Search (115 results, page 1 of 6)

  • × theme_ss:"Automatisches Abstracting"
  1. Salton, G.; Allan, J.; Buckley, C.; Singhal, A.: Automatic analysis, theme generation, and summarization of machine readable texts (1994) 0.01 
    0.0052301446 = product of:
  0.052301444 = sum of:
    0.01225174 = product of:
      0.02450348 = sum of:
        0.02450348 = weight(_text_:29 in 1949) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02450348 = score(doc=1949,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.38865322 = fieldWeight in 1949, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1949)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.021231882 = weight(_text_:u in 1949) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021231882 = score(doc=1949,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.058687534 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.017922899 = queryNorm
        0.3617784 = fieldWeight in 1949, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1949)
    0.018817822 = product of:
      0.028226731 = sum of:
        0.0037232507 = weight(_text_:a in 1949) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0037232507 = score(doc=1949,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.18016359 = fieldWeight in 1949, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1949)
        0.02450348 = weight(_text_:29 in 1949) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02450348 = score(doc=1949,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.38865322 = fieldWeight in 1949, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1949)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.1 = coord(3/30)
    Date
    16. 8.1998 12:30:29
    Footnote
    Wiederabgedruckt in: Readings in information retrieval. Ed.: K. Sparck Jones u. P. Willett. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann 1997. S.478-483.
    Type
    a
  2. Pinto, M.: Engineering the production of meta-information : the abstracting concern (2003) 0.00 
    0.0039371583 = product of:
  0.05905737 = sum of:
    0.024257207 = product of:
      0.048514415 = sum of:
        0.048514415 = weight(_text_:29 in 4667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048514415 = score(doc=4667,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.7694941 = fieldWeight in 4667, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4667)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.034800164 = product of:
      0.052200243 = sum of:
        0.00368583 = weight(_text_:a in 4667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00368583 = score(doc=4667,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 4667, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4667)
        0.048514415 = weight(_text_:29 in 4667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048514415 = score(doc=4667,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.7694941 = fieldWeight in 4667, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4667)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Date
    27.11.2005 18:29:55
    Source
    Journal of information science. 29(2003) no.5, S.405-418
    Type
    a
  3. Meyer, R.: Allein, es wär' so schön gewesen : Der Copernic Summarzier kann Internettexte leider nicht befriedigend und sinnvoll zusammenfassen (2002) 0.00 
    0.0027508556 = product of:
  0.027508555 = sum of:
    0.024009569 = weight(_text_:einzelne in 648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024009569 = score(doc=648,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10548963 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.885746 = idf(docFreq=333, maxDocs=44218)
          0.017922899 = queryNorm
        0.22760123 = fieldWeight in 648, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.885746 = idf(docFreq=333, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=648)
    0.0031918352 = product of:
      0.0063836705 = sum of:
        0.0063836705 = weight(_text_:online in 648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0063836705 = score(doc=648,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.05439423 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.11735933 = fieldWeight in 648, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=648)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    3.071525E-4 = product of:
