Search (1019 results, page 50 of 51)

7.8151375E-4 = product of:
  0.0015630275 = sum of:
    0.0015630275 = product of:
      0.003126055 = sum of:
        0.003126055 = weight(_text_:s in 4605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.003126055 = score(doc=4605,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.062418222 = fieldWeight in 4605, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=4605)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 56(2005) no.6, S.658-659 (L..E. Harris): "The twenty-eight essays in Benchmarks in Distance Education chronicle the historically significant developments of library and information science's (LIS) tradition in distance education, also known as distributed learning. Twenty-seven programs are represented in the text, geographically ranging from C. Herbert Carson's "The University of Rhode Island Regional Program Distance Education in New England" to Leigh Estabrook's "Distance Education at the University of Illinois" to Violet H. Harada's "Distance Learning at the University of Hawai'i: Serving the Underserved in an Island State." There are discussions of programs for individual institutions, such as "A Tradition of Innovation: The Syracuse University Experience," by Ruth V. Small and Barbara Settel; for statewide programs, such as "OhioLEARN: Distributed Education in Library and Information Science at Kent State University," by Danny P. Wallace and Connie Van Fleet; for cross-state joint programs, such as Mary Wagner and Prudence Dalrymple's "Dominican University (River Forest, IL) and the College of St. Catherine (St. Paul, MN) Distance Learning Experience; and even discussions of separate programs within the same state, such as Jane Pearlmutter's "Distance Education at the University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Library and Information Studies" and "The Evolution of Distance Learning at the School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee" by Wilfred Fong, Judith Senkevitch, and Dietmar Wolfram. Each essay was independently written and varies widely in format, designation of key issues, and comprehensiveness. Some place the development of distance education in the context of the historical development of LIS in the specific institution. Others focus an the technology, while still others approach the discussion from a pedagogical perspective. Alma Dawson, in "The School of Library and Information Science at Louisiana State University: Distance Education Program," provides a chronological timetable of specific course offerings from 1947 and includes a projected listing of courses through 2007 in a set of appendices. Barron's "Introduction" provides a useful framework for approaching the benchmark cases. First, there is a synthesized definition of distance education "as the study and practice of education in environments where the learner and teacher are separated by time and distance but are connected by technology and commitmenC (p. xi). He goes an to clarify terminology: "Distance education can be argued to be a subset of a more comprehensive concept, distributed education, a term that is generally accepted as referring to all elements of the academic experience that is enhanced by information technology applications" (p. xi). The introduction is completed through an historical overview of early technological efforts in LIS distance education, including correspondence study, extension efforts, and telecommunication delivery. The volume concludes with an index useful to locating specific topical information located through the essays. Despite (or perhaps as a result of) the depth and breadth of the case studies, this reviewer found nine common threads, which are repeated in some shape or form within each essay: - Technology - Pedagogy - Faculty issues - Political/organization/institutional concerns - Student issues - Support services - Economic considerations - Research and evaluation - The future of LIS distance education ...

Pages

408 S

Type

s

7.8151375E-4 = product of:
  0.0015630275 = sum of:
    0.0015630275 = product of:
      0.003126055 = sum of:
        0.003126055 = weight(_text_:s in 592) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.003126055 = score(doc=592,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.062418222 = fieldWeight in 592, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=592)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 58(2007) no.11, S.1704 (D.E. Agosto): "Student participation in computer science (CS) has dropped significantly over the past few years in the United States. As the Computing Research Association (Vegso, 2006) recently noted, "After five years of decline, the number of new CS majors in fall 2005 was half of what it was in fall 2000 (15,958 vs. 7,952)." Many computing educators and working professionals worry that this reduced level of participation might result in slowed technological innovation in future years. Adding to the problem is especially low female participation in the computer-related disciplines. For example, Cohoon (2003) showed that the percentage of high school girls indicating intent to study CS in college dropped steadily from 1991 to 2001, from a high of 37% to a low of 20%. The National Science Foundation's most recent report on Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering (National Science Foundation, 2004) indicates that while females obtained 57% of all bachelor's degrees in 2001, they obtained just 28% of computer-related undergraduate degrees. These low percentages of female participation are reflected in the computing workforce as well. Women and Information Technology: Research on Underrepresentation provides an overview of research projects and research trends relating to gender and computing. The book takes a proactive general stance; the ultimate goal of publishing the research included in the volume is to lead to significant gains in female representation in the study and practice of the computing-related fields. ... The volume as a whole does not offer a clear-cut solution to the problem of female underrepresentation, but a number of the chapters do indicate that recruitment and retention must be dealt with jointly, as each is dependent on the other. Another recurring theme is the importance of role models from early on in girls' lives, in the form of both female faculty and female computing professionals as role models. Still another recurring theme is the importance of female mentoring before and during the college years, including both informal peer mentoring and formal faculty mentoring. Taken as a whole, this is a successful work that is probably most useful as a background reference tool. As such, it should assist students and scholars interested in continuing this undeniably important area of research."

Pages

xviii, 500 S

Type

s

7.8151375E-4 = product of:
  0.0015630275 = sum of:
    0.0015630275 = product of:
      0.003126055 = sum of:
        0.003126055 = weight(_text_:s in 1464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.003126055 = score(doc=1464,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.062418222 = fieldWeight in 1464, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1464)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: KO 34(2007) no.4, S. 264-265 (L.C. Howarth): "At a time when cataloguing code revision is continuing apace with the consolidation of the International Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD), the drafting of RDA: Resource Description and Access, and the development of common principles for an international cataloguing code (International Meeting of Experts on an International Cataloguing Code [IME ICC]), the publication of a guide for cataloguing cultural objects is timely and purposeful. Compiling this data content standard on behalf of the Visual Resources Association, the five editors - with oversight from an advisory board - have divided the guide into three parts. Following a brief introduction outlining the purpose, intended audience, and scope and methodology for the publication, Part One, General Guidelines, explains both what the Cataloging Cultural Objects (CCO) guide is "a broad document that includes rules for formatting data, suggestions for required information, controlled vocabulary requirements, and display issues" (p. I) and is not "not a metadata element set per se" (p. 1). Part Two, Elements, is further divided into nine chapters dealing with one or more metadata elements, and describing the relationships between and among each element. Part Three, Authorities, discusses what elements to include in building authority records. A Selected Bibliography, Glossary, and Index, respectively, round out the guide.

