.43143538 = fieldWeight in 232, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=232)
    0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026799891 = score(doc=232,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 232, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=232)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    This paper examines some traditional information searching methods and their role in Hungarian OPACs. What challenges are there in the digital and online environment? How do users work with them and do they give users satisfactory results? What kinds of techniques are users employing? In this paper I examine the user interfaces of UDC, thesauri, subject headings etc. in the Hungarian library. The key question of the paper is whether a universal system or local solutions is the best approach for searching in the digital environment.
  5. Powell, C.K.: OPAC integration in the era of mass digitization : the MBooks experience (2008) 0.06 
    0.05604878 = product of:
  0.11209756 = sum of:
    0.085297674 = weight(_text_:digital in 2541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.085297674 = score(doc=2541,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.43143538 = fieldWeight in 2541, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2541)
    0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 2541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026799891 = score(doc=2541,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 2541, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2541)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the OPAC integration in the University of Michigan's local implementation of materials digitized in the partnership with Google. Design/methodology/approach - The paper provides a discussion of different strategies used in integrating metadata with digital resources and presenting the digital objects to the user in the OPAC. Findings - The paper finds that methods that had served in smaller digitization projects require more automation and error reduction processes in an undertaking of this scale. Increased integration with the OPAC is one approach. Originality/value - Michigan is the first of the Google partners to mount their materials themselves and others involved in mass digitization may be interested in the experience.
    Source
    Library hi tech. 26(2008) no.1, S.24-32
  6. Butterfield, K.: Online Public Access Catalogs (OPACs) (2009) 0.05 
    0.051531833 = product of:
  0.103063665 = sum of:
    0.051698197 = weight(_text_:digital in 4694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051698197 = score(doc=4694,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.26148933 = fieldWeight in 4694, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4694)
    0.05136547 = weight(_text_:library in 4694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05136547 = score(doc=4694,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.38975742 = fieldWeight in 4694, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4694)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    In one form or another, from a mental list in the mind of the librarian, to book catalogs, card indexes, and online information retrieval systems, some type of meta access has existed to guide library users through library collections. Over the last 40 years, these constructs of paper and wood evolved into Online Public Access Catalogs (OPACs). When the catalog shifted out of drawers and off of three by five cards to become a networked, universally accessible entity, its role in the library shifted as well. The OPAC competes with the World Wide Web, metadata registries, search engines, and more sophisticated database structures for attention. Amongst this assortment of access mechanisms, the purpose of the OPAC has become muddled. The OPAC has now become one information source among many and one of a number of portals for accessing library collections and beyond.
    Content
    Digital unter: http://dx.doi.org/10.1081/E-ELIS3-120045435. Vgl.: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/book/10.1081/E-ELIS3.
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates
  7. Beccaria, M.; Scott, D.: Fac-Back-OPAC : an open source interface to your library system (2007) 0.04 
    0.04470687 = product of:
  0.08941374 = sum of:
    0.06564606 = weight(_text_:library in 2207) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06564606 = score(doc=2207,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.4981175 = fieldWeight in 2207, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2207)
    0.023767682 = product of:
      0.047535364 = sum of:
        0.047535364 = weight(_text_:22 in 2207) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047535364 = score(doc=2207,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2207, 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=2207)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Fac-Back-OPAC is a faceted back­ up OPAC. This advanced catalog offers features that compare favorably with the traditional catalogs for today's library systems. Fac-Back-OPAC represents the convergence of two prominent trends in library tools: the decoupling of discovery tools from the traditional integrated library system and the use of readily available open source components to rapidly produce leading-edge technology for meeting patron and library needs. Built on code that was originally developed by Casey Durfee in February 2007, Fac-Back-OPAC is available for no cost under an open source license to any library that wants to offer an advanced search interface or a backup catalog for its patrons.