      9.214575E-4 = sum of:
        9.214575E-4 = weight(_text_:a in 648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          9.214575E-4 = score(doc=648,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.044588212 = fieldWeight in 648, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=648)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.1 = coord(3/30)
    Abstract
    Das Netz hat die Jagd nach textlichen Inhalten erheblich erleichtert. Es ist so ein-fach, irgendeinen Beitrag über ein bestimmtes Thema zu finden, daß man eher über Fülle als über Mangel klagt. Suchmaschinen und Kataloge helfen beim Sichten, indem sie eine Vorauswahl von Links treffen. Das Programm "Copernic Summarizer" geht einen anderen Weg: Es erstellt Exzerpte beliebiger Texte und will damit die Lesezeit verkürzen. Decken wir über die lästige Zwangsregistrierung (unter Pflichtangabe einer Mailadresse) das Mäntelchen des Schweigens. Was folgt, geht rasch, nicht nur die ersten Schritte sind schnell vollzogen. Die Software läßt sich in verschiedenen Umgebungen einsetzen. Unterstützt werden Microsoft Office, einige Mailprogramme sowie der Acrobat Reader für PDF-Dateien. Besonders eignet sich das Verfahren freilich für Internetseiten. Der "Summarizer" nistet sich im Browser als Symbol ein. Und mit einem Klick faßt er einen Online Text in einem Extrafenster zusammen. Es handelt sich dabei nicht im eigentlichen Sinne um eine Zusammenfassung mit eigenen Worten, die in Kürze den Gesamtgehalt wiedergibt. Das Ergebnis ist schlichtes Kürzen, das sich noch dazu ziemlich brutal vollzieht, da grundsätzlich vollständige Sätze gestrichen werden. Die Software erfaßt den Text, versucht Schlüsselwörter zu ermitteln und entscheidet danach, welche Sätze wichtig sind und welche nicht. Das Verfahren mag den Entwicklungsaufwand verringert haben, dem Anwender hingegen bereitet es Probleme. Oftmals beziehen sich Sätze auf frühere Aussagen, etwa in Formulierungen wie "Diese Methode wird . . ." oder "Ein Jahr später . . ." In der Zusammenfassung fehlt entweder der Kontext dazu oder man kann nicht darauf vertrauen, daß der Bezug sich tatsächlich im voranstehenden Satz findet. Die Liste der Schlüsselwörter, die links eingeblendet wird, wirkt nicht immer glücklich. Teilweise finden sich unauffällige Begriffe wie "Anlaß" oder "zudem". Wenigstens lassen sich einzelne Begriffe entfernen, um das Ergebnis zu verfeinern. Hilfreich ist das mögliche Markieren der Schlüsselbegriffe im Text. Unverständlich bleibt hingegen, weshalb man nicht selbst relevante Wörter festlegen darf, die als Basis für die Zusammenfassung dienen. Das Kürzen des Textes ist in mehreren Stufen möglich, von fünf bis fünfzig Prozent. Fünf Prozent sind unbrauchbar; ein guter Kompromiß sind fünfundzwanzig. Allerdings nimmt es die Software nicht genau mit den eigenen Vorgaben. Bei kürzeren Texten ist die Zusammenfassung von angeblich einem Viertel fast genauso lang wie das Original; noch bei zwei Seiten eng bedrucktem Text (8 Kilobyte) entspricht das Exzerpt einem Drittel des Originals. Für gewöhnlich sind Webseiten geschmückt mit einem Menü, mit Werbung, mit Hinweiskästen und allerlei mehr. Sehr zuverlässig erkennt die Software, was überhaupt Fließtext ist; alles andere wird ausgefiltert. Da bedauert man es zuweilen, daß der Summarizer nicht den kompletten Text listet, damit er in einer angenehmen Umgebung schwarz auf weiß gelesen oder gedruckt wird. Wahlweise zum manuellen Auslösen der Zusammenfassung wird der "LiveSummarizer" aktiviert. Er verdichtet Text zeitgleich mit dem Aufrufen einer Seite, nimmt dafür aber ein Drittel der Bildschirmfläche ein - ein zu hoher Preis. Insgesamt fragen wir uns, wie man das Programm sinnvoll nutzen soll. Beim Verdichten von Nachrichten ist unsicher, ob Summarizer nicht wichtige Details unterschlägt. Bei langen Texten sorgen Fragen zum Kontext für Verwirrung. Sucht man nach der Antwort auf eine Detailfrage, hilft die Suchfunktion des Browsers oft schneller. Eine Zusammenfassung hätte auch dem Preis gutgetan: 100 Euro verlangt der deutsche Verleger Softline. Das scheint deutlich zu hoch gegriffen. Zumal das Zusammenfassen der einzige Zweck des Summarizers ist. Das Verwalten von Bookmarks und das Archivieren von Texten wären sinnvolle Ergänzungen gewesen.