Pages

xiii, 396 S

Type

s

7.520119E-4 = product of:
  0.0015040238 = sum of:
    0.0015040238 = product of:
      0.0030080476 = sum of:
        0.0030080476 = weight(_text_:s in 1312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0030080476 = score(doc=1312,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 1312, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1312)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

s

7.520119E-4 = product of:
  0.0015040238 = sum of:
    0.0015040238 = product of:
      0.0030080476 = sum of:
        0.0030080476 = weight(_text_:s in 2294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0030080476 = score(doc=2294,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 2294, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2294)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Editor

Schroeder, S.

Footnote

Rez. in: Knowledge organization 30(2003) no.2, S.115-116 (C. Jacobs): "This collection of articles by indexing practitioners, software designers and vendors is divided into five sections: Dedicated Software, Embedded Software, Online and Web Indexing Software, Database and Image Software, and Voice-activated, Automatic, and Machine-aided Software. This diversity is its strength. Part 1 is introduced by two chapters an choosing dedicated software, highlighting the issues involved and providing tips an evaluating requirements. The second chapter includes a fourteen page chart that analyzes the attributes of Authex Plus, three versions of CINDEX 1.5, MACREX 7, two versions of SKY Index (5.1 and 6.0) and wINDEX. The lasting value in this chart is its utility in making the prospective user aware of the various attributes/capabilities that are possible and that should be considered. The following chapters consist of 16 testimonials for these software packages, completed by a final chapter an specialized/customized software. The point is made that if a particular software function could increase your efficiency, it can probably be created. The chapters in Part 2, Embedded Software, go into a great deal more detail about how the programs work, and are less reviews than illustrations of functionality. Perhaps this is because they are not really stand-alones, but are functions within, or add-ons used with larger word processing or publishing programs. The software considered are Microsoft Word, FrameMaker, PageMaker, IndexTension 3.1.5 that is used with QuarkXPress, and Index Tools Professional and IXgen that are used with FrameMaker. The advantages and disadvantages of embedded indexing are made very clear, but the actual illustrations are difficult to follow if one has not worked at all with embedded software. Nonetheless, the section is valuable as it highlights issues and provides pointers an solutions to embedded indexing problems.

Pages

275 S

Type

s

7.520119E-4 = product of:
  0.0015040238 = sum of:
    0.0015040238 = product of:
      0.0030080476 = sum of:
        0.0030080476 = weight(_text_:s in 5862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0030080476 = score(doc=5862,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 5862, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5862)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

s

7.520119E-4 = product of:
  0.0015040238 = sum of:
    0.0015040238 = product of:
      0.0030080476 = sum of:
        0.0030080476 = weight(_text_:s in 636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0030080476 = score(doc=636,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 636, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=636)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: 1. The Text REtrieval Conference - Ellen M. Voorhees and Donna K. Harman 2. The TREC Test Collections - Donna K. Harman 3. Retrieval System Evaluation - Chris Buckley and Ellen M. Voorhees 4. The TREC Ad Hoc Experiments - Donna K. Harman 5. Routing and Filtering - Stephen Robertson and Jamie Callan 6. The TREC Interactive Tracks: Putting the User into Search - Susan T. Dumais and Nicholas J. Belkin 7. Beyond English - Donna K. Harman 8. Retrieving Noisy Text - Ellen M. Voorhees and John S. Garofolo 9.The Very Large Collection and Web Tracks - David Hawking and Nick Craswell 10. Question Answering in TREC - Ellen M. Voorhees 11. The University of Massachusetts and a Dozen TRECs - James Allan, W. Bruce Croft and Jamie Callan 12. How Okapi Came to TREC - Stephen Robertson 13. The SMART Project at TREC - Chris Buckley 14. Ten Years of Ad Hoc Retrieval at TREC Using PIRCS - Kui-Lam Kwok 15. MultiText Experiments for TREC - Gordon V. Cormack, Charles L. A. Clarke, Christopher R. Palmer and Thomas R. Lynam 16. A Language-Modeling Approach to TREC - Djoerd Hiemstra and Wessel Kraaij 17. BM Research Activities at TREC - Eric W. Brown, David Carmel, Martin Franz, Abraham Ittycheriah, Tapas Kanungo, Yoelle Maarek, J. Scott McCarley, Robert L. Mack, John M. Prager, John R. Smith, Aya Soffer, Jason Y. Zien and Alan D. Marwick Epilogue: Metareflections on TREC - Karen Sparck Jones

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 58(2007) no.6, S.910-911 (J.L. Vicedo u. J. Gomez): "The Text REtrieval Conference (TREC) is a yearly workshop hosted by the U.S. government's National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) that fosters and supports research in information retrieval as well as speeding the transfer of technology between research labs and industry. Since 1992, TREC has provided the infrastructure necessary for large-scale evaluations of different text retrieval methodologies. TREC impact has been very important and its success has been mainly supported by its continuous adaptation to the emerging information retrieval needs. Not in vain, TREC has built evaluation benchmarks for more than 20 different retrieval problems such as Web retrieval, speech retrieval, or question-answering. The large and intense trajectory of annual TREC conferences has resulted in an immense bulk of documents reflecting the different eval uation and research efforts developed. This situation makes it difficult sometimes to observe clearly how research in information retrieval (IR) has evolved over the course of TREC. TREC: Experiment and Evaluation in Information Retrieval succeeds in organizing and condensing all this research into a manageable volume that describes TREC history and summarizes the main lessons learned. The book is organized into three parts. The first part is devoted to the description of TREC's origin and history, the test collections, and the evaluation methodology developed. The second part describes a selection of the major evaluation exercises (tracks), and the third part contains contributions from research groups that had a large and remarkable participation in TREC. Finally, Karen Spark Jones, one of the main promoters of research in IR, closes the book with an epilogue that analyzes the impact of TREC on this research field.

