Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

Did you mean:
precises%3a%2fdocuments %2f subject classification schemes%3a bliss%2c henry evelyn %2f bliss bibliographic classification %2f texts%22 2
precises%3a%2f_documents %2f subject classification schemes%3a bliss%2c henry evelyn %2f bliss bibliographic classification %2f texts%22 2
precises%3a%2fdocuments %2f subject classification schemes%3a bliss%2c heery evelyn %2f bliss bibliographic classification %2f texts%22 2
precises%3a%2fdocuments %2f subject classification schemes%3a bliss%2c henry evelyn %2f bloss bibliographic classification %2f texts%22 2
precises%3a%2fdocuments %2f subject classification schemes%3a bloss%2c henry evelyn %2f bliss bibliographic classification %2f texts%22 2

Francu, V.: Construirea unui tezaur multilingv bazat pr CZU (1997) 0.00
```
0.002513852 = product of:
  0.035193928 = sum of:
    0.035193928 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3221) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035193928 = score(doc=3221,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 3221, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3221)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
```
Abstract

The automation of Bucharest University Central Library involved the compilation of a dictionary of terms to facilitate postcoordinated searching in accordance with the UDC notation attached to every bibliographic record. Describes the project and demonstrates why a multilingual UDC based thesaurus is considered as ideal indexing and searching tool. The experiment, which applied to Class 8 of UDC (Linguisitcs and Literature), illustrates how all UDC tables can be successfully used to build a thesaurus and the ways in which their limitations can be overcome by a thesaurus

Timotin, A.: Multilingvism si tezaure de concepte (1994) 0.00

0.0011622861 = product of:
  0.016272005 = sum of:
    0.016272005 = product of:
      0.03254401 = sum of:
        0.03254401 = weight(_text_:22 in 7887) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03254401 = score(doc=7887,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7887, 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=7887)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Source: Probleme de Informare si Documentare. 28(1994) no.1, S.13-22

Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

Authors