    Type
    a
  4. Automatic summarizing : introduction (1995) 0.00 
    0.0025982412 = product of:
  0.038973615 = sum of:
    0.037980746 = weight(_text_:u in 626) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037980746 = score(doc=626,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.058687534 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.017922899 = queryNorm
        0.6471689 = fieldWeight in 626, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=626)
    9.928669E-4 = product of:
      0.0029786006 = sum of:
        0.0029786006 = weight(_text_:a in 626) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0029786006 = score(doc=626,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 626, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=626)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Content
    Enthält u.a. Beiträge von: J. BATEMAN u. E. TEICH; R. BRANDOW, K. MITZE u. L.F. RAU; B. ENDRES-NIGGEMEYER, E. MAIER u. A. SIGEL; M.T. MAYBURY; K. McKEOWN, J. ROBIN u. K. KUKICH; A. ROTHKEGEL
    Editor
    Sparck Jones, K. u. B. Endres-Niggemeyer
  5. Endres-Niggemeyer, B.: Kognitive Modellierung des Abstracting (1991) 0.00 
    0.0024723196 = product of:
  0.03708479 = sum of:
    0.036031697 = weight(_text_:u in 23) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036031697 = score(doc=23,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.058687534 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.017922899 = queryNorm
        0.6139583 = fieldWeight in 23, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=23)
    0.0010530944 = product of:
      0.003159283 = sum of:
        0.003159283 = weight(_text_:a in 23) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.003159283 = score(doc=23,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 23, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=23)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Source
    Deutscher Dokumentartag 1990. 1. Deutsch-deutscher Dokumentartag, 25.-27.9.90, Fulda. Proceedings. Hrsg. W. Neubauer u. U. Schneider-Briehn
    Type
    a
  6. Kim, H.H.; Kim, Y.H.: Generic speech summarization of transcribed lecture videos : using tags and their semantic relations (2016) 0.00 
    0.0022308417 = product of:
  0.033462625 = sum of:
    0.00612587 = product of:
      0.01225174 = sum of:
        0.01225174 = weight(_text_:29 in 2640) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01225174 = score(doc=2640,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 2640, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2640)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.027336756 = sum of:
      0.002943488 = weight(_text_:a in 2640) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.002943488 = score(doc=2640,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.017922899 = queryNorm
          0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 2640, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2640)
      0.01225174 = weight(_text_:29 in 2640) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.01225174 = score(doc=2640,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.017922899 = queryNorm
          0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 2640, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2640)
      0.012141528 = weight(_text_:22 in 2640) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.012141528 = score(doc=2640,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.06276294 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.017922899 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2640, 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=2640)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    We propose a tag-based framework that simulates human abstractors' ability to select significant sentences based on key concepts in a sentence as well as the semantic relations between key concepts to create generic summaries of transcribed lecture videos. The proposed extractive summarization method uses tags (viewer- and author-assigned terms) as key concepts. Our method employs Flickr tag clusters and WordNet synonyms to expand tags and detect the semantic relations between tags. This method helps select sentences that have a greater number of semantically related key concepts. To investigate the effectiveness and uniqueness of the proposed method, we compare it with an existing technique, latent semantic analysis (LSA), using intrinsic and extrinsic evaluations. The results of intrinsic evaluation show that the tag-based method is as or more effective than the LSA method. We also observe that in the extrinsic evaluation, the grand mean accuracy score of the tag-based method is higher than that of the LSA method, with a statistically significant difference. Elaborating on our results, we discuss the theoretical and practical implications of our findings for speech video summarization and retrieval.
    Date
    22. 1.2016 12:29:41
    Type
    a
  7. Hahn, U.: Automatisches Abstracting (2013) 0.00 
    0.0020602662 = product of:
  0.030903993 = sum of:
    0.030026415 = weight(_text_:u in 721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030026415 = score(doc=721,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.058687534 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.017922899 = queryNorm
        0.5116319 = fieldWeight in 721, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=721)
    8.775785E-4 = product of:
      0.0026327355 = sum of:
        0.0026327355 = weight(_text_:a in 721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0026327355 = score(doc=721,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 721, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=721)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Source
    Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation. Handbuch zur Einführung in die Informationswissenschaft und -praxis. 6., völlig neu gefaßte Ausgabe. Hrsg. von R. Kuhlen, W. Semar u. D. Strauch. Begründet von Klaus Laisiepen, Ernst Lutterbeck, Karl-Heinrich Meyer-Uhlenried
    Type
    a
  8. Endres-Niggemeyer, B.: ¬An empirical process model of abstracting (1992) 0.00 
    0.0017978373 = product of:
  0.026967559 = sum of:
    0.025478259 = weight(_text_:u in 8834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025478259 = score(doc=8834,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.058687534 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.017922899 = queryNorm