Pages

X, 462 S

Type

s

7.520119E-4 = product of:
  0.0015040238 = sum of:
    0.0015040238 = product of:
      0.0030080476 = sum of:
        0.0030080476 = weight(_text_:s in 577) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0030080476 = score(doc=577,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 577, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=577)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: Mitt VÖB 59(2006) H.2, S.83-88 (O. Oberhauser): "Dieser neue Sammelband möchte Interessenten aus den Bereichen Informationswissenschaft, Bibliothekswesen sowie Sozial- und Evolutionspsychologie aktuelle Entwicklungen und neue theoretische Ansätze auf dem Gebiet des menschlichen Informationsverhaltens-human information behavio(u)r bzw. kurz HIB - vermitteln. Es geht dabei um die komplexen Informationsprozesse, die in das alltägliche Sozialverhalten und die Lebensabläufe menschlicher Individuen eingebettet sind. Die beiden Herausgeber sind in diesem Teilbereich der Informationswissenschaft auch durch eine Reihe anderer Publikationen einschlägig ausgewiesen: Amanda Spink (vormals Universität Pittsburgh), die sich kürzlich selbst in aller Bescheidenheit als "world-class ICT researcher" beschrieb,' ist Professorin an der Technischen Universität Queensland (Australien); Charles Cole ist Research Associate (wissenschaftlicher Projektmitarbeiter) an der McGill University in Montreal und selbständiger Berater für Informationsdesign. Gemeinsam haben Spink und Cole zuletzt, ebenfalls bei Springer, eine weitere Aufsatzsammlung - New Directions in Cognitive Information Retrieval (2005) - herausgegeben. Das Buch versammelt zwölf Beiträge ("Kapitel"), die in fünf Sektionen dargeboten werden, wobei es sich allerdings bei den Sektionen 1 und 5 (= Kapitel 1 und 12) um Einleitung und Zusammenschau der Herausgeber handelt. Während erstere eigentlich nur eine Übersicht über die Gliederung und die Beiträge des Buches, die jeweils mit Abstracts beschrieben werden, darstellt, kann letztere als eigenständiger Beitrag gelten, der versucht, die in diesem Band angesprochenen Aspekte in einem vorläufigen HIB-Modell zu integrieren.
Weitere Rez. in: JASIST 58(2007) no.10, S.1553 (C. Wang)

Pages

245 S

Type

s

7.520119E-4 = product of:
  0.0015040238 = sum of:
    0.0015040238 = product of:
      0.0030080476 = sum of:
        0.0030080476 = weight(_text_:s in 1150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0030080476 = score(doc=1150,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 1150, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1150)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: García Marco, F.J. et al.: Proyectos internacionales de reforma y ampliación de las normas sobre tesauros para su adaptación a los nuevos contextos de integración e interoperabilidad en el entorno digital; De Beer, C.S.: Knowledge is everywhere: a philosophical exploration; Hajdu Barát, Á.: Heisenberg and the structure of conceptcontent and dimension; López-Huertas, M.J.: Gestión del conocimiento multidimensional en los sistemas de organización del conocimiento; Sánchez Gómez, L., Campos Havidich, M.: The idealist paradigm in knowledge representation; González Alcaide, G., et al.: Ámbitos de investigación y colaboració entre disciplinas en la producción científica española sobre abuso de sustancias; Yukimo Kobashio, N., Santos, R.N.M.: Information organization and representation by graphic devices: an interdisciplinary approach; Gnoli, C., Bosch, M., Mazzocchi, F.: A new relationship for multidisciplinary knowledge organization systems: dependence; González de Gómez, M.N., Goyannes Dill Orrico, E., Graciosa, L.: Grupos de investigación interdisciplinaria: flujos transversals de información; Rodríguez López, M. Del C., Santos de Paz, L., Gallego Lorenzo, J., Morán Suárez, M.A.: La red social conocimiento para la inmigración: el caso de Castilla y León; Ferrer Morillo, L.M., Portillo de Hernández, R.: Tesauros transdisciplinarios: del reduccionismo científico a la unidad del conocimiento; Guimarães, J.A.C. et al.: Los valores éticos en organización y representación del conocimiento (ORC); Davies, S.: Mediating knowledge across the activities of information science; Borrego Díaz, J., Chávez González, A.M.: Anomalías en ontologías provisionales; Bräscher, M., Monteiro, F., Silva, A.: Life cycle assessment ontology; Szotak, R.: Interdisciplinarity and the classification of scholarly documents by phenomena, theories and methods; Polsinelli Rubi, M., Spotti Lopes Fujita, M.: La política de indización en la perspectiva del conocimiento organizacional; Gutiérrez García, B., Rodríguez Yunta, L., Román Román, A.: Bases de datos bibliográficas y clasificación de revistas científicas: problemas de la interisciplinariedad para la automatización de procesos; Rodríguez Isaías García, F.,
Diez Diez, Á., Blanes Peiro, J.J., Rodríguez Sedano, F.J.: Diseño e implementación de un sistema de gestión de la actividad docente; Simon, J.: Probing concepts: knowledge and information as boundary objects in interdisciplinary discourse; Santiago Bufrem, L., Breda, S.M., Viana Sorribas, T.: The presence of logic in the domain of knowledge organization: interdisciplinary aspects of college curricula, Pluzhenskaia, M.. Research collaboration of Library and Information Science (LIS) schools# faculty members with LIS and non-LIS advanced degrees: multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary trends; Agrasso Neto, M., França de Abreu, A.: Modelo de servicio de referencia e información para portal de conocimiento de grupos de investigación; Ayuso García, M.D., Martínez Navarro, V.: Alfabetización informacional y servicios de referencia virtual; Barrionuevo Almuzara, L., Marsá Vila, M.: La biblioteca universitaria de Léon: pasos hacia la convergencia Europea; Lúcia Terra, A., Sá, S.: La recuperación de la información en la biblioteca escolar: la necesidad de competencias transdisciplinares; Vangari, V.M.: User-centred systems of information retrieval in the digital era; De Fátima Loureiro, M.: Information organization and visualization in cyberspace: interdisciplinary study based on concept maps

