Search (400 results, page 1 of 20)

0.1337354 = product of:
  0.48144743 = sum of:
    0.034793857 = product of:
      0.10438157 = sum of:
        0.10438157 = weight(_text_:3a in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10438157 = score(doc=2514,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18572637 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.14761783 = weight(_text_:2f in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14761783 = score(doc=2514,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18572637 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.7948135 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
    0.14761783 = weight(_text_:2f in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14761783 = score(doc=2514,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18572637 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.7948135 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
    0.14761783 = weight(_text_:2f in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14761783 = score(doc=2514,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18572637 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.7948135 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
    0.003800067 = weight(_text_:in in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003800067 = score(doc=2514,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
  0.2777778 = coord(5/18)

Abstract

In this paper, we present two ways to improve the precision of HITS-based algorithms onWeb documents. First, by analyzing the limitations of current HITS-based algorithms, we propose a new weighted HITS-based method that assigns appropriate weights to in-links of root documents. Then, we combine content analysis with HITS-based algorithms and study the effects of four representative relevance scoring methods, VSM, Okapi, TLS, and CDR, using a set of broad topic queries. Our experimental results show that our weighted HITS-based method performs significantly better than Bharat's improved HITS algorithm. When we combine our weighted HITS-based method or Bharat's HITS algorithm with any of the four relevance scoring methods, the combined methods are only marginally better than our weighted HITS-based method. Between the four relevance scoring methods, there is no significant quality difference when they are combined with a HITS-based algorithm.

Content

Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fdelab.csd.auth.gr%2F~dimitris%2Fcourses%2Fir_spring06%2Fpage_rank_computing%2Fp527-li.pdf. Vgl. auch: http://www2002.org/CDROM/refereed/643/.

0.005256885 = product of:
  0.03154131 = sum of:
    0.0044784215 = weight(_text_:in in 3205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0044784215 = score(doc=3205,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 3205, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3205)
    0.017079504 = weight(_text_:der in 3205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017079504 = score(doc=3205,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.34902605 = fieldWeight in 3205, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3205)
    0.009983385 = product of:
      0.029950155 = sum of:
        0.029950155 = weight(_text_:29 in 3205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029950155 = score(doc=3205,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.38865322 = fieldWeight in 3205, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3205)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(3/18)

Pages

S.29-61

Source

Wissen in elektronischen Netzwerken: Strukturierung, Erschließung und Retrieval von Informationsressourcen im Internet. Eine Auswahl von Vorträgen der 19. Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Klassifikation, Basel 1995. Hrsg.: H.-C. Hobohm u. H.-J. Wätjen

0.0035845733 = product of:
  0.03226116 = sum of:
    0.004433411 = weight(_text_:in in 3238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004433411 = score(doc=3238,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.14877784 = fieldWeight in 3238, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3238)
    0.027827747 = product of:
      0.04174162 = sum of:
        0.020965107 = weight(_text_:29 in 3238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020965107 = score(doc=3238,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 3238, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3238)
        0.020776514 = weight(_text_:22 in 3238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020776514 = score(doc=3238,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.076713994 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3238, 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=3238)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)

Abstract

The increasing expansion of the Internet has made resources available to users in sometimes unmanageable abundance. To help users manage this proliferation of information, librarians have begun to add URLs to their home pages. As well, specialized search engines are being used to retrieve information from selected sources in aneffort to return pertinent results. Describes the Harvest system which has been used to develop Index Antiquus, a specialized engine, for the classics and mediaeval studies. Presents a working example of how to search Index Antiquus

Date

6. 3.1997 16:22:15
5. 3.1999 19:29:26

0.0034402937 = product of:
  0.030962642 = sum of:
    0.0031348949 = weight(_text_:in in 7453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0031348949 = score(doc=7453,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 7453, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7453)
    0.027827747 = product of:
      0.04174162 = sum of:
        0.020965107 = weight(_text_:29 in 7453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020965107 = score(doc=7453,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 7453, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7453)
        0.020776514 = weight(_text_:22 in 7453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020776514 = score(doc=7453,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.076713994 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7453, 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=7453)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)