        0.43413407 = fieldWeight in 8834, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=8834)
    0.0014893002 = product of:
      0.0044679004 = sum of:
        0.0044679004 = weight(_text_:a in 8834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0044679004 = score(doc=8834,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 8834, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=8834)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Source
    Mensch und Maschine: Informationelle Schnittstellen der Kommunikation. Proc. des 3. Int. Symposiums für Informationswissenschaft (ISI'92), 5.-7.11.1992 in Saarbrücken. Hrsg.: H.H. Zimmermann, H.-D. Luckhardt u. A. Schulz
    Type
    a
  9. Craven, T.C.: ¬A phrase flipper for the assistance of writers of abstracts and other text (1995) 0.00 
    0.0017339757 = product of:
  0.026009634 = sum of:
    0.0098013915 = product of:
      0.019602783 = sum of:
        0.019602783 = weight(_text_:29 in 4897) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019602783 = score(doc=4897,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 4897, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4897)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.016208243 = product of:
      0.024312364 = sum of:
        0.004709581 = weight(_text_:a in 4897) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004709581 = score(doc=4897,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.22789092 = fieldWeight in 4897, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4897)
        0.019602783 = weight(_text_:29 in 4897) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019602783 = score(doc=4897,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 4897, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4897)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    Describes computerized tools for computer assisted abstracting. FlipPhr is a Microsoft Windows application program that rearranges (flips) phrases or other expressions in accordance with rules in a grammar. The flipping may be invoked with a single keystroke from within various Windows application programs that allow cutting and pasting of text. The user may modify the grammar to provide for different kinds of flipping
    Date
    17. 8.1996 10:29:59
    Type
    a
  10. Robin, J.; McKeown, K.: Empirically designing and evaluating a new revision-based model for summary generation (1996) 0.00 
    0.0015790652 = product of:
  0.023685977 = sum of:
    0.0072956234 = product of:
      0.014591247 = sum of:
        0.014591247 = weight(_text_:online in 6751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014591247 = score(doc=6751,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.05439423 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.2682499 = fieldWeight in 6751, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6751)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.016390353 = product of:
      0.02458553 = sum of:
        0.005159087 = weight(_text_:a in 6751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005159087 = score(doc=6751,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.24964198 = fieldWeight in 6751, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6751)
        0.019426443 = weight(_text_:22 in 6751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019426443 = score(doc=6751,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06276294 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6751, 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=6751)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    Presents a system for summarizing quantitative data in natural language, focusing on the use of a corpus of basketball game summaries, drawn from online news services, to empirically shape the system design and to evaluate the approach. Initial corpus analysis revealed characteristics of textual summaries that challenge the capabilities of current language generation systems. A revision based corpus analysis was used to identify and encode the revision rules of the system. Presents a quantitative evaluation, using several test corpora, to measure the robustness of the new revision based model
    Date
    6. 3.1997 16:22:15
    Type
    a
  11. Marsh, E.: ¬A production rule system for message summarisation (1984) 0.00 
    0.0014981978 = product of:
  0.022472966 = sum of:
    0.021231882 = weight(_text_:u in 1956) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021231882 = score(doc=1956,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.058687534 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.017922899 = queryNorm
        0.3617784 = fieldWeight in 1956, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1956)
    0.0012410836 = product of:
      0.0037232507 = sum of:
        0.0037232507 = weight(_text_:a in 1956) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0037232507 = score(doc=1956,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.18016359 = fieldWeight in 1956, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1956)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Footnote
    Wiederabgedruckt in: Readings in information retrieval. Ed.: K. Sparck Jones u. P. Willett. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann 1997. S.534-537.
    Type
    a
  12. Johnson, F.C.; Paice, C.D.; Black, W.J.; Neal, A.P.: ¬The application of linguistic processing to automatic abstract generation (1993) 0.00 
    0.0014739641 = product of:
  0.02210946 = sum of:
    0.021231882 = weight(_text_:u in 2290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021231882 = score(doc=2290,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.058687534 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.017922899 = queryNorm
        0.3617784 = fieldWeight in 2290, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2290)
    8.775785E-4 = product of:
      0.0026327355 = sum of:
        0.0026327355 = weight(_text_:a in 2290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0026327355 = score(doc=2290,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 2290, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2290)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Footnote
    Wiederabgedruckt in: Readings in information retrieval. Ed.: K. Sparck Jones u. P. Willett. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann 1997. S.538-552.