Pages

620 S

Type

s

7.520119E-4 = product of:
  0.0015040238 = sum of:
    0.0015040238 = product of:
      0.0030080476 = sum of:
        0.0030080476 = weight(_text_:s in 3262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0030080476 = score(doc=3262,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 3262, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3262)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: KO 36(2009) no.1, S.62-63 (K. La Barre): "This special issue of Axiomathes presents an ambitious dual agenda. It attempts to highlight aspects of facet analysis (as used in LIS) that are shared by cognate approaches in philosophy, psychology, linguistics and computer science. Secondarily, the issue aims to attract others to the study and use of facet analysis. The authors represent a blend of lifetime involvement with facet analysis, such as Vickery, Broughton, Beghtol, and Dahlberg; those with well developed research agendas such as Tudhope, and Priss; and relative newcomers such as Gnoli, Cheti and Paradisi, and Slavic. Omissions are inescapable, but a more balanced issue would have resulted from inclusion of at least one researcher from the Indian school of facet theory. Another valuable addition might have been a reaction to the issue by one of the chief critics of facet analysis. Potentially useful, but absent, is a comprehensive bibliography of resources for those wishing to engage in further study, that now lie scattered throughout the issue. Several of the papers assume relative familiarity with facet analytical concepts and definitions, some of which are contested even within LIS. Gnoli's introduction (p. 127-130) traces the trajectory, extensions and new developments of this analytico- synthetic approach to subject access, while providing a laundry list of cognate approaches that are similar to facet analysis. This brief essay and the article by Priss (p. 243-255) directly addresses this first part of Gnoli's agenda. Priss provides detailed discussion of facet-like structures in computer science (p. 245- 246), and outlines the similarity between Formal Concept Analysis and facets. This comparison is equally fruitful for researchers in computer science and library and information science. By bridging into a discussion of visualization challenges for facet display, further research is also invited. Many of the remaining papers comprehensively detail the intellectual heritage of facet analysis (Beghtol; Broughton, p. 195-198; Dahlberg; Tudhope and Binding, p. 213-215; Vickery). Beghtol's (p. 131-144) examination of the origins of facet theory through the lens of the textbooks written by Ranganathan's mentor W.C.B. Sayers (1881-1960), Manual of Classification (1926, 1944, 1955) and a textbook written by Mills A Modern Outline of Classification (1964), serves to reveal the deep intellectual heritage of the changes in classification theory over time, as well as Ranganathan's own influence on and debt to Sayers.

Pages

144 S

Source

Axiomathes. 18(2008) no.2, S.127-271

Type

s

7.520119E-4 = product of:
  0.0015040238 = sum of:
    0.0015040238 = product of:
      0.0030080476 = sum of:
        0.0030080476 = weight(_text_:s in 986) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0030080476 = score(doc=986,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 986, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=986)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

CATEGORIES IN KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION L. Hajibayova and E. K. Jacob. A Theoretical Framework for Operationalizing Basic Level Categories in Knowledge Organization Research - A. Y. Asundi. Epistemological Basis of some Common Categories - A Study of Space and Time As Common Concepts - A. Y. Asundi. Domain Specific Categories and Relations and their Potential Applications: A Case Study of Two Arrays of Agriculture Schedule of Colon Classification RELATIONSHIPS IN KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION K. S. Raghavan and A. Neelameghan. Indic Cultures and Concepts: Implications for Knowledge Organization - Eduardo Ismael Murguia and Rodrigo de Sales. CNPq.s Knowledge Area Table as a Knowledge and Power Apparatus - Maja Zumer, Marcia Lei Zeng and Joan S. Mitchell. FRBRizing KOS Relationships: Applying the FRBR Model to Versions of the DDC - D. Grant Campbell. Farradane.s Relational Indexing and its Relationship to Hyperlinking in Alzheimer.s Information - Elizabeth Milonas. Classifying Web Term Relationships: An Examination of the Search Result Pages of Two Major Search Engines - Rosa San Sengundo and Daniel Martinez Avila. New Conceptual Structures for the Digital Environment: From KOS to the Semantic Interconnection - A. Neelameghan and K.S. Raghavan. Concept of .Time., Semantic Relationships and Cultural Frames

Pages

X, 396 S

Type

s

7.4445386E-4 = product of:
  0.0014889077 = sum of:
    0.0014889077 = product of:
      0.0029778155 = sum of:
        0.0029778155 = weight(_text_:s in 1981) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0029778155 = score(doc=1981,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.059458308 = fieldWeight in 1981, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1981)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Pages

XXII1, 479 S

Type

s

7.4445386E-4 = product of:
  0.0014889077 = sum of:
    0.0014889077 = product of:
      0.0029778155 = sum of:
        0.0029778155 = weight(_text_:s in 2930) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0029778155 = score(doc=2930,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.059458308 = fieldWeight in 2930, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2930)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Pages

