Search (2902 results, page 1 of 146)

0.18156424 = product of:
  0.36312848 = sum of:
    0.24206336 = weight(_text_:fields in 1038) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.24206336 = score(doc=1038,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.76591945 = fieldWeight in 1038, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1038)
    0.12106511 = weight(_text_:22 in 1038) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12106511 = score(doc=1038,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 1038, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1038)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.17800082 = product of:
  0.35600165 = sum of:
    0.3041166 = weight(_text_:3a in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.3041166 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.5411154 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
    0.051885046 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051885046 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Content

Vgl.: http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CEAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.91.4940%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&ei=dOXrUMeIDYHDtQahsIGACg&usg=AFQjCNHFWVh6gNPvnOrOS9R3rkrXCNVD-A&sig2=5I2F5evRfMnsttSgFF9g7Q&bvm=bv.1357316858,d.Yms.

Date

8. 1.2013 10:22:32

0.15438034 = product of:
  0.30876067 = sum of:
    0.2395806 = weight(_text_:fields in 5092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2395806 = score(doc=5092,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.7580637 = fieldWeight in 5092, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5092)
    0.069180064 = weight(_text_:22 in 5092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.069180064 = score(doc=5092,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5092, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5092)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Presents a list of 53 periodicals in 22 subject fields which regularly provide bibliographies of theses, research in progress and patents in their particular subject field. The fields of business, economics, history and literature have most periodical listings of dissertations and theses. Also lists 63 periodicals in 25 sub-disciplines which provide rankings or ratings. Rankings and ratings information predominates in the fields of business, sports and games, finance and banking, and library and information science

0.1323984 = product of:
  0.2647968 = sum of:
    0.19561674 = weight(_text_:fields in 2830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19561674 = score(doc=2830,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.6189564 = fieldWeight in 2830, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2830)
    0.069180064 = weight(_text_:22 in 2830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.069180064 = score(doc=2830,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2830, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2830)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The PRO-CITE and BIBLIO-LINK software packages make the process of compiling bibliographies and internal data bases much easier than when all the steps in the process were manual (compiling, typing). The 2 programs work on records that have been downloaded from on-line data bases. BIBLIO-LINK analyses the downloaded records to determine document type and stores the data in the appropriate PRO-CITE workform, putting fields from the downloaded record into the correct PRO-CITE fields.

Source

Computers in libraries. 9(1989) no.4, S.22-24

0.1323984 = product of:
  0.2647968 = sum of:
    0.19561674 = weight(_text_:fields in 7181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19561674 = score(doc=7181,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.6189564 = fieldWeight in 7181, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7181)
    0.069180064 = weight(_text_:22 in 7181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.069180064 = score(doc=7181,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7181, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7181)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Notes that the information needs and information seeking behaviour of scholars and students in interdisciplinary fields has been studied very little. The few scattered studies available suggest that such fields may require striking and distinctive information seeking adaptations by researchers that mark this area as different and very much deserving of research. Discusses the kinds of research needed at both basic and applied levels

Date

14. 4.1997 20:22:55

0.12968874 = product of:
  0.25937748 = sum of:
    0.1729024 = weight(_text_:fields in 4290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1729024 = score(doc=4290,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.54708534 = fieldWeight in 4290, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4290)
    0.08647508 = weight(_text_:22 in 4290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08647508 = score(doc=4290,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4290, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4290)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Part 11 of a continuing series devoted to new online and CD-ROM databases in the fields of social sciences, humanities, news and general coverage

Source

Online and CD-ROM review. 22(1998) no.3, S.169-190

0.12968874 = product of:
  0.25937748 = sum of:
    0.1729024 = weight(_text_:fields in 2682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1729024 = score(doc=2682,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.54708534 = fieldWeight in 2682, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2682)
    0.08647508 = weight(_text_:22 in 2682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08647508 = score(doc=2682,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2682, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2682)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Part 1 of a continuing series devoted to new online and CD-ROM databases in the fields of social sciences, humanities, news and general coverage

Date

17. 1.1999 10:44:22

0.12968874 = product of:
  0.25937748 = sum of:
    0.1729024 = weight(_text_:fields in 3563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1729024 = score(doc=3563,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.54708534 = fieldWeight in 3563, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3563)
    0.08647508 = weight(_text_:22 in 3563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08647508 = score(doc=3563,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3563, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3563)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Part 12 of a continuing series devoted to new online and CD-ROM databases in the fields of social sciences, humanities, news and general coverage. Information about the new databases were obtained from the Gale Directory of Databases

Source

Online and CD-ROM review. 22(1998) no.5, S.323-336

0.12968874 = product of:
  0.25937748 = sum of:
    0.1729024 = weight(_text_:fields in 4992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1729024 = score(doc=4992,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.54708534 = fieldWeight in 4992, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4992)
    0.08647508 = weight(_text_:22 in 4992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08647508 = score(doc=4992,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4992, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4992)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Date

14. 2.2012 12:53:22

Footnote

This article corrects: Thoughts on uncitedness: Nobel laureates and Fields medalists as case studies in: JASIST 62(2011) no,8, S.1637-1644.

0.12968396 = product of:
  0.2593679 = sum of:
    0.20748287 = weight(_text_:fields in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20748287 = score(doc=136,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.65650237 = fieldWeight in 136, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=136)
    0.051885046 = weight(_text_:22 in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051885046 = score(doc=136,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 136, 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=136)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Bibliographic relationships have taken on even greater importance in the context of ongoing efforts to integrate concepts from the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) into cataloging codes and database structures. In MARC 21, the linking entry fields are a major mechanism for expressing relationships between bibliographic records. Taxonomies of bibliographic relationships have been proposed by Tillett, with an extension by Smiraglia, and in FRBR itself. The present exercise is to provide a detailed bidirectional mapping of the MARC 21 linking fields to these two schemes. The correspondence of the Tillett taxonomic divisions to the MARC categorization of the linking fields as chronological, horizontal, or vertical is examined as well. Application of the findings to MARC format development and system functionality is discussed.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.12968396 = product of:
  0.2593679 = sum of:
    0.20748287 = weight(_text_:fields in 2695) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20748287 = score(doc=2695,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.65650237 = fieldWeight in 2695, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2695)
    0.051885046 = weight(_text_:22 in 2695) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051885046 = score(doc=2695,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2695, 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=2695)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The bibliometric measure impact factor is a leading indicator of journal influence, and impact factors are routinely used in making decisions ranging from selecting journal subscriptions to allocating research funding to deciding tenure cases. Yet journal impact factors have increased gradually over time, and moreover impact factors vary widely across academic disciplines. Here we quantify inflation over time and differences across fields in impact factor scores and determine the sources of these differences. We find that the average number of citations in reference lists has increased gradually, and this is the predominant factor responsible for the inflation of impact factor scores over time. Field-specific variation in the fraction of citations to literature indexed by Thomson Scientific's Journal Citation Reports is the single greatest contributor to differences among the impact factors of journals in different fields. The growth rate of the scientific literature as a whole, and cross-field differences in net size and growth rate of individual fields, have had very little influence on impact factor inflation or on cross-field differences in impact factor.

Date

23. 2.2009 18:22:28

0.12671526 = product of:
  0.50686103 = sum of:
    0.50686103 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.50686103 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.5411154 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja

0.11827415 = product of:
  0.2365483 = sum of:
    0.19331077 = weight(_text_:fields in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19331077 = score(doc=4186,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.61166 = fieldWeight in 4186, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4186)
    0.04323754 = weight(_text_:22 in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04323754 = score(doc=4186,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4186, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4186)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The Impact Factors (IFs) of the Institute for Scientific Information suffer from a number of drawbacks, among them the statistics-Why should one use the mean and not the median?-and the incomparability among fields of science because of systematic differences in citation behavior among fields. Can these drawbacks be counteracted by fractionally counting citation weights instead of using whole numbers in the numerators? (a) Fractional citation counts are normalized in terms of the citing sources and thus would take into account differences in citation behavior among fields of science. (b) Differences in the resulting distributions can be tested statistically for their significance at different levels of aggregation. (c) Fractional counting can be generalized to any document set including journals or groups of journals, and thus the significance of differences among both small and large sets can be tested. A list of fractionally counted IFs for 2008 is available online at http:www.leydesdorff.net/weighted_if/weighted_if.xls The between-group variance among the 13 fields of science identified in the U.S. Science and Engineering Indicators is no longer statistically significant after this normalization. Although citation behavior differs largely between disciplines, the reflection of these differences in fractionally counted citation distributions can not be used as a reliable instrument for the classification.

Date

22. 1.2011 12:51:07

0.11807865 = product of:
  0.2361573 = sum of:
    0.13832192 = weight(_text_:fields in 3601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13832192 = score(doc=3601,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.43766826 = fieldWeight in 3601, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3601)
    0.097835384 = weight(_text_:22 in 3601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.097835384 = score(doc=3601,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 3601, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3601)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Explains how 5 Internet search engines (AltaVista, HotBot, InfoSeek, Lycos, and Yahoo) handle field searching. Includes a chart which identifies where on a search engine's page a particular field is searched and the prefix syntax used, and gives examples. Details the individual fields that can be searched: data, title, URL, images, audiovideo and other page content, links and page depth

Source

Online. 22(1998) no.3, S.18-22

0.11584859 = product of:
  0.23169719 = sum of:
    0.17116463 = weight(_text_:fields in 7890) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17116463 = score(doc=7890,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.5415868 = fieldWeight in 7890, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7890)
    0.060532555 = weight(_text_:22 in 7890) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060532555 = score(doc=7890,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7890, 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=7890)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Describes the features of a library automation application called Micro CDS/ISIS. The software produced by UNESCO is used by more than 15.000 instituions all over the world. It is cost free and readily available. Its technical features include minimum hardware requirements, large database capacity, variable length fields, repeatable fields, subfields, powerful indexing, and rapid searching. It follows international data exchange standards. Support features include extensive documentation and a worldwide user group. Training courses in CDS/ISIS are conducted worldwide. These features ensure that CDS/ISIS library software is ideal for developing countries

Date

6. 3.1997 16:22:15

0.11584859 = product of:
  0.23169719 = sum of:
    0.17116463 = weight(_text_:fields in 4874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17116463 = score(doc=4874,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.5415868 = fieldWeight in 4874, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4874)
    0.060532555 = weight(_text_:22 in 4874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060532555 = score(doc=4874,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4874, 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=4874)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

NOVAGate is a subject-based information gateway covering electronic resources in the agricultural, veterinary and related fields. The service, which opened in July 1998, is produced by the veterinary and agricultural libraries of the 5 Nordic countries - Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden - which serve the NOVA University. The gateway covers Nordic and European resources as well as the resources of international organizations, but being planned is a network of subject gateways which will give access to a wide range of international quality resources within the agricultural, veterinary and related fields. The service uses the ROADS software

Date

22. 6.2002 19:41:00

0.11584859 = product of:
  0.23169719 = sum of:
    0.17116463 = weight(_text_:fields in 129) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17116463 = score(doc=129,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.5415868 = fieldWeight in 129, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=129)
    0.060532555 = weight(_text_:22 in 129) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060532555 = score(doc=129,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 129, 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=129)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Papers on the cataloging of electronic resources have focused on electronic journals and Internet resources such as Web sites and not on electronic books. Electronic books are nonserial monographic resources accessed with a computer either directly or remotely. Rules and standards for cataloging electronic resources have changed and continue to change. This article discusses the electronic book as a unique manifestation and provides practical instruction on the application of current cataloging rules. The cataloging elements covered are control fields and variable data fields, including classification, uniform titles, title information, edition information, type and extent of the resource, publication and distribution information, physical description, series statements, notes, and subject analysis.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.11578524 = product of:
  0.23157048 = sum of:
    0.17968544 = weight(_text_:fields in 5257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17968544 = score(doc=5257,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.5685477 = fieldWeight in 5257, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5257)
    0.051885046 = weight(_text_:22 in 5257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051885046 = score(doc=5257,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5257, 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=5257)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Bioinformatics is a multifaceted discipline combining many scientific fields including computational biology, statistics, mathematics, molecular biology, and genetics. Bioinformatics enables biomedical investigators to exploit existing and emerging computational technologies to seamlessly store, mine, retrieve, and analyze data from genomics and proteomics technologies. This is achieved by creating unified data models, standardizing data interfaces, developing structured vocabularies, generating new data visualization methods, and capturing detailed metadata that describes various aspects of the experimental design and analysis methods. Already there are a number of related undertakings that are dividing the field into more specialized groups. Clinical Bioinformatics and Biomedical Informatics are emerging as transitional fields to promote the utilization of genomics and proteomics data combined with medical history and demographic data towards personalized medicine, molecular diagnostics, pharmacogenomics and predicting outcomes of therapeutic interventions. The field of bioinformatics will continue to evolve through the incorporation of diverse technologies and methodologies that draw experts from disparate fields to create the latest computational and informational tools specifically design for the biomedical research enterprise.

Date

22. 7.2006 14:21:27

0.10806997 = product of:
  0.21613994 = sum of:
    0.1729024 = weight(_text_:fields in 5077) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1729024 = score(doc=5077,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.54708534 = fieldWeight in 5077, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5077)
    0.04323754 = weight(_text_:22 in 5077) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04323754 = score(doc=5077,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5077, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5077)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

How does information lead to changes in human behavior? Why have current information theories been inadequate to shed light on this and related questions? Library and Information Science (LIS) has arrived at a crucial juncture in its relatively brief theoretical history. In addition to the cognitive and physical perspectives in our study of information, a new paradigm has been suggested; the affective paradigm. This new perspective offers keys to unlocking questions about the nature of the interaction of human and information. In recent years we have developed deeper knowledge and deeper specializations, drawing together and combining knowledge from multiple fields in order to advance our own knowledge. The relationship between information needs and information seeking has been well studied. The ways in which people use information is not as well understood because of the complex nature of human behavior. Drawing from other fields that study human behavior, however, muddies the traditional boundaries of LIS, creating some possible discomfort as we trespass into lesser known intellectual territory. Pushing our boundaries also forces questions of our self-identity as a discipline. What constitutes Library and Information Science, either in whole or in part, becomes more difficult to define and can lead to greater fragmentation. Alternatively, the incorporation of multiple perspectives may be the defining core of what constitutes LIS. The focus of this talk is to look at LIS from the outside in, from a multidisciplinary perspective, in order to shed light on questions of how information can lead to changes in human behavior. Drawing from other fields of study, the impact of information on human behavior will be explored in light of what other fields may have to offer.

Date

16. 3.2019 17:32:22

0.10375099 = product of:
  0.20750198 = sum of:
    0.13832192 = weight(_text_:fields in 4247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13832192 = score(doc=4247,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.43766826 = fieldWeight in 4247, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4247)
    0.069180064 = weight(_text_:22 in 4247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.069180064 = score(doc=4247,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4247, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4247)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Examines the value of the subject analysis fields in serial bibliographic records. Reports on the work of a recent CONSER task force on serial subject analysis. Presents finding of a detailed survey of the current subject analysis practices of all the full participants in the program, the policy issues the Task Force identified, and the recommendations it formulated. The group anticipated what the resultant supporting documentation would look like in the CONSER editing guide

Source

Serials librarian. 22(1992) nos.1/2, S.101-122