    Type
    a
  13. Hahn, U.: ¬Die Verdichtung textuellen Wissens zu Information : vom Wandel methodischer Paradigmen beim automatischen Abstracting (2004) 0.00 
    0.0014739641 = product of:
  0.02210946 = sum of:
    0.021231882 = weight(_text_:u in 4667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021231882 = score(doc=4667,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.058687534 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.017922899 = queryNorm
        0.3617784 = fieldWeight in 4667, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4667)
    8.775785E-4 = product of:
      0.0026327355 = sum of:
        0.0026327355 = weight(_text_:a in 4667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0026327355 = score(doc=4667,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 4667, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4667)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Type
    a
  14. Uyttendaele, C.; Moens, M.-F.; Dumortier, J.: SALOMON: automatic abstracting of legal cases for effective access to court decisions (1998) 0.00 
    0.0014499128 = product of:
  0.02174869 = sum of:
    0.008576217 = product of:
      0.017152434 = sum of:
        0.017152434 = weight(_text_:29 in 495) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017152434 = score(doc=495,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 495, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=495)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.013172473 = product of:
      0.019758709 = sum of:
        0.0026062755 = weight(_text_:a in 495) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0026062755 = score(doc=495,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 495, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=495)
        0.017152434 = weight(_text_:29 in 495) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017152434 = score(doc=495,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 495, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=495)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    The SALOMON project summarises Belgian criminal cases in order to improve access to the large number of existing and future cases. A double methodology was used when developing SALOMON: the cases are processed by employing additional knowledge to interpret structural patterns and features on the one hand and by way of occurrence statistics of index terms on the other. SALOMON performs an initial categorisation and structuring of the cases and subsequently extracts the most relevant text units of the alleged offences and of the opinion of the court. The SALOMON techniques do not themselves solve any legal questions, but they do guide the use effectively towards relevant texts
    Date
    17. 7.1996 14:16:29
    Type
    a
  15. Sweeney, S.; Crestani, F.; Losada, D.E.: 'Show me more' : incremental length summarisation using novelty detection (2008) 0.00 
    0.0011555814 = product of:
  0.01733372 = sum of:
    0.00612587 = product of:
      0.01225174 = sum of:
        0.01225174 = weight(_text_:29 in 2054) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01225174 = score(doc=2054,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 2054, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2054)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.011207849 = product of:
      0.016811773 = sum of:
        0.0045600324 = weight(_text_:a in 2054) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0045600324 = score(doc=2054,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.22065444 = fieldWeight in 2054, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2054)
        0.01225174 = weight(_text_:29 in 2054) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01225174 = score(doc=2054,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 2054, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2054)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    The paper presents a study investigating the effects of incorporating novelty detection in automatic text summarisation. Condensing a textual document, automatic text summarisation can reduce the need to refer to the source document. It also offers a means to deliver device-friendly content when accessing information in non-traditional environments. An effective method of summarisation could be to produce a summary that includes only novel information. However, a consequence of focusing exclusively on novel parts may result in a loss of context, which may have an impact on the correct interpretation of the summary, with respect to the source document. In this study we compare two strategies to produce summaries that incorporate novelty in different ways: a constant length summary, which contains only novel sentences, and an incremental summary, containing additional sentences that provide context. The aim is to establish whether a summary that contains only novel sentences provides sufficient basis to determine relevance of a document, or if indeed we need to include additional sentences to provide context. Findings from the study seem to suggest that there is only a minimal difference in performance for the tasks we set our users and that the presence of contextual information is not so important. However, for the case of mobile information access, a summary that contains only novel information does offer benefits, given bandwidth constraints.
