-
Hori, I.: ¬The cognitive structure of classification work (1989)
0.01
0.01077042 = product of:
0.02154084 = sum of:
0.02154084 = product of:
0.04308168 = sum of:
0.04308168 = weight(_text_:22 in 3553) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04308168 = score(doc=3553,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1590723 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045425482 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3553, 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=3553)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 25.12.1995 22:12:09
-
Eastman, C.M.: Overlaps in postings to thesaurus terms : a preliminary study (1988)
0.01
0.01077042 = product of:
0.02154084 = sum of:
0.02154084 = product of:
0.04308168 = sum of:
0.04308168 = weight(_text_:22 in 3555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04308168 = score(doc=3555,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1590723 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045425482 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3555, 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=3555)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 25.12.1995 22:52:34
-
Hodges, P.R.: Keyword in title indexes : effectiveness of retrieval in computer searches (1983)
0.01
0.01077042 = product of:
0.02154084 = sum of:
0.02154084 = product of:
0.04308168 = sum of:
0.04308168 = weight(_text_:22 in 5001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04308168 = score(doc=5001,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1590723 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045425482 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5001, 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=5001)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 14. 3.1996 13:22:21
-
Walker, A.: Australia's pictorial collections on interactive videodisc (1989)
0.01
0.01077042 = product of:
0.02154084 = sum of:
0.02154084 = product of:
0.04308168 = sum of:
0.04308168 = weight(_text_:22 in 2477) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04308168 = score(doc=2477,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1590723 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045425482 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2477, 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=2477)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 3. 1.1999 11:22:04
-
Studwell, W.E.: Why not an 'AACR' for subject headings? (1985)
0.01
0.01077042 = product of:
0.02154084 = sum of:
0.02154084 = product of:
0.04308168 = sum of:
0.04308168 = weight(_text_:22 in 363) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04308168 = score(doc=363,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1590723 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045425482 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 363, 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=363)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 7. 1.2007 13:22:01
-
Striedieck, S.: Online catalog maintenance : the OOPS command in LIAS (1985)
0.01
0.01077042 = product of:
0.02154084 = sum of:
0.02154084 = product of:
0.04308168 = sum of:
0.04308168 = weight(_text_:22 in 366) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04308168 = score(doc=366,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1590723 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045425482 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 366, 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=366)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 7. 1.2007 13:22:30
-
Chafe, W.L.: Meaning and the structure of language (1980)
0.01
0.01077042 = product of:
0.02154084 = sum of:
0.02154084 = product of:
0.04308168 = sum of:
0.04308168 = weight(_text_:22 in 220) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04308168 = score(doc=220,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1590723 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045425482 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 220, 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=220)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 4.2007 12:21:29
-
Devadason, F.J.: Postulate-Based Permuted Subject Indexing Language as a metalanguage for computer-aided generation of information retrieval thesaurus (1983)
0.01
0.009231788 = product of:
0.018463576 = sum of:
0.018463576 = product of:
0.036927152 = sum of:
0.036927152 = weight(_text_:22 in 1637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036927152 = score(doc=1637,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1590723 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045425482 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1637, 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=1637)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- International forum on information and documentation. 8(1983), S.22-29
-
Sievert, M.E.; McKinin, E.J.: Why full-text misses some relevant documents : an analysis of documents not retrieved by CCML or MEDIS (1989)
0.01
0.009231788 = product of:
0.018463576 = sum of:
0.018463576 = product of:
0.036927152 = sum of:
0.036927152 = weight(_text_:22 in 3564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036927152 = score(doc=3564,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1590723 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045425482 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3564, 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=3564)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 9. 1.1996 10:22:31
-
Miller, J.: From subject headings for audiovisual media (1988)
0.01
0.009231788 = product of:
0.018463576 = sum of:
0.018463576 = product of:
0.036927152 = sum of:
0.036927152 = weight(_text_:22 in 324) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036927152 = score(doc=324,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1590723 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045425482 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 324, 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=324)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Inspel. 22(1988), S.121-145
-
Woodhead, P.A.; Martin, J.V.: Subject specialization in British university libraries : a survey (1982)
0.01
0.009231788 = product of:
0.018463576 = sum of:
0.018463576 = product of:
0.036927152 = sum of:
0.036927152 = weight(_text_:22 in 468) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036927152 = score(doc=468,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1590723 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045425482 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 468, 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=468)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 9. 2.1997 18:44:22
-
Theory and application of information research : Proc. of the 2nd Int. Research Forum on Information Science, 3.-6.8.1977 ... Copenhagen (1980)
0.01
0.009110626 = product of:
0.018221252 = sum of:
0.018221252 = product of:
0.036442503 = sum of:
0.036442503 = weight(_text_:w in 1312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036442503 = score(doc=1312,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17310768 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
0.045425482 = queryNorm
0.21051927 = fieldWeight in 1312, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1312)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- Enthält die Beiträge: VICKERY, B.C.: An approach to information science; HENRIKSEN, T.: Information science: towards consensus; HOEL, I.A.L.: On the concept of knowledge and its relation to information science; PRATT, A.D. Information and emmorphosis: an attempt at definition; BRITTAIN, J.M.: What are the distinctive characteristics of information science? MEY, M. de: The relevance of the cognitive paradigm for information science; BIVINS, K.T. Concept formation: the evidence from experimental psychology and linguistics and its relationship to information science; DEBONS, A.: Foundations of information science; WELLISCH, H.H.: The cybernetics of bibliographic control: toward a theory of document retrieval systems; FAIRTHORNE, R.A. Bradford's law and perspective; BROOKES, B.C.: People versus particles; GRIFFITHS, J.-M.: Alternative approaches to information retrieval system simulation; GOFFMAN, W.: On the effectiveness problem in communication; ROBERTSON, S.E.: Some recent theories and models in information retrieval; HEINE, M.H.: The 'question' as a fundamental variable in information science; PEJTERSEN, A.M.: Sesign of a classification scheme for fiction based on an analysis of actual user-librarian communication; and use of the scheme for control of librarians' search strategies; INGWERSEN, P., T. JOHANSEN u. P. TIMMERMANN: User-librarian negotiations and search procedures: a progress report; KOCHEN, M.: Control of attention in raising consciousness about community issues; BELKIN, N.J.: The problem of 'matching' in information retrieval; WILSON, T.D.: Information system design implications of research into the information behavoiur of social workers and social administrators; NEVELING, U. u. G. WERSIG: The information scientist of the 1980s in Europe
-
Subject control in online catalogs (1989)
0.01
0.009110626 = product of:
0.018221252 = sum of:
0.018221252 = product of:
0.036442503 = sum of:
0.036442503 = weight(_text_:w in 235) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036442503 = score(doc=235,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17310768 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
0.045425482 = queryNorm
0.21051927 = fieldWeight in 235, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=235)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Footnote
- Rez. in: Library resources and technical services 35(1990) S.119-120 (P. Lisbon); International classification 18(1991) S.238-239 (W. Gödert)
-
Lancaster, F.W.: Evaluating the performance of a large computerized information system (1985)
0.01
0.0072885007 = product of:
0.014577001 = sum of:
0.014577001 = product of:
0.029154003 = sum of:
0.029154003 = weight(_text_:w in 3649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029154003 = score(doc=3649,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17310768 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
0.045425482 = queryNorm
0.16841541 = fieldWeight in 3649, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3649)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- F. W. Lancaster is known for his writing an the state of the art in librarylinformation science. His skill in identifying significant contributions and synthesizing literature in fields as diverse as online systems, vocabulary control, measurement and evaluation, and the paperless society have earned him esteem as a chronicler of information science. Equally deserving of repute is his own contribution to research in the discipline-his evaluation of the MEDLARS operating system. The MEDLARS study is notable for several reasons. It was the first large-scale application of retrieval experiment methodology to the evaluation of an actual operating system. As such, problems had to be faced that do not arise in laboratory-like conditions. One example is the problem of recall: how to determine, for a very large and dynamic database, the number of documents relevant to a given search request. By solving this problem and others attendant upon transferring an experimental methodology to the real world, Lancaster created a constructive procedure that could be used to improve the design and functioning of retrieval systems. The MEDLARS study is notable also for its contribution to our understanding of what constitutes a good index language and good indexing. The ideal retrieval system would be one that retrieves all and only relevant documents. The failures that occur in real operating systems, when a relevant document is not retrieved (a recall failure) or an irrelevant document is retrieved (a precision failure), can be analysed to assess the impact of various factors an the performance of the system. This is exactly what Lancaster did. He found both the MEDLARS indexing and the McSH index language to be significant factors affecting retrieval performance. The indexing, primarily because it was insufficiently exhaustive, explained a large number of recall failures. The index language, largely because of its insufficient specificity, accounted for a large number of precision failures. The purpose of identifying factors responsible for a system's failures is ultimately to improve the system. Unlike many user studies, the MEDLARS evaluation yielded recommendations that were eventually implemented.* Indexing exhaustivity was increased and the McSH index language was enriched with more specific terms and a larger entry vocabulary.