Abstract

Presents a novel method to extract from a web object its hyper informative content, in contrast with current search engines, which only deal with the textual information content. This method is not only valuable per se, but it is shown to be able to considerably increase the precision of current search engines. It integrates with existing search engine technology since it can be implemented on top of every search engine, acting as a post-processor, thus automatically transforming a search engine into its corresponding hyper version. Shows how the hyper information can be usefully employed to face the search engines persuasion problem

Date

1. 8.1996 22:08:06

Source

Computer networks and ISDN systems. 29(1997) no.8, S.1225-1235

0.0034402937 = product of:
  0.030962642 = sum of:
    0.0031348949 = weight(_text_:in in 2670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0031348949 = score(doc=2670,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 2670, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2670)
    0.027827747 = product of:
      0.04174162 = sum of:
        0.020965107 = weight(_text_:29 in 2670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020965107 = score(doc=2670,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 2670, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2670)
        0.020776514 = weight(_text_:22 in 2670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020776514 = score(doc=2670,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.076713994 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2670, 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=2670)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)

Abstract

Proposes a new idea of searching under the multi-engine search architecture to overcome the problems associated with relevance ranking. These include clustering of the search results and extraction of co-occurence keywords, which, with the user's feedback, better refines the query in the searching process. The system also provides the construction of the concept space to gradually customize the search tool to fit the usage for the user at the same time

Date

1. 8.1996 22:08:06

Source

Computer networks and ISDN systems. 29(1997) no.8, S.1217-1224

0.0032385467 = product of:
  0.01943128 = sum of:
    0.0063334443 = weight(_text_:in in 373) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0063334443 = score(doc=373,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 373, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=373)
    0.0060385168 = weight(_text_:der in 373) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060385168 = score(doc=373,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.12339935 = fieldWeight in 373, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=373)
    0.007059319 = product of:
      0.021177957 = sum of:
        0.021177957 = weight(_text_:29 in 373) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021177957 = score(doc=373,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.2748193 = fieldWeight in 373, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=373)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(3/18)

Abstract

On 17 March 2006, Google, the major web search engine, won a partial victory in its legal battle against the United States government. In an attempt to enforce the 1998 Child Online Protection Act, the us government had asked it to provide one million web addresses or URLs that are accessible through Google, as well as 5,000 users' search queries. In Gonzales v. Google, a California District Court ruled that Google did not have to comply fully with the us government's request: Google did not need to disclose a single search query, and was not required to provide more than 50.000 web addresses. However, it soon appeared that Microsoft, AOL and Yahoo! had handed over the information requested by the government in that instance, and in the course of this case all search engines publicly admitted massive user data collection. It turns out that all major search engines are able to provide a list of IP addresses with the actual search queries made, and vice versa. Scarcely five months later, AOL's search engine logs were the subject of yet another round of data protection concerns. There was a public outcry when it became known that it had published 21 million search queries, that is, the search histories of more than 650,000 of its users. While AOL's intentions were laudable (namely supporting research in user behaviour), it emerged that making the link between the unique ID supplied for a given user and the real-world identity was not all that difficult. Both these cases are milestones in raising awareness of the importance of data protection in relation to web search.

Date

13. 5.2007 10:29:29

Source

Macht der Suchmaschinen: The Power of Search Engines. Hrsg.: Machill, M. u. M. Beiler

0.0031662963 = product of:
  0.028496666 = sum of:
    0.0031348949 = weight(_text_:in in 399) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0031348949 = score(doc=399,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 399, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=399)
    0.02536177 = weight(_text_:der in 399) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02536177 = score(doc=399,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.5182773 = fieldWeight in 399, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=399)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)

Abstract

Bei webbasierten Suchmaschinen werden zunehmend auch Systeme mit Visualisierungskomponenten für die Ergebnisrepräsentation angeboten. Die Ansätze der Visualisierungen unterscheiden sich hierbei in der Zielsetzung und Ausführung deutlich voneinander. Der folgende Beitrag beschreibt die verwendeten Visualisierungsmethoden, systematisiert diese anhand einer Klassifikation, stellt die führenden frei zugänglichen Systeme vor und vergleicht diese anhand der Kriterien aus der Systematisierung. Die typischen Problemfelder werden identifiziert und die wichtigsten Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede der untersuchten Systeme herausgearbeitet. Die Vorstellung zweier innovativer Visualisierungskonzepte im Bereich der Relationenvisualisierung innerhalb von Treffermengen und der Visualisierung von Relationen bei der Suche nach Musik schließen den Beitrag ab.

0.0030971267 = product of:
  0.01858276 = sum of:
    0.0054849237 = weight(_text_:in in 381) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0054849237 = score(doc=381,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.18406484 = fieldWeight in 381, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=381)
    0.0060385168 = weight(_text_:der in 381) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060385168 = score(doc=381,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.12339935 = fieldWeight in 381, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=381)
    0.007059319 = product of:
      0.021177957 = sum of:
        0.021177957 = weight(_text_:29 in 381) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021177957 = score(doc=381,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.2748193 = fieldWeight in 381, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=381)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(3/18)

Abstract

In the United Kingdom, the BBC is principally known for television and until recently there was no difficulty in finding BBC content on your TV. There was only one channel and then two. It wasn't until the late 1950's in the UK that commercial TV provided an alternative, but even then we owned the transmitters, the distribution and crucially the BBC remained 1 and 2 on the dial. The explosion of multi-channel TV and now internet has meant falling market share inevitably and the arrival of digital television has meant hundred of channels, thousands in the case of the internet, and the need to invent new forms of navigation. Today, the BBC does not control those guides or the navigation systems that will inevitably drive people to the content of the future. Eastenders is a much loved BBC soap opera which gets about 8 million viewers a week, but some people no longer associate the programme with the BBC. Many people in the UK get their television via Rupert Murdoch's SKY platform and so the credit often goes to the aggregator. In Focus groups, we hear comments like »I watched Eastenders last night on SKY«. Today British consumers, who have only just got used to hundreds of television channels are now being bombarded by a second wave of content. There are podcasts, vodcasts, webcasts, user generated content - and on its way even more on demand video content as the world's major media companies open un 7 day output and their archives directly to consumers.

Date

13. 5.2007 10:29:29

Source

Macht der Suchmaschinen: The Power of Search Engines. Hrsg.: Machill, M. u. M. Beiler

0.0030857208 = product of:
  0.018514324 = sum of:
    0.0031348949 = weight(_text_:in in 631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0031348949 = score(doc=631,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 631, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=631)
    0.008453923 = weight(_text_:der in 631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008453923 = score(doc=631,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.17275909 = fieldWeight in 631, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=631)
    0.0069255047 = product of:
      0.020776514 = sum of:
        0.020776514 = weight(_text_:22 in 631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020776514 = score(doc=631,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.076713994 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 631, 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=631)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(3/18)

Content

Mit einem Anhang, der in fachlicher Ordnung vorhandene Subject gateways auflistet; vgl. unter: http://www.lub.lu.se/tk/SBIGs.html

Date

22. 6.2002 19:37:55

0.0029488232 = product of:
  0.026539408 = sum of:
    0.0026870528 = weight(_text_:in in 2674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0026870528 = score(doc=2674,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.09017298 = fieldWeight in 2674, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2674)
    0.023852354 = product of:
      0.03577853 = sum of:
        0.017970093 = weight(_text_:29 in 2674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017970093 = score(doc=2674,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 2674, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2674)
        0.01780844 = weight(_text_:22 in 2674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01780844 = score(doc=2674,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.076713994 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2674, 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=2674)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)

Abstract

The WebQuery system offers a powerful new method for searching the Web based on connectivity and content. Examines links among the nodes returned in a keyword-based query. Rankes the nodes, giving the highest rank to the most highly connected nodes. By doing so, finds hot spots on the Web that contain information germane to a user's query. WebQuery not only ranks and filters the results of a Web query; it also extends the result set beyond what the search engine retrieves, by finding interesting sites that are highly connected to those sites returned by the original query. Even with WebQuery filering and ranking query results, the result set can be enormous. Explores techniques for visualizing the returned information and discusses the criteria for using each of the technique

Date

1. 8.1996 22:08:06

Source

Computer networks and ISDN systems. 29(1997) no.8, S.1257-1267

0.0029488232 = product of:
  0.026539408 = sum of:
    0.0026870528 = weight(_text_:in in 2678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0026870528 = score(doc=2678,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.09017298 = fieldWeight in 2678, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2678)
    0.023852354 = product of:
      0.03577853 = sum of:
        0.017970093 = weight(_text_:29 in 2678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017970093 = score(doc=2678,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 2678, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2678)
        0.01780844 = weight(_text_:22 in 2678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01780844 = score(doc=2678,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.076713994 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2678, 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=2678)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)

Abstract

Describes a search engine that integrate text and image search. 1 or more Web site can be indexed for both textual and image information, allowing the user to search based on keywords or images or both. Another problem with the current search engines is that they show the results as pages of scrolled lists; this is not very user-friendly. The search engine allows the user to visualise to results in various ways. Explains the indexing and searching techniques of the search engine and highlights several features of the querying interface to make the retrieval process more efficient. Use examples to show the usefulness of the technology

Date

1. 8.1996 22:08:06

Source

Computer networks and ISDN systems. 29(1997) no.8, S.1181-1191

0.0029293762 = product of:
  0.017576257 = sum of:
    0.0044784215 = weight(_text_:in in 379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0044784215 = score(doc=379,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 379, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=379)
    0.0060385168 = weight(_text_:der in 379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060385168 = score(doc=379,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.12339935 = fieldWeight in 379, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=379)
    0.007059319 = product of:
      0.021177957 = sum of:
        0.021177957 = weight(_text_:29 in 379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021177957 = score(doc=379,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.2748193 = fieldWeight in 379, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=379)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(3/18)

Abstract

The political economy of communication focuses critically on what structural issues in mass media - ownership, labour practices, professional ethics, and so on - mean for products of those mass media and thus for society more generally. In the case of new media, recent political economic studies have looked at the technical infrastructure of the Internet and also at Internet usage. However, political economic studies of internet content are only beginning. Recent studies on the phenomenology of the Web, that is, the way the Web is experienced from an individual user's perspective, highlight the centrality of the search engine to most users' experiences of the Web, particularly when they venture beyond familiar Web sites. Search engines are therefore an obvi ous place to begin the analysis of Web content. An important assumption of this chapter is that internet search engines are media businesses and that the tools developed in media studies can be profitably brought to bear on them. This focus on search engine as industry comes from the critical tradition of the political economy of communications in rejecting the notion that the market alone should be the arbiter of the structure of the media industry, as might be appropriate for other types of products.

Date

13. 5.2007 10:29:29

Source

Macht der Suchmaschinen: The Power of Search Engines. Hrsg.: Machill, M. u. M. Beiler

0.0029293762 = product of:
  0.017576257 = sum of:
    0.0044784215 = weight(_text_:in in 383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0044784215 = score(doc=383,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 383, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=383)
    0.0060385168 = weight(_text_:der in 383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060385168 = score(doc=383,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.12339935 = fieldWeight in 383, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=383)
    0.007059319 = product of:
      0.021177957 = sum of:
        0.021177957 = weight(_text_:29 in 383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021177957 = score(doc=383,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.2748193 = fieldWeight in 383, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=383)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(3/18)

Abstract

Where Internet users go, attackers follow. Users embrace e-mail; then spammers fill their inboxes with junk mail. With the rise in online commerce, phishers trick them into giving up their passwords. Users find handy downloadable applications; adware vendors bundle them with pop-up-spewing add-ons. The rise of Internet search brings a new type of risk. Hostile Web sites might seek to harm users or take advantage of them - whether through spyware, spam, scams, or other bad practices - because search engines often do not filter these sites from their results. Consider this scenario: Suzy wants to perform Beyonce's Crazy in Love for her school talent show. To make sure she dresses the part, she performs a Google search for >celebrity photos<. When she clicks the first search result, celebritypictures.duble.com, she is quickly prompted to install an adware-bundled ActiveX control in order to browse the site's contents. Eager to view photos of her celebrity role model, she accepts the installation of a new browser toolbar and a pop-up serving adware program. In principle, search engines' listing rules, ranking rules, and advertising policies might shield users from some bad practices, and users' good judgment could protect them from others. But empirically, search engines often lead users to dangerous content. My analysis of search engine safety finds bad practices among approximately 5% of search results for popular keywords, or roughly one site per page of search results.

Date

13. 5.2007 10:29:29

Source

Macht der Suchmaschinen: The Power of Search Engines. Hrsg.: Machill, M. u. M. Beiler

0.0028634928 = product of:
  0.017180957 = sum of:
    0.006702687 = weight(_text_:in in 384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006702687 = score(doc=384,freq=28.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.22493094 = fieldWeight in 384, product of:
          5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
            28.0 = termFreq=28.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=384)
    0.0048308135 = weight(_text_:der in 384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0048308135 = score(doc=384,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.09871948 = fieldWeight in 384, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=384)
    0.005647456 = product of:
      0.016942367 = sum of:
        0.016942367 = weight(_text_:29 in 384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016942367 = score(doc=384,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.21985546 = fieldWeight in 384, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=384)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(3/18)

Abstract

It is remarkable to observe that in the wake of the Muhammad cartoon controversy no one has picketed Google, threatened its employees, or destroyed any of its merchandise. After all, far more people reached the cartoons online than by any other means. Meanwhile almost every other major non-online media source that published the cartoons has faced similar threats of violence. In September 2005 Flemming Rose, the cultural editor of the conservative Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, set a controversy in motion by recruiting over 40 cartoonists to caricature the Prophet Muhammad in response to what he felt was a Danish trend of press self-censorship in covering Islamic issues. From these 40 cartoonists, only 12 cartoons emerged for publication in the 30 September 2005 issue. The initial result was, surprising in retrospect, negligible. The Danish newspaper, known colloquially as the >morning Fascist<, had failed in its attempt to stir up controversy. Three key subsequent events, among others, transformed this failure into controversy and then crisis: first, the republication of the 12 cartoons by a right-wing Norwegian newspaper, followed by February, by hundreds of other newspapers throughout the world; second, the parade of the vicious and misleading 43-page Akkari-Laban dossier of cartoons throughout the Muslim world; and third, the saturation of the Internet (reaching 16% of the world's population) with the Muhammad cartoons. The pandemonium that ensued should be familiar to all: nearly 140 dead; over Boo injured; a potential for more than 10.000 unemployed as a result of political embargoes; dozens of government buildings, Christian churches, and fast food restaurants torched and vandalized; troublesome reprints of the cartoons in major papers on every continent; and millions across the globe left shaken and upset. Some two years later, the riotous repercussions of the cartoons, while dampened, have yet to disappear. In the following pages, I use the Muhammad cartoon controversy as a springboard to think about three key features of our emerging search engine world: one, democracy offers a rich backdrop against which to cast the study of search engines (especially the observation that many of the problems of democracy are also those of search engines); two, the editors' role is in decline by disintermediation - they still shape content but users have new influence in directing distribution; and three, algorithms influence ethics. This chapter also serves as a starting point for thinking about search engine scholarship as well as for the problems and potential treasure chests of insight we may yet find in related studies of communication, journalism, and democracy. Finally, this chapter hopes to invite and provoke its readers to employ a fuller arsenal of tools and metaphors in the critical study of search engines.

Date

13. 5.2007 10:29:29

Source

Macht der Suchmaschinen: The Power of Search Engines. Hrsg.: Machill, M. u. M. Beiler

0.0027934678 = product of:
  0.02514121 = sum of:
    0.004433411 = weight(_text_:in in 294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004433411 = score(doc=294,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.14877784 = fieldWeight in 294, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=294)
    0.0207078 = weight(_text_:der in 294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0207078 = score(doc=294,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.4231716 = fieldWeight in 294, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=294)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)

Abstract

Dieser Aufsatz beschreibt die Entwicklung der Suchmaschine BASE (Bielefeld Academic Search Engine) seit 2005. In dieser Zeit wurde der Index um ein Vielfaches ausgebaut und auch die Nutzungszahlen stiegen deutlich. Der Schwerpunkt liegt auf der Indexierung von Dokumentenservern, die ihre Daten über das "Protocol for Metadata Harvesting" (OAI-PMH) bereitstellen. Im Gegensatz zu speziellen OAI-Suchmaschine wie OAIster verfügt BASE jedoch über weitergehende Suchmöglichkeiten und indexiert auch wissenschaftliche Webseiten mit Hilfe eines integrierten Web-Crawlers und andere Quellen, wie zum Beispiel den Bibliothekskatalog der Universitätsbibliothek Bielefeld. BASE kommt darüber hinaus als Suchsystem auch in anderen Bereichen, zum Beispiel im Bielefeld eScholarship Repository, als Suchmaschine der Universität Bielefeld und im EU-Projekt DRIVER via Schnittstellen zum BASE-Index zum Einsatz.

0.0026905125 = product of:
  0.016143074 = sum of:
    0.005664805 = weight(_text_:in in 387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005664805 = score(doc=387,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.19010136 = fieldWeight in 387, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=387)
    0.0048308135 = weight(_text_:der in 387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0048308135 = score(doc=387,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.09871948 = fieldWeight in 387, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=387)
    0.005647456 = product of:
      0.016942367 = sum of:
        0.016942367 = weight(_text_:29 in 387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016942367 = score(doc=387,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.21985546 = fieldWeight in 387, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=387)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(3/18)

Abstract

Search engines have evolved with the internet as an organic tool to make sense of the chaos of sites accessible on the web. They started in the early 19906 as the Internet was becoming a commercial entity. They have gradually been converging and a few of them have a quasi monopoly on access to information, with three major actors left: Google, Yahoo! and MSN. This increased control in access to sources of internet content has triggered concerns among consumers, activists, family associations and governments. Issues of consumer manipulation, harmful content and freedom of speech have appeared that stress the key role of search engines but also call into question their functionality and their independence. Their use and appropriation by young people and parents also question their functionality and independence. According to a recent research on media appropriation, go per cent of young people between iz and 14 years in six European countries connect to internet mostly via search engines, with Google by far the favourite. But it is not to look for information. It is rather as a lazy way to get to the site they want and already know. It is more a portal than an information provider. Most young people don't seem to be aware that there are dedicated search engines for their own use. As for parents, they tend to use filters mostly to control the time and the expenses of their children. In both cases, search relevance is a kind of shortcut rather than a thorough quest for information. It follows an economic logic of saving time and money rather than curiosity or control of harmful content. And yet search engines for children are the outcome of calls for regulation by families and educators. So how to explain the gap between user behaviour and media competence? Between regulation and appropriation? Where does this leave protection of minors about unsuitable or harmful content? What does it tell us about the future of search? This chapter has three objectives, developed in three parts: to take stock of the existing search tools for parents and young people; to provide an analytical framework for assessing self-, co- and regulatory strategies for search engines in the context of harmful content; to place search engines for children in the wider perspective of the search for information, in an environmental cognition paradigm. This leads to consider alternative solutions to direct regulation in internet governance and to examine new criteria for the empowerment of children in the information society.

Date

13. 5.2007 10:29:29

Source

Macht der Suchmaschinen: The Power of Search Engines. Hrsg.: Machill, M. u. M. Beiler

0.0024819607 = product of:
  0.022337645 = sum of:
    0.005429798 = weight(_text_:in in 284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005429798 = score(doc=284,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.1822149 = fieldWeight in 284, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=284)
    0.016907847 = weight(_text_:der in 284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016907847 = score(doc=284,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.34551817 = fieldWeight in 284, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=284)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)

Abstract

In dieser Untersuchung werden die Aufsätze der Jahre 2004 bis 2006 aus den acht wichtigsten deutschsprachigen Zeitschriften des Bibliotheks- und Informationswesens auf ihre Verfügbarkeit in Google Scholar hin untersucht. Dabei zeigt sich, dass Google Scholar keinen vollständigen Nachweis der Artikel bieten kann und sich daher nicht als Ersatz für bibliographische Datenbanken eignet. Google Scholar macht einen Teil der Volltexte direkt verfügbar und eignet sich insofern für einen schnellen und problemlosen Zugang zum Volltext, der traditionelle Wege wie die Bibliothek bzw. die Fernleihe umgeht. Für das Fach Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft bietet Google Scholar insgesamt die Chance, seine Inhalte auch über die Fachgrenzen hinaus bekannt zu machen.

0.0024330472 = product of:
  0.014598282 = sum of:
    0.005429798 = weight(_text_:in in 351) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005429798 = score(doc=351,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.1822149 = fieldWeight in 351, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=351)
    0.0042269616 = weight(_text_:der in 351) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0042269616 = score(doc=351,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.08637954 = fieldWeight in 351, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=351)
    0.0049415235 = product of:
      0.01482457 = sum of:
        0.01482457 = weight(_text_:29 in 351) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01482457 = score(doc=351,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.19237353 = fieldWeight in 351, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=351)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(3/18)

Abstract

In March 2005, the Paris-based news service Agence France Presse (AFP) sued Google Inc. in an American court, charging that the search engine's news aggregator program had illegally infringed the wire service's copyright. The lawsuit, filed in the u.s. District Court for the District of Columbia, claimed that Google News had engaged in the infringement since its launch in September 2002 by »reproducing and publicly displaying AFP's photographs, headlines, and story leads« . The claim also said that Google News had ignored requests that it cease and desist the infringement, and it asked for more than $17 million (about 13.6 million Euros) in damages. Within a few days, Google News was removing links t0 Agence France Presse news articles and photographs.1 However, Agence France Presse said it would still pursue the lawsuit because 0f the licensing fees it was owed as a result of what it claimed was Google's past copyright infringement. The case, which was still pending in early 2007, as the sides struggled to reconstruct and evaluate specific past Google News pageso, was interesting for several reasons. First, it pitted the company that owns the world's most popular search engine against the world's oldest news service; Agence France Presse was founded in Paris in 1835 by Charles-Louis Havas, sometimes known as the father of global journalismo. Second, the copyright-infringement allegations made by AFP had not been made by most of the 4,500 or so other news organizations whose material is used in exactly the same way on Google News every day, though Google did lose somewhat similar cases in German and Belgian courts in 2004 and 2006, respectively. Third, AFP's assertions and Google's counter claims offer an intriguing argument about the nature of key components of traditional and new-media journalism, especially news headlines. Finally, the case warrants further examination because it is essentially an argument over the fundamental nature of Internet hyperlinking. Some commentators have noted that a ruling against Google could be disastrous for blogs, which also often quote news storieso, while other commentators have concluded that a victory for Agence France Presse would call into question the future of online news aggregatorso. This chapter uses the Agence France Presse lawsuit as a way to examine arguments about the legality of news aggregator links to copyrighted material. Using traditional legal research methods, it attempts to put the case into context by referring to key u.s. and European Internet hyperlinking lawsuits from the 1990s through 2006. The chapter also discusses the nature of specific traditional journalistic forms such as headlines and story leads and whether they can be copyrighted. Finally, the chapter argues that out-of-court settlements and conflicting court rulings have left considerable ambiguity around the intersection of copyright, free speech, and information-cataloging concerns, leaving Google News and other aggregators vulnerable to claims of copyright infringement.

Date

13. 5.2007 10:29:29

Source

Macht der Suchmaschinen: The Power of Search Engines. Hrsg.: Machill, M. u. M. Beiler

0.002395325 = product of:
  0.021557925 = sum of:
    0.0044784215 = weight(_text_:in in 3374) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0044784215 = score(doc=3374,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 3374, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3374)
    0.017079504 = weight(_text_:der in 3374) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017079504 = score(doc=3374,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.34902605 = fieldWeight in 3374, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3374)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)

Abstract

Die Suchmaschinen sind in der Politik angekommen. Einerseits wurde eine Freiwillige Selbstkontrolle unter Beteiligung großerAnbietergegründet Andererseits beschäftigt sich die grüne Bundestagsfraktion mit der Frage, ob die bisher bestehende Suchmaschinen-Struktur die beste für den Nutzer sei.

0.0023286592 = product of:
  0.020957932 = sum of:
    0.003878427 = weight(_text_:in in 310) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003878427 = score(doc=310,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.1301535 = fieldWeight in 310, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=310)
    0.017079504 = weight(_text_:der in 310) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017079504 = score(doc=310,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.34902605 = fieldWeight in 310, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=310)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)

Content

"Wer wissenschaftliche Informationen und Fachliteratur sucht, kommt mit einer herkömmlichen Internet-Suchmaschine nicht weit. Auch Bibliothekskataloge und Datenbanken helfen nur begrenzt weiter, da es zu viele Anlaufstellen im Web gibt. Das Hochschulbibliothekszentrum NRW (hbz) arbeitet deshalb an der technischen Infrastrukturlösung eines gemeinsamen Suchraums. Der Suchraum fasst mithilfe modernster Suchmaschinentechnologie viele unterschiedliche Datenquellen zu einem optimierten Index zusammen, der von verschiedenen Suchanwendungen in Sekundenschnelle abgefragt werden kann. Zu den Datenbeständen des Suchraums gehören die Kataloge der deutschsprachigen Bibliotheken sowie Artikel aus den Wissenschaftszeitschriften. Hinzu kommen Abstracts, Inhaltsverzeichnisse und andere Informationen. Ergänzt wird dieser Suchindex durch einen Zugriff auf Fachdatenbanken, die zum Beispiel das vascodaProjekt zusammenträgt. Die Suchanwendungen wie beispielsweise die Portal-Lösung »DigiBib - Die Digitale Bibliothek« müssen nur noch den einheitlich aufgebauten Index durchsuchen und erhalten die Ergebnisse nach wenigen Millisekunden. In der Realität existiert eine solche virtuelle Metabibliothek nur in den Anfängen. Der Dreiländerkatalog des hbz und das Wissenschaftsportal vascoda sind ein großer Schritt auf dem Weg zu diesem gemeinsamen Suchraum. Er kann nur durch eine - inhaltlich und geografisch-weiträumige Kooperation der Universitäten, Bibliotheken, Verlage und anderer Anbieter von Fachinformationen der deutschsprachigen Länder aufgebaut werden. Die Grundlagen für dieses Ziel wurden bereits vom hbz gelegt. Die Teilnahme am Suchraum ist eine lohnende Aufgabe für die Bibliotheken und Wissenschaftsorganisationen: Am Ende steht eine wissenschaftliche Suchmaschine, die alle wichtigen und nützlichen Datenquellen erfasst."