    Date
    29. 7.2008 19:35:12
    Type
    a
  16. Wang, S.; Koopman, R.: Embed first, then predict (2019) 0.00 
    0.0010962212 = product of:
  0.016443316 = sum of:
    0.00612587 = product of:
      0.01225174 = sum of:
        0.01225174 = weight(_text_:29 in 5400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01225174 = score(doc=5400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 5400, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5400)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.010317447 = product of:
      0.01547617 = sum of:
        0.0032244297 = weight(_text_:a in 5400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0032244297 = score(doc=5400,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 5400, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5400)
        0.01225174 = weight(_text_:29 in 5400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01225174 = score(doc=5400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 5400, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5400)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    Automatic subject prediction is a desirable feature for modern digital library systems, as manual indexing can no longer cope with the rapid growth of digital collections. It is also desirable to be able to identify a small set of entities (e.g., authors, citations, bibliographic records) which are most relevant to a query. This gets more difficult when the amount of data increases dramatically. Data sparsity and model scalability are the major challenges to solving this type of extreme multilabel classification problem automatically. In this paper, we propose to address this problem in two steps: we first embed different types of entities into the same semantic space, where similarity could be computed easily; second, we propose a novel non-parametric method to identify the most relevant entities in addition to direct semantic similarities. We show how effectively this approach predicts even very specialised subjects, which are associated with few documents in the training set and are more problematic for a classifier.
    Date
    29. 9.2019 12:18:42
    Type
    a
  17. Kannan, R.; Ghinea, G.; Swaminathan, S.: What do you wish to see? : A summarization system for movies based on user preferences (2015) 0.00 
    9.5530914E-4 = product of:
  0.0143296365 = sum of:
    0.0049006958 = product of:
      0.0098013915 = sum of:
        0.0098013915 = weight(_text_:29 in 2683) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0098013915 = score(doc=2683,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.15546128 = fieldWeight in 2683, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2683)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.009428941 = product of:
      0.01414341 = sum of:
        0.0043420186 = weight(_text_:a in 2683) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0043420186 = score(doc=2683,freq=34.0), product of:
            0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.21010503 = fieldWeight in 2683, product of:
              5.8309517 = tf(freq=34.0), with freq of:
                34.0 = termFreq=34.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2683)
        0.0098013915 = weight(_text_:29 in 2683) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0098013915 = score(doc=2683,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.15546128 = fieldWeight in 2683, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2683)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    Video summarization aims at producing a compact version of a full-length video while preserving the significant content of the original video. Movie summarization condenses a full-length movie into a summary that still retains the most significant and interesting content of the original movie. In the past, several movie summarization systems have been proposed to generate a movie summary based on low-level video features such as color, motion, texture, etc. However, a generic summary, which is common to everyone and is produced based only on low-level video features will not satisfy every user. As users' preferences for the summary differ vastly for the same movie, there is a need for a personalized movie summarization system nowadays. To address this demand, this paper proposes a novel system to generate semantically meaningful video summaries for the same movie, which are tailored to the preferences and interests of a user. For a given movie, shots and scenes are automatically detected and their high-level features are semi-automatically annotated. Preferences over high-level movie features are explicitly collected from the user using a query interface. The user preferences are generated by means of a stored-query. Movie summaries are generated at shot level and scene level, where shots or scenes are selected for summary skim based on the similarity measured between shots and scenes, and the user's preferences. The proposed movie summarization system is evaluated subjectively using a sample of 20 subjects with eight movies in the English language. The quality of the generated summaries is assessed by informativeness, enjoyability, relevance, and acceptance metrics and Quality of Perception measures. Further, the usability of the proposed summarization system is subjectively evaluated by conducting a questionnaire survey. The experimental results on the performance of the proposed movie summarization approach show the potential of the proposed system.