    Date
    17. 8.2008 11:22:47
  8. Hutchinson, H.B.; Druin, A.; Bederson, B.B.: Supporting elementary-age children's searching and browsing : design and evaluation using the international children's digital library (2007) 0.04 
    0.04399944 = product of:
  0.08799888 = sum of:
    0.060926907 = weight(_text_:digital in 585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060926907 = score(doc=585,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.3081681 = fieldWeight in 585, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=585)
    0.027071979 = weight(_text_:library in 585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027071979 = score(doc=585,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.2054202 = fieldWeight in 585, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=585)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Elementary-age children (ages 6-11) are among the largest user groups of computers and the Internet. Therefore, it is important to design searching and browsing tools that support them. However, many interfaces for children do not consider their skills and preferences. Children are capable of creating Boolean queries using category browsers, but have difficulty with the hierarchies used in many category-browsing interfaces because different branches of the hierarchy must be navigated sequentially and top-level categories are often too abstract for them to understand. Based on previous research, the authors believe using a flat category structure, where only leaf-level categories are available and can be viewed simultaneously, might better support children. However, this design introduces many more items on the screen and the need for paging or scrolling, all potential usability problems. To evaluate these tradeoffs, the authors conducted two studies with children searching and browsing using two types of category browsers in the International Children's Digital Library. Their results suggest that a flat, simultaneous interface provides advantages over a hierarchical, sequential interface for children in both Boolean searching and casual browsing. These results add to our understanding of children's searching and browsing skills and preferences, and possibly serve as guidelines for other children's interface designers.
  9. Markey, K.: ¬The online library catalog : paradise lost and paradise regained? (2007) 0.04 
    0.040147644 = product of:
  0.08029529 = sum of:
    0.030157281 = weight(_text_:digital in 1172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030157281 = score(doc=1172,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.15253544 = fieldWeight in 1172, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1172)
    0.050138008 = weight(_text_:library in 1172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050138008 = score(doc=1172,freq=28.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.38044354 = fieldWeight in 1172, product of:
          5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
            28.0 = termFreq=28.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1172)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    This think piece tells why the online library catalog fell from grace and why new directions pertaining to cataloging simplification and primary sources will not attract people back to the online catalog. It proposes an alternative direction that has greater likelihood of regaining the online catalog's lofty status and longtime users. Such a direction will require paradigm shifts in library cataloging and in the design and development of online library catalogs that heed catalog users' longtime demands for improvements to the searching experience. Our failure to respond accordingly may permanently exile scholarly and scientific information to a netherworld where no one searches while less reliable, accurate, and objective sources of information thrive in a paradise where people prefer to search for information.
    The impetus for this essay is the library community's uncertainty regarding the present and future direction of the library catalog in the era of Google and mass digitization projects. The uncertainty is evident at the highest levels. Deanna Marcum, Associate Librarian for Library Services at the Library of Congress (LC), is struck by undergraduate students who favor digital resources over the online library catalog because such resources are available at anytime and from anywhere (Marcum, 2006). She suggests that "the detailed attention that we have been paying to descriptive cataloging may no longer be justified ... retooled catalogers could give more time to authority control, subject analysis, [and] resource identification and evaluation" (Marcum, 2006, 8). In an abrupt about-face, LC terminated series added entries in cataloging records, one of the few subject-rich fields in such records (Cataloging Policy and Support Office, 2006). Mann (2006b) and Schniderman (2006) cite evidence of LC's prevailing viewpoint in favor of simplifying cataloging at the expense of subject cataloging. LC commissioned Karen Calhoun (2006) to prepare a report on "revitalizing" the online library catalog. Calhoun's directive is clear: divert resources from cataloging mass-produced formats (e.g., books) to cataloging the unique primary sources (e.g., archives, special collections, teaching objects, research by-products). She sums up her rationale for such a directive, "The existing local catalog's market position has eroded to the point where there is real concern for its ability to weather the competition for information seekers' attention" (p. 10). At the University of California Libraries (2005), a task force's recommendations parallel those in Calhoun report especially regarding the elimination of subject headings in favor of automatically generated metadata. Contemplating these events prompted me to revisit the glorious past of the online library catalog. For a decade and a half beginning in the early 1980s, the online library catalog was the jewel in the crown when people eagerly queued at its terminals to find information written by the world's experts. I despair how eagerly people now embrace Google because of the suspect provenance of the information Google retrieves. Long ago, we could have added more value to the online library catalog but the only thing we changed was the catalog's medium. Our failure to act back then cost the online catalog the crown. Now that the era of mass digitization has begun, we have a second chance at redesigning the online library catalog, getting it right, coaxing back old users, and attracting new ones. Let's revisit the past, reconsidering missed opportunities, reassessing their merits, combining them with new directions, making bold decisions and acting decisively on them.
  10. Moulaison, H.L.: OPAC queries at a medium-sized academic library : a transaction log analysis (2008) 0.04 
    0.03509323 = product of:
  0.07018646 = sum of:
    0.04641878 = weight(_text_:library in 3599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04641878 = score(doc=3599,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.3522223 = fieldWeight in 3599, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3599)
    0.023767682 = product of:
      0.047535364 = sum of:
        0.047535364 = weight(_text_:22 in 3599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047535364 = score(doc=3599,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3599, 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=3599)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Patron queries at a four-year comprehensive college's online public access catalog were examined via transaction logs from March 2007. Three representative days were isolated for a more detailed examination of search characteristics. The results show that library users employed an average of one to three terms in a search, did not use Boolean operators, and made use of limits one-tenth of the time. Failed queries remained problematic, as a full one-third of searches resulted in zero hits. Implications and recommendations for improvements in the online public access catalog are discussed.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 52(2008) no.4, S.230-237
  11. Lam, V.-T.: Enhancing subject access to monographs in Online Public Access Catalogs : table of contents added to bibliographic records (2000) 0.03 
    0.030079912 = product of:
  0.060159825 = sum of:
    0.039787523 = weight(_text_:library in 1187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039787523 = score(doc=1187,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.30190483 = fieldWeight in 1187, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1187)
    0.0203723 = product of:
      0.0407446 = sum of:
        0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 1187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0407446 = score(doc=1187,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1187, 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=1187)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Subject access to monographs through online public access catalogs (OPACs) has always been a major concern for large research and/or academic libraries. Academic library practice of providing subject access to monographs has proven inadequate, especially in the case of composite works. Many techniques have been proposed to enhance subject treatment of monographs in OPACs. This article briefly reviews these efforts in the past and presents the case of adding Tables of Contents as one of the Most useful and probably also one of the Most costeffective ways of improving subject access to Monographs in an academic environment.
    Date
    22. 9.1997 19:16:05
    Imprint
    Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science
    Source
    Saving the time of the library user through subject access innovation: Papers in honor of Pauline Atherton Cochrane. Ed.: W.J. Wheeler
  12. Li, Y.-O.; Leung, S.W.: Computer cataloging of electronic Journals in unstable Aggregator Databases the Hong Kong Baptist University Library experience (2001) 0.03 
    0.030079912 = product of:
  0.060159825 = sum of:
    0.039787523 = weight(_text_:library in 164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039787523 = score(doc=164,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.30190483 = fieldWeight in 164, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=164)
    0.0203723 = product of:
      0.0407446 = sum of:
        0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0407446 = score(doc=164,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 164, 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=164)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The growth and use of aggregator databases have presented libraries with both new opportunities for collection enhancement and new challenges of bibliographic control. How to integrate full-text electronic journal titles in unstable aggregator databases into a library's OPAC (Online Public Access Catalog) has been an especially taxing matter for libraries. This article describes the Hong Kong Baptist University Library's effort to integrate full-text electronic journal titles from three large, unstable aggregator databases into its INNOPAC-based OPAC. The library's electronic journal computer program (EJCOP) does this in a simple, direct, consistent, and accurate manner and addresses some of the issues elaborated in the January 2000 Final Report of the Task Group on Journals in Aggregator Databases of the Standing Committee on Automation of the Library of Congress Program for Cooperative Cataloging.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 45(2001) no.4, S.198-211
  13. Horn, M.E.: "Garbage" in, "refuse and refuse disposal" out : making the most of the subject authority file in the OPAC (2002) 0.03 
    0.025283787 = product of:
  0.050567575 = sum of:
    0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 156) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026799891 = score(doc=156,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 156, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=156)
    0.023767682 = product of:
      0.047535364 = sum of:
        0.047535364 = weight(_text_:22 in 156) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047535364 = score(doc=156,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 156, 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=156)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 46(2002) no.3, S.111-
  14. Khoo, C.S.G.; Wan, K.-W.: ¬A simple relevancy-ranking strategy for an interface to Boolean OPACs (2004) 0.02 
    0.019341866 = product of:
  0.03868373 = sum of:
    0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 2509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026799891 = score(doc=2509,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 2509, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2509)
    0.011883841 = product of:
      0.023767682 = sum of:
        0.023767682 = weight(_text_:22 in 2509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023767682 = score(doc=2509,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 2509, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2509)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Content
    "Most Web search engines accept natural language queries, perform some kind of fuzzy matching and produce ranked output, displaying first the documents that are most likely to be relevant. On the other hand, most library online public access catalogs (OPACs) an the Web are still Boolean retrieval systems that perform exact matching, and require users to express their search requests precisely in a Boolean search language and to refine their search statements to improve the search results. It is well-documented that users have difficulty searching Boolean OPACs effectively (e.g. Borgman, 1996; Ensor, 1992; Wallace, 1993). One approach to making OPACs easier to use is to develop a natural language search interface that acts as a middleware between the user's Web browser and the OPAC system. The search interface can accept a natural language query from the user and reformulate it as a series of Boolean search statements that are then submitted to the OPAC. The records retrieved by the OPAC are ranked by the search interface before forwarding them to the user's Web browser. The user, then, does not need to interact directly with the Boolean OPAC but with the natural language search interface or search intermediary. The search interface interacts with the OPAC system an the user's behalf. The advantage of this approach is that no modification to the OPAC or library system is required. Furthermore, the search interface can access multiple OPACs, acting as a meta search engine, and integrate search results from various OPACs before sending them to the user. The search interface needs to incorporate a method for converting the user's natural language query into a series of Boolean search statements, and for ranking the OPAC records retrieved. The purpose of this study was to develop a relevancyranking algorithm for a search interface to Boolean OPAC systems. This is part of an on-going effort to develop a knowledge-based search interface to OPACs called the E-Referencer (Khoo et al., 1998, 1999; Poo et al., 2000). E-Referencer v. 2 that has been implemented applies a repertoire of initial search strategies and reformulation strategies to retrieve records from OPACs using the Z39.50 protocol, and also assists users in mapping query keywords to the Library of Congress subject headings."
    Source
    Electronic library. 22(2004) no.2, S.112-120
  15. Harmsen, B.: Adding value to Web-OPACs (2000) 0.02 
    0.015314223 = product of:
  0.061256893 = sum of:
    0.061256893 = weight(_text_:library in 4672) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.061256893 = score(doc=4672,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.46481284 = fieldWeight in 4672, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4672)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Electronic library. 18(2000) no.2, S.109-113
  16. Thomas, D.H.: ¬The effect of interface design on item selection in an online catalog (2001) 0.01 
    0.014447878 = product of:
  0.028895756 = sum of:
    0.015314223 = weight(_text_:library in 168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015314223 = score(doc=168,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.11620321 = fieldWeight in 168, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=168)
    0.013581533 = product of:
      0.027163066 = sum of:
        0.027163066 = weight(_text_:22 in 168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027163066 = score(doc=168,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 168, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=168)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 45(2001) no.1, S
  17. Ramesh Babu, B.; O'Brien, A.: Web OPAC interfaces : an overview (2000) 0.01 
    0.013399946 = product of:
  0.053599782 = sum of:
    0.053599782 = weight(_text_:library in 768) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053599782 = score(doc=768,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 768, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=768)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Electronic library. 18(2000) no.5, S.316-327
  18. Condron, L.; Tittemore, C.P.: Library catalogs on the Web (2002) 0.01 
    0.013399946 = product of:
  0.053599782 = sum of:
    0.053599782 = weight(_text_:library in 5624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053599782 = score(doc=5624,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 5624, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5624)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
  19. Sridhar, M.S.: Subject searching in the OPAC of a special library : problems and issues (2004) 0.01 
    0.013399946 = product of:
  0.053599782 = sum of:
    0.053599782 = weight(_text_:library in 4203) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053599782 = score(doc=4203,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 4203, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4203)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
  20. Mi, J.; Weng, C.: Revitalizing the library OPAC : interface, searching and display challenges (2008) 0.01 
    0.013399946 = product of:
  0.053599782 = sum of:
    0.053599782 = weight(_text_:library in 2255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053599782 = score(doc=2255,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 2255, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2255)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    The behavior of academic library users has drastically changed in recent years. Internet search engines have become the preferred tool over the library online public access catalog (OPAC) for finding information. Libraries are losing ground to online search engines. In this paper, two aspects of OPAC use are studied: (1) the current OPAC interface and searching capabilities, and (2) the OPAC bibliographic display. The purpose of the study is to find answers to the following questions: Why is the current OPAC ineffective? What can libraries and librarians do to deliver an OPAC that is as good as search engines to better serve our users? Revitalizing the library OPAC is one of the pressing issues that has to be accomplished.

Authors

Types

Themes