-
Taube, M.: Functional approach to bibliographic organization : a critique and a proposal (1985)
0.01
0.0063774376 = product of:
0.012754875 = sum of:
0.012754875 = product of:
0.02550975 = sum of:
0.02550975 = weight(_text_:w in 3635) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02550975 = score(doc=3635,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17310768 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
0.045425482 = queryNorm
0.14736348 = fieldWeight in 3635, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3635)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The idea of computing with concepts as mathematicians manipulate variables in equations goes back at least as far as G. W. Leibniz (1663). Leibniz dreamed of a universal calculus, an ambiguity-free language, with which scholars could communicate ideas with mathematical precision. George Boole, in his investigation of the laws of thought, contributed to the realization of this idea by developing a calculus of classes (1847). A modern visionary who saw a practical application of Boole's work and further contributed to the idea of communicating by "computing" was Mortimer Taube (1910-1965), a member of the Library of Congress staff from 1944 to 1949 who later founded Documentation, Inc. He proposed communicating with a mechanized information store by combining concepts using the Boolean operators, AND, OR and NOT. The following selection contains one of the first presentations of a technique Taube called "coordinate indexing" and what later has come to be called "post coordinate indexing" or Boolean searching. This selection is interesting an three counts. It is interesting first of all because of its early date-1950. Though the idea of coordinate indexing had been anticipated in manual systems of the punched card sort, these systems were limited, relying for the most part an repeated application of the AND operator. To conceptualize the full power that could be achieved by Boolean search strategy in mechanized systems was an imaginative step forward. Second, the selection is interesting insofar as the idea of coordinate indexing is couched, indeed nearly hidden, in a somewhat ponderous essay an the compatibility of universal and special classifications and the merits of different methods of information organization. Ponderous though it is, the essay is worth a careful reading. The perspective it gives is enlightening, a reminder that the roots of information science reach far back into the bibliographic past. The third and perhaps most interesting aspect of this selection is that in it Taube looks beyond the technique of coordinate indexing to envisage its implications an bibliographic organization. (Now more than thirty years later we are still attempting to understand these implications.) What Taube saw was a new method of bibliographic organization, which, not ingenuously, he observed might seem almost bumptious in the face of a two thousand year history of organizing information. This "new" method was, however, being proposed elsewhere, albeit in different guise, by S. R. Ranganathan (q.v.) and his school. It was the method of organizing information using abstract categories called fields or facets. These categories, unlike those used in the great traditional classifications, were not locked in procrustean hierarchical structures, but could be freely synthesized or combined in indexing or retrieval. In short, Taube's voice was among those at midcentury supporting the move from enumerative to synthetic subject approaches. The fact that it was an American voice and one especially weIl informed about bibliography and computers is perhaps what led Jesse Shera to refer to Taube as "the Melvil Dewey ... of midtwentieth century American Librarianship," one who was able "to weld successfully conventional librarianship and the then-emerging information science."
-
Pettee, J.: ¬The subject approach to books and the development of the dictionary catalog (1985)
0.01
0.0061545256 = product of:
0.012309051 = sum of:
0.012309051 = product of:
0.024618102 = sum of:
0.024618102 = weight(_text_:22 in 3624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024618102 = score(doc=3624,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1590723 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045425482 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3624, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3624)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Footnote
- Original in: Pettee, J.: The history and theory of the alphabetical subject approach to books. New York: Wilson 1946. S.22-25.
-
Mooers, C.N.: ¬The indexing language of an information retrieval system (1985)
0.01
0.00538521 = product of:
0.01077042 = sum of:
0.01077042 = product of:
0.02154084 = sum of:
0.02154084 = weight(_text_:22 in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02154084 = score(doc=3644,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1590723 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045425482 = queryNorm
0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Footnote
- Original in: Information retrieval today: papers presented at an Institute conducted by the Library School and the Center for Continuation Study, University of Minnesota, Sept. 19-22, 1962. Ed. by Wesley Simonton. Minneapolis, Minn.: The Center, 1963. S.21-36.