570 S

Type

s

7.368182E-4 = product of:
  0.0014736364 = sum of:
    0.0014736364 = product of:
      0.0029472727 = sum of:
        0.0029472727 = weight(_text_:s in 68) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0029472727 = score(doc=68,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.05884846 = fieldWeight in 68, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=68)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: Mitt. VÖB 59(2006) H.3, S.90-93 (O. Oberhauser): "What a marvellous book! [dies vorwegnehmend als Quintessenz der folgenden Rezension und auch für den englischsprachigen Verlag gedacht]. Den drei Herausgeberinnen, die an den Universitäten von Washington (Seattle, WA), Missouri (Columbia, MO) und Western Ontario (London, Kanada) lehren, ist das seltene Kunststück geglückt, einen Band zu erstellen, der nicht nur als mustergültige Einführung in die Thematik human information behaviour zu dienen vermag, sondern gleichzeitig auch als Nachschlagewerk zu den vielfältigen theoretischen Ansätzen innerhalb dieser bedeutenden Teildisziplin der Informationswissenschaft herangezogen werden kann. Wie sie selbst in der Danksagung feststellen, ist das Buch "a collaborative work of the information behavior community" (S. xvii), wobei die editorische Leistung vor allem darin lag, 85 Beitragende aus zehn Ländern zu koordinieren bzw. zur Abfassung von 72 Artikeln von jeweils ähnlicher Länge (bzw. Knappheit und Kürze), Gestaltung und Lesbarkeit zu veranlassen. Unter diesen 85 Beitragenden ist im übrigen alles versammelt, was in dieser Teildisziplin Rang und Namen hat, mit Ausnahme der leider bereits verstorbenen Soziologin Elfreda A. Chatman, einer der einflussreichsten Theoretikerinnen im Bereich des Informationsverhaltens, deren Andenken das Buch auch gewidmet ist.
Im Gegensatz zur früher üblichen Praxis, Informationsverhalten auf die Aktivitäten der Informationssuche zu beschränken, folgt man heute Tom Wilsons Definition, wonach es sich dabei um "the totality of human behaviour in relation to sources and channels of information, including both active and passive information-seeking, and information use" handelt, bzw. jener von Karen Pettigrew [nunmehr Fisher] et al., "how people need, seek, give and use information in different contexts". Im Laufe der letzten Jahre, ja schon Jahrzehnte, hat sich dazu ein fast nicht mehr überschaubarer Bestand an Literatur angesammelt, der sich sowohl aus theoretischen bzw. theoretisierenden, als auch aus auch praktischen bzw. empirischen Arbeiten zusammensetzt. Einige wenige dieser theoretischen Ansätze haben weite Verbreitung gefunden, werden in Studiengängen der Informationswissenschaft gelehrt und tauchen in der laufend veröffentlichten Literatur immer wieder als Basis für empirische Untersuchungen oder modifizierende Weiterentwicklungen auf. Das Buch beginnt mit drei Grundsatzartikeln, die von herausragenden Vertretern des gegenständlichen Themenbereichs verfasst wurden. Im ersten und längsten dieser Beiträge, An Introduction to Metatheories, Theories and Models (S. 1-24), gibt Marcia J. Bates (Los Angeles, CA), zunächst eine wissenschaftstheoretische Einführung zu den drei im Titel genannten Begriffen, nicht ohne darauf hinzuweisen, dass der Großteil der theoretisierenden Ansätze in unserer Disziplin erst dem Modellstadium angehört. Am Beispiel des Principle of Least Effort zeigt sie, dass selbst für diesen am besten abgesicherten Befund der Forschung zum Informationsverhalten, keine ausreichende theoretische Begründung existiert. In der Folge versucht Bates, die in der Informationswissenschaft gängigen Metatheorien zu identifizieren und gelangt dabei zu der folgenden Kategorisierung, die auch als Bezugsrahmen für die Einordnung der zahlreichen in diesem Buch dargestellten Modelle dienen kann:
Weitere Rez. in: JASIST 58(2007) no.2, S.303 (D.E. Agosto): "Due to the brevity of the entries, they serve more as introductions to a wide array of theories than as deep explorations of a select few. The individual entries are not as deep as those in more traditional reference volumes, such as The Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science (Drake, 2003) or The Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST) (Cronin, 2005), but the overall coverage is much broader. This volume is probably most useful to doctoral students who are looking for theoretical frameworks for nascent research projects or to more veteran researchers interested in an introductory overview of information behavior research, as those already familiar with this subfield also will probably already be familiar with most of the theories presented here. Since different authors have penned each of the various entries, the writing styles vary somewhat, but on the whole, this is a readable, pithy volume that does an excellent job of encapsulating this important area of information research."

Pages

xxii, 431 S

Type

s

7.368182E-4 = product of:
  0.0014736364 = sum of:
    0.0014736364 = product of:
      0.0029472727 = sum of:
        0.0029472727 = weight(_text_:s in 1973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0029472727 = score(doc=1973,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.05884846 = fieldWeight in 1973, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1973)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Introduction: Libraries and Their Interrelationships with Google - William Miller Disruptive Beneficence: The Google Print Program and the Future of Libraries - Mark Sandler The Google Library Project at Oxford - Ronald Milne The (Uncertain) Future of Libraries in a Google World: Sounding an Alarm - Rick Anderson A Gaggle of Googles: Limitations and Defects of Electronic Access as Panacea - -Mark Y. Herring Using the Google Search Appliance for Federated Searching: A Case Study - Mary Taylor Google's Print and Scholar Initiatives: The Value of and Impact on Libraries and Information Services - Robert J. Lackie Google Scholar vs. Library Scholar: Testing the Performance of Schoogle - Burton Callicott; Debbie Vaughn Google, the Invisible Web, and Librarians: Slaying the Research Goliath - Francine Egger-Sider; Jane Devine Choices in the Paradigm Shift: Where Next for Libraries? - Shelley E. Phipps; Krisellen Maloney Calling the Scholars Home: Google Scholar as a Tool for Rediscovering the Academic Library - Maurice C. York Checking Under the Hood: Evaluating Google Scholar for Reference Use - Janice Adlington; Chris Benda Running with the Devil: Accessing Library-Licensed Full Text Holdings Through Google Scholar - Rebecca Donlan; Rachel Cooke Directing Students to New Information Types: A New Role for Google in Literature Searches? - Mike Thelwall Evaluating Google Scholar as a Tool for Information Literacy Rachael Cathcart - Amanda Roberts Optimising Publications for Google Users - Alan Dawson Google and Privacy - Paul S. Piper Image: Google's Most Important Product - Ron Force Keeping Up with Google: Resources and Strategies for Staying Ahead of the Pack - Michael J. Krasulski; Steven J. Bell

Footnote

Co-published simultaneously as Internet reference services quarterly, vol. 10(1005), nos. 3/4 Rez. in: ZfBB 54(2007) H.2, S.98-99 (D. Lewandowski): "Google und Bibliotheken? Meist hat man leider den Eindruck, dass hier eher ein oder gedacht wird. Dies sehen auch die Herausgeber des vorliegenden Bandes und nehmen deshalb neben Beiträgen zur Diskussion um die Rolle der Bibliotheken im Zeitalter von Google auch solche auf, die Tipps zur Verwendung unterschiedlicher Google-Dienste geben. Die allgemeine Diskussion um Google und die Bibliotheken dreht sich vor allem um die Rolle, die Bibliotheken (mit ihren Informationsportalen) noch spielen können, wenn ihre Nutzer sowieso bei Google suchen, auch wenn die Bibliotheksangebote (zumindest von den Bibliothekaren) als überlegen empfunden werden. Auch wenn die Nutzer geschult werden, greifen sie doch meist lieber zur einfachen Recherchemöglichkeit bei Google oder anderen Suchmaschinen - vielleicht lässt sich die Situation am besten mit dem Satz eines im Buch zitierten Bibliothekars ausdrücken: »Everyone starts with Google except librarians.« (5.95) Sollen die Bibliotheken nun Google die einfache Recherche ganz überlassen und sich auf die komplexeren Suchfragen konzentrieren? Oder verlieren sie dadurch eine Nutzerschaft, die sich mittlerweile gar nicht mehr vorstellen kann, dass man mit anderen Werkzeugen als Suchmaschinen bessere Ergebnisse erzielen kann? Diese sicherlich für die Zukunft der Bibliotheken maßgebliche Frage wird in mehreren Beiträgen diskutiert, wobei auffällt, dass die jeweiligen Autoren keine klare Antwort bieten können, wie Bibliotheken ihre Quellen so präsentieren können, dass die Nutzer mit der Recherche so zufrieden sind, dass sie freiwillig in den Bibliotheksangeboten anstatt in Google recherchieren. Den Schwerpunkt des Buchs machen aber nicht diese eher theoretischen Aufsätze aus, sondern solche, die sich mit konkreten Google-Diensten beschäftigen. Aufgrund ihrer Nähe zu den Bibliotheksangeboten bzw. den Aufgaben der Bibliotheken sind dies vor allem Google Print und Google Scholar, aber auch die Google Search Appliance. Bei letzterer handelt es sich um eine integrierte Hard- und Softwarelösung, die die Indexierung von Inhalten aus unterschiedlichen Datenquellen ermöglicht. Der Aufsatz von Mary Taylor beschreibt die Vor- und Nachteile des Systems anhand der praktischen Anwendung in der University of Nevada.
Ebenfalls direkt aus der Praxis erhält der Leser Informationen zum Google-PrintProgramm. Robert Milne beschreibt die Zusammenarbeit von Google und der Universität Oxford. In diesem Aufsatz wird - was dem Autor natürlich nicht anzulasten ist - ein Problem des vorliegenden Werks deutlich: Viele Informationen sind doch von sehr beschränkter Haltbarkeit. Der Redaktionsschluss war im Frühsommer 2005, sodass sich in vielen Bereichen bereits neue Entwicklungen ergeben haben. Dies ist beim Print-Programm der Fall, vor allem wird es aber bei dem Hauptthema des Bandes, nämlich Google Scholar, deutlich. Dieser Dienst wurde im November 2004 gestartet und stieß auf unterschiedlichste Reaktionen, die (anhand von Beispielen amerikanischer Bibliotheken) im Beitrag von Maurice C. York beschrieben werden. Einige Bibliotheken nahmen den Dienst begeistert auf und verlinkten diesen mit Lob versehen auf ihren Websites. Andere reagierten gegenteilig und warnten vor dessen schlechter Qualität. Auch weil vorauszusehen war, dass Google Scholar bei den Nutzern gut ankommen würde, darf das folgende Statement von einer Bibliothekswebsite geradezu als ignorant gelten: Google Scholar »is wonderful for those who do not have access to the library's databases« (S.119). Wie nun die Scholar-Nutzer auf die Bibliotheksangebote gelenkt werden können, beschreibt der ironisch »Running with the Devil« betitelte Aufsatz von Rebecca Donlan und Rachel Cooke. Die Autorinnen beschreiben den Einsatz von Link-Resolvern und gehen auf die in Google Scholar bestehenden Probleme durch unklare Bezeichnungen in den Trefferlisten ein. Einige Beispiele zeigen, dass Google Scholar auch in Kombination mit der Verlinkung auf die Bibliotheksbestände keine befriedigende Recherchesituation herstellt, sondern vielmehr weitere Anstrengungen nötig sind, um »das Beste beider Welten« zusammenzuführen. Zwei weitere Aufsätze beschäftigen sich mit der Frage, wie gut Google Scholar eigentlich ist. Einmal geht es darum, wie gut Scholar den »ACRL Information Literacy Standards« genügt. Der zweite Beitrag vergleicht Google Scholar anhand von fünf Suchaufgaben einerseits mit einem lokalen Bibliothekskatalog, andererseits mit EBSCOs Academic Search Premier und jeweils einer fachspezifischen Datenbank. Die Ergebnisse zeigen keine durchgehende Überlegenheit einer Suchlösung, vielmehr wird deutlich, dass es auf die Auswahl des richtigen Suchwerkzeugs für die bestehende Suchanfrage ankommt bzw. dass erst eine Kombination dieser Werkzeuge zu optimalen Ergebnissen führt. Man könnte also auch hier wieder sagen: Google und Bibliotheken, nicht Google oder Bibliotheken.
Weitere Rez. in JASIST 59(2008) H.9, S.1531-1533 (J. Satyanesan): "Libraries and Google is an interesting and enlightening compilation of 18 articles on Google and its impact on libraries. The topic is very current, debatable, and thought provoking. Google has profoundly empowered individuals and transformed access to information and librarians are very much concerned about its popularity and visibility. In this book, the leading authorities discuss the usefulness of Google, its influence and potential menace to libraries, and its implications for libraries and the scholarly communication. They offer practical suggestions to cope with the changing situation. The articles are written from different perspective and express all shades of opinion, both hopeful and fearful. One can discern varied moods-apprehension, resignation, encouragement, and motivation-on the part of the librarians. This is an important book providing a wealth of information for the 21st century librarian. There is a section called "Indexing, Abstracting & Website/Internet Coverage," which lists major indexing and abstracting services and other tools for bibliographic access. The format of the articles is uniform with an introduction, key words, and with the exception of two articles the rest have summaries and conclusions. References and notes of varying lengths are included in each article. This book has been copublished simultaneously as Internet Reference Quarterly, 10(3/4), 2005. Although there are single articles written on Google and libraries, this is the first book-length treatment of the topic.

Pages

240 S

Type

s

6.512615E-4 = product of:
  0.001302523 = sum of:
    0.001302523 = product of:
      0.002605046 = sum of:
        0.002605046 = weight(_text_:s in 6299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.002605046 = score(doc=6299,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.052015185 = fieldWeight in 6299, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=6299)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: Machine translation review: 1999, no.10, S.26-27 (D. Lewis): "Cross Language Information Retrieval (CLIR) addresses the growing need to access large volumes of data across language boundaries. The typical requirement is for the user to input a free form query, usually a brief description of a topic, into a search or retrieval engine which returns a list, in ranked order, of documents or web pages that are relevant to the topic. The search engine matches the terms in the query to indexed terms, usually keywords previously derived from the target documents. Unlike monolingual information retrieval, CLIR requires query terms in one language to be matched to indexed terms in another. Matching can be done by bilingual dictionary lookup, full machine translation, or by applying statistical methods. A query's success is measured in terms of recall (how many potentially relevant target documents are found) and precision (what proportion of documents found are relevant). Issues in CLIR are how to translate query terms into index terms, how to eliminate alternative translations (e.g. to decide that French 'traitement' in a query means 'treatment' and not 'salary'), and how to rank or weight translation alternatives that are retained (e.g. how to order the French terms 'aventure', 'business', 'affaire', and 'liaison' as relevant translations of English 'affair'). Grefenstette provides a lucid and useful overview of the field and the problems. The volume brings together a number of experiments and projects in CLIR. Mark Davies (New Mexico State University) describes Recuerdo, a Spanish retrieval engine which reduces translation ambiguities by scanning indexes for parallel texts; it also uses either a bilingual dictionary or direct equivalents from a parallel corpus in order to compare results for queries on parallel texts. Lisa Ballesteros and Bruce Croft (University of Massachusetts) use a 'local feedback' technique which automatically enhances a query by adding extra terms to it both before and after translation; such terms can be derived from documents known to be relevant to the query.

Pages

VII,182 S

Type

s

6.512615E-4 = product of:
  0.001302523 = sum of:
    0.001302523 = product of:
      0.002605046 = sum of:
        0.002605046 = weight(_text_:s in 3586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.002605046 = score(doc=3586,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.052015185 = fieldWeight in 3586, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3586)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 56(2005) no.8, S.889-890 (J. Warner): "This work is a collection of papers, reflective and theoretical, rather than primarily empirical, from scholars in information systems and economies, with discursive rather than formal modes of argument and presentation. The discipline of information systems (IS) is understood to have developed as codified knowledge about appropriate procedures for the development of customized information and communication technology (ICT) applications. The editors recognize that, with the displacement of customized applications by purchased packages, IS lost its main utility as a prescription for professional practice in the 1990s. The need for the scholarly community to establish its continuing value and to survive might be orte motivation for the increasing resort to theory. A difference in perspective between IS and economies is acknowledged: economiet take an outside-in approach to the results of innovation while IS focuses an the process of innovation. Recognition does not extend to synthesis, and a dynamic by which the process of Innovation both generates and is compelled by the resulting sociotechnical environment is not isolated. The literature of information science is not cited-other writers have noted the analogies between the subjects and disjunctions between the disciplines of IS and information science (Ellis, Allen, & Wilson, 1999)-but interdisciplinary dialogue is advocated. For information science readers, the interest of the work lies in the analogies between topics treated and the emerging theoretical reflection an them. Theory seems to have emerged primarily as a response to empirical difficulties, particularly contradictions between expectations and reality, and can reproduce the divides which motivated it. Empirical generalizations are not distinguished from the motivating forces which created the phenomena covered by those generalizations. For instance, the social constructivist perspective which argues that impact of technology is a matter of interpretation by human actors according to their social conditions, and which acknowledges the interpretive flexibility of a technology in use, is introduced, but technology is not fully recognized as a radical human construction, "organs of the human brain, created by the human hand" (Marx, 1973, p. 706; Warner, 2004), and the notion of impact is retained. The productivity paradox, understood as the weak correlation between investment in ICT and commercial success, forms a recurrent concern. A simple response might that the commercial value of a technology lies in the way it is used. More sophisticatedly the paradox could be regarded as an artifact of the apparent rigor and closeness, particularly temporal closeness, of studies and could be reinterpreted as a productivity effect, corresponding to a transition cost. The conclusion does not recall the distinction between invention, innovation, and diffusion, promised in the preface, and invention tends to be treated as if it were exogenous. The most interesting insights emerge from accounts of cited papers, particularly Ciborra's view of technology as being assimilated to the social by the device of hospitality and Orlikowski's reflections an technology.

Pages

219 S

Type

s

6.512615E-4 = product of:
  0.001302523 = sum of:
    0.001302523 = product of:
      0.002605046 = sum of:
        0.002605046 = weight(_text_:s in 3592) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.002605046 = score(doc=3592,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.052015185 = fieldWeight in 3592, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3592)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: CRIS-Cross: Research Information Systems at a Crossroads (Eric H. Zimmerman) Current Research Information as Part of Digital Libraries and the Heterogeneity Problem: Integrated searches in the context of databases with different content analyses (Jürgen Krause) CERIF: Past, Present and Future: An Overview (Anne Asserson, Keith G Jeffery, Andrei Lopatenko) Treatment of Semantic fleterogeneity using Meta-Data Extraction and Query Translation (Robert Strötgen) Proposals for a new flexible and extensible XML-model for exchange of research information (Jens Vindvad, Erlend Oeverby), Information Retrieval of Research Information in a Distributed Heterogeneous Environment (Andrei Lopatenko, Anne Asserson, Keith G Jeffery) Effectiveness of tagging laboratory data using Dublin Core in an electronic scientific notebook (Laura M. Bartolo, Cathy S. Lowe, Austin C Melton, Monica Strah, Louis Feng, Christopher J. Woolverton) Comparative Study of Metadata for Scientific Information: The place of CERIF in CRISs and Scientific Repositories (Keith G Jeffery, Andrei Lopatenko, Anne Asserson) Metasearch engine for Austrian research information (Marek Andricik) SEAL - a SEmantic portAL with content management functionality (Steffen Staab, Rudi Studer, York Sure, Raphael Volz) Discovery of patterns of scientific and technological development and knowledge transfer (Anthony FJ van Raan, Ed C. M. Noyons)

Pages

232 S

Type

s

6.512615E-4 = product of:
  0.001302523 = sum of:
    0.001302523 = product of:
      0.002605046 = sum of:
        0.002605046 = weight(_text_:s in 839) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.002605046 = score(doc=839,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.052015185 = fieldWeight in 839, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=839)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: Part I-Foundations of Access to Visual Information Intellectual Access to Images (Hsin-liang Chen and Edie M. Rasmussen) - Image Retrieval as Linguistic and Nonlinguistic Visual Model Matching (P. Bryan Heidorn) - Computer Vision Tools for Finding Images and Video Sequences (D. A. Forsyth) Part II-Implementation and Evaluation Securing Digital Image Assets in Museums and Libraries: A Risk Management Approach (Teresa Grose Beamsley) - Getting the Picture: Observations from the Library of Congress on Providing Access to Pictorial Images (Caroline R. Arms) - Recent Developments in Cultural Heritage Image Databases: Directions for User-Centered Design (Christie Stephenson) - Evaluation of Image Retrieval Systems: Role of User Feedback (Samantha K. Hastings) Part III-Experimental Approaches Information Retrieval Beyond the Text Document (Yong Rui, Michael Ortega, Thomas S. Huang, and Sharad Mehrotra) - Precise and Efficient Retrieval of Captioned Images: The MARIE Project (Neil C. Rowe) - Exploiting Multimodal Context in Image Retrieval (Rohini K. Srihari and Zhongfei Zhang)

Source

Library trends. 48(1999) no.2, S.291-520

Type

s

6.512615E-4 = product of:
  0.001302523 = sum of:
    0.001302523 = product of:
      0.002605046 = sum of:
        0.002605046 = weight(_text_:s in 441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.002605046 = score(doc=441,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.052015185 = fieldWeight in 441, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=441)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 57(2006) no.5, S.724-725 (P.K. Nayar): "The network society (Castells, 1996) calls for radically new definitions of the public sphere. and this is what Shaping the Network Society's essays set out to do. The first section lays out the essential issues at stake here: human rights, the sociology of cyberspace. and globalization. Oliver BoydBarrett characterizes cyberspace as exclusive. Pointing to the almost total corporate control of the technologies of cyberspace. Boyd-Barrett argues that any attempt of huge corporate bodies to get into grassroots democracy should be viewed with suspicion. The institution of a public sphere. argues Boyd-Barrett, must begin with an assessment of how far the Internet at fords a space of contestation of elitist governing frameworks. Gary Chapman looks at Italy's slow food movement as a counter to the technoglobalist trends, and suggests that the globaltechnological imperative must not be allowed to occlude human values. Rather we need a social imperative here. one which thinks about technology as "malleable, as capable of serving human-determined ends" (p. 64). Cees Hamelink discusses how four rights-right to speech. democratic order, equal participation in social life. and cultural identity are threatened by what he terms the billboardization of society in the networked age. In the second section a range of case studies are presented. Kate Williams and Abdul Alkalimat survey every public computing facility in Toledo (Ohio) to map the parameters of public access to information and decision-making. They conclude that government public computing sites arc situated randomly, community sites are in economically rich or poor (but not middle-stratum) localities, and that commercial and university sites are influenced by market forces. They suggest that future research must necessarily focus on what forms of cyberpower emerge through such use of public computing.

Pages

433 S

Type

s