    Date
    25. 1.2016 18:45:29
    Type
    a
  18. Endres-Niggemeyer, B.; Jauris-Heipke, S.; Pinsky, S.M.; Ulbricht, U.: Wissen gewinnen durch Wissen : Ontologiebasierte Informationsextraktion (2006) 0.00 
    7.3698204E-4 = product of:
  0.01105473 = sum of:
    0.010615941 = weight(_text_:u in 6016) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010615941 = score(doc=6016,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.058687534 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.017922899 = queryNorm
        0.1808892 = fieldWeight in 6016, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6016)
    4.3878925E-4 = product of:
      0.0013163678 = sum of:
        0.0013163678 = weight(_text_:a in 6016) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0013163678 = score(doc=6016,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.06369744 = fieldWeight in 6016, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6016)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Type
    a
  19. Advances in automatic text summarization (1999) 0.00 
    7.077294E-4 = product of:
  0.021231882 = sum of:
    0.021231882 = weight(_text_:u in 6191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021231882 = score(doc=6191,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.058687534 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.017922899 = queryNorm
        0.3617784 = fieldWeight in 6191, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6191)
  0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
    Editor
    Mani, I. u. M.T. Maybury
  20. Kuhlen, R.: Informationsaufbereitung III : Referieren (Abstracts - Abstracting - Grundlagen) (2004) 0.00 
    6.067172E-4 = product of:
  0.009100758 = sum of:
    0.008492753 = weight(_text_:u in 2917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008492753 = score(doc=2917,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.058687534 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.017922899 = queryNorm
        0.14471136 = fieldWeight in 2917, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2917)
    6.080043E-4 = product of:
      0.0018240128 = sum of:
        0.0018240128 = weight(_text_:a in 2917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0018240128 = score(doc=2917,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.017922899 = queryNorm
            0.088261776 = fieldWeight in 2917, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2917)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    Was ein Abstract (im Folgenden synonym mit Referat oder Kurzreferat gebraucht) ist, legt das American National Standards Institute in einer Weise fest, die sicherlich von den meisten Fachleuten akzeptiert werden kann: "An abstract is defined as an abbreviated, accurate representation of the contents of a document"; fast genauso die deutsche Norm DIN 1426: "Das Kurzreferat gibt kurz und klar den Inhalt des Dokuments wieder." Abstracts gehören zum wissenschaftlichen Alltag. Weitgehend allen Publikationen, zumindest in den naturwissenschaftlichen, technischen, informationsbezogenen oder medizinischen Bereichen, gehen Abstracts voran, "prefe-rably prepared by its author(s) for publication with it". Es gibt wohl keinen Wissenschaftler, der nicht irgendwann einmal ein Abstract geschrieben hätte. Gehört das Erstellen von Abstracts dann überhaupt zur dokumentarischen bzw informationswissenschaftlichen Methodenlehre, wenn es jeder kann? Was macht den informationellen Mehrwert aus, der durch Expertenreferate gegenüber Laienreferaten erzeugt wird? Dies ist nicht so leicht zu beantworten, zumal geeignete Bewertungsverfahren fehlen, die Qualität von Abstracts vergleichend "objektiv" zu messen. Abstracts werden in erheblichem Umfang von Informationsspezialisten erstellt, oft unter der Annahme, dass Autoren selber dafür weniger geeignet sind. Vergegenwärtigen wir uns, was wir über Abstracts und Abstracting wissen. Ein besonders gelungenes Abstract ist zuweilen klarer als der Ursprungstext selber, darf aber nicht mehr Information als dieser enthalten: "Good abstracts are highly structured, concise, and coherent, and are the result of a thorough analysis of the content of the abstracted materials. Abstracts may be more readable than the basis documents, but because of size constraints they rarely equal and never surpass the information content of the basic document". Dies ist verständlich, denn ein "Abstract" ist zunächst nichts anderes als ein Ergebnis des Vorgangs einer Abstraktion. Ohne uns zu sehr in die philosophischen Hintergründe der Abstraktion zu verlieren, besteht diese doch "in der Vernachlässigung von bestimmten Vorstellungsbzw. Begriffsinhalten, von welchen zugunsten anderer Teilinhalte abgesehen, abstrahiert' wird. Sie ist stets verbunden mit einer Fixierung von (interessierenden) Merkmalen durch die aktive Aufmerksamkeit, die unter einem bestimmten pragmatischen Gesichtspunkt als wesentlich' für einen vorgestellten bzw für einen unter einen Begriff fallenden Gegenstand (oder eine Mehrheit von Gegenständen) betrachtet werden". Abstracts reduzieren weniger Begriffsinhalte, sondern Texte bezüglich ihres proportionalen Gehaltes. Borko/ Bernier haben dies sogar quantifiziert; sie schätzen den Reduktionsfaktor auf 1:10 bis 1:12
    Source
    Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation. 5., völlig neu gefaßte Ausgabe. 2 Bde. Hrsg. von R. Kuhlen, Th. Seeger u. D. Strauch. Begründet von Klaus Laisiepen, Ernst Lutterbeck, Karl-Heinrich Meyer-Uhlenried. Bd.1: Handbuch zur Einführung in die Informationswissenschaft und -praxis
    Type
    a

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 96
  • d 17
  • chi 2
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 109
  • m 3
  • s 2
  • el 1
  • r 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects