-
Hotho, A.; Bloehdorn, S.: Data Mining 2004 : Text classification by boosting weak learners based on terms and concepts (2004)
0.08
0.08225932 = sum of:
0.0613318 = product of:
0.2453272 = sum of:
0.2453272 = weight(_text_:3a in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.2453272 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
0.43651128 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = 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)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.020927519 = product of:
0.041855037 = sum of:
0.041855037 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041855037 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18030031 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = 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(1/2)
- 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
-
Lu, C.; Bu, Y.; Wang, J.; Ding, Y.; Torvik, V.; Schnaars, M.; Zhang, C.: Examining scientific writing styles from the perspective of linguistic complexity : a cross-level moderation model (2019)
0.07
0.07362792 = sum of:
0.017733788 = product of:
0.07093515 = sum of:
0.07093515 = weight(_text_:authors in 5219) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07093515 = score(doc=5219,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23472176 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 5219, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5219)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.055894133 = product of:
0.111788265 = sum of:
0.111788265 = weight(_text_:y in 5219) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.111788265 = score(doc=5219,freq=4.0), product of:
0.24777827 = queryWeight, product of:
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.45116252 = fieldWeight in 5219, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5219)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Publishing articles in high-impact English journals is difficult for scholars around the world, especially for non-native English-speaking scholars (NNESs), most of whom struggle with proficiency in English. To uncover the differences in English scientific writing between native English-speaking scholars (NESs) and NNESs, we collected a large-scale data set containing more than 150,000 full-text articles published in PLoS between 2006 and 2015. We divided these articles into three groups according to the ethnic backgrounds of the first and corresponding authors, obtained by Ethnea, and examined the scientific writing styles in English from a two-fold perspective of linguistic complexity: (a) syntactic complexity, including measurements of sentence length and sentence complexity; and (b) lexical complexity, including measurements of lexical diversity, lexical density, and lexical sophistication. The observations suggest marginal differences between groups in syntactical and lexical complexity.
-
Wu, H.; He, J.; Pei, Y.: Scientific impact at the topic level : a case study in computational linguistics (2010)
0.07
0.06679972 = sum of:
0.020689419 = product of:
0.082757674 = sum of:
0.082757674 = weight(_text_:authors in 4103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.082757674 = score(doc=4103,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23472176 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.35257778 = fieldWeight in 4103, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4103)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.046110306 = product of:
0.09222061 = sum of:
0.09222061 = weight(_text_:y in 4103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09222061 = score(doc=4103,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24777827 = queryWeight, product of:
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.3721901 = fieldWeight in 4103, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4103)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In this article, we propose to apply the topic model and topic-level eigenfactor (TEF) algorithm to assess the relative importance of academic entities including articles, authors, journals, and conferences. Scientific impact is measured by the biased PageRank score toward topics created by the latent topic model. The TEF metric considers the impact of an academic entity in multiple granular views as well as in a global view. Experiments on a computational linguistics corpus show that the method is a useful and promising measure to assess scientific impact.
-
Ali, C.B.; Haddad, H.; Slimani, Y.: Multi-word terms selection for information retrieval (2022)
0.06
0.058532458 = sum of:
0.025596522 = product of:
0.10238609 = sum of:
0.10238609 = weight(_text_:authors in 900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10238609 = score(doc=900,freq=6.0), product of:
0.23472176 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.43620193 = fieldWeight in 900, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=900)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.032935936 = product of:
0.06587187 = sum of:
0.06587187 = weight(_text_:y in 900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06587187 = score(doc=900,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24777827 = queryWeight, product of:
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.26585007 = fieldWeight in 900, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=900)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Purpose A number of approaches and algorithms have been proposed over the years as a basis for automatic indexing. Many of these approaches suffer from precision inefficiency at low recall. The choice of indexing units has a great impact on search system effectiveness. The authors dive beyond simple terms indexing to propose a framework for multi-word terms (MWT) filtering and indexing. Design/methodology/approach In this paper, the authors rely on ranking MWT to filter them, keeping the most effective ones for the indexing process. The proposed model is based on filtering MWT according to their ability to capture the document topic and distinguish between different documents from the same collection. The authors rely on the hypothesis that the best MWT are those that achieve the greatest association degree. The experiments are carried out with English and French languages data sets. Findings The results indicate that this approach achieved precision enhancements at low recall, and it performed better than more advanced models based on terms dependencies. Originality/value Using and testing different association measures to select MWT that best describe the documents to enhance the precision in the first retrieved documents.
-
Natural language processing (1996)
0.05
0.052697495 = product of:
0.10539499 = sum of:
0.10539499 = product of:
0.21078998 = sum of:
0.21078998 = weight(_text_:y in 6824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.21078998 = score(doc=6824,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24777827 = queryWeight, product of:
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.8507202 = fieldWeight in 6824, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6824)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Editor
- Wilks, Y.
-
Luo, L.; Ju, J.; Li, Y.-F.; Haffari, G.; Xiong, B.; Pan, S.: ChatRule: mining logical rules with large language models for knowledge graph reasoning (2023)
0.05
0.050375536 = product of:
0.10075107 = sum of:
0.10075107 = sum of:
0.06587187 = weight(_text_:y in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06587187 = score(doc=1171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24777827 = queryWeight, product of:
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.26585007 = fieldWeight in 1171, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1171)
0.0348792 = weight(_text_:22 in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0348792 = score(doc=1171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18030031 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1171, 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=1171)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 23.11.2023 19:07:22
-
Agüera y Arcas, B.: Artificial neural networks are making strides towards consciousness (2022)
0.05
0.04657845 = product of:
0.0931569 = sum of:
0.0931569 = product of:
0.1863138 = sum of:
0.1863138 = weight(_text_:y in 861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1863138 = score(doc=861,freq=4.0), product of:
0.24777827 = queryWeight, product of:
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.75193757 = fieldWeight in 861, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=861)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- ¬The Economist. 2022, [https://www.economist.com/by-invitation/2022/06/09/artificial-neural-networks-are-making-strides-towards-consciousness-according-to-blaise-aguera-y-arcas?giftId=89e08696-9884-4670-b164-df58fffdf067]
-
Guthrie, L.; Pustejovsky, J.; Wilks, Y.; Slator, B.M.: ¬The role of lexicons in natural language processing (1996)
0.05
0.046110306 = product of:
0.09222061 = sum of:
0.09222061 = product of:
0.18444122 = sum of:
0.18444122 = weight(_text_:y in 6825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.18444122 = score(doc=6825,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24777827 = queryWeight, product of:
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.7443802 = fieldWeight in 6825, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6825)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Deventer, J.P. van; Kruger, C.J.; Johnson, R.D.: Delineating knowledge management through lexical analysis : a retrospective (2015)
0.04
0.03957725 = sum of:
0.02736953 = product of:
0.10947812 = sum of:
0.10947812 = weight(_text_:authors in 3807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10947812 = score(doc=3807,freq=14.0), product of:
0.23472176 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.46641657 = fieldWeight in 3807, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3807)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.0122077195 = product of:
0.024415439 = sum of:
0.024415439 = weight(_text_:22 in 3807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024415439 = score(doc=3807,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18030031 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 3807, 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=3807)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Purpose Academic authors tend to define terms that meet their own needs. Knowledge Management (KM) is a term that comes to mind and is examined in this study. Lexicographical research identified KM terms used by authors from 1996 to 2006 in academic outlets to define KM. Data were collected based on strict criteria which included that definitions should be unique instances. From 2006 onwards, these authors could not identify new unique instances of definitions with repetitive usage of such definition instances. Analysis revealed that KM is directly defined by People (Person and Organisation), Processes (Codify, Share, Leverage, and Process) and Contextualised Content (Information). The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach The aim of this paper is to add to the body of knowledge in the KM discipline and supply KM practitioners and scholars with insight into what is commonly regarded to be KM so as to reignite the debate on what one could consider as KM. The lexicon used by KM scholars was evaluated though the application of lexicographical research methods as extended though Knowledge Discovery and Text Analysis methods. Findings By simplifying term relationships through the application of lexicographical research methods, as extended though Knowledge Discovery and Text Analysis methods, it was found that KM is directly defined by People (Person and Organisation), Processes (Codify, Share, Leverage, Process) and Contextualised Content (Information). One would therefore be able to indicate that KM, from an academic point of view, refers to people processing contextualised content.
Research limitations/implications In total, 42 definitions were identified spanning a period of 11 years. This represented the first use of KM through the estimated apex of terms used. From 2006 onwards definitions were used in repetition, and all definitions that were considered to repeat were therefore subsequently excluded as not being unique instances. All definitions listed are by no means complete and exhaustive. The definitions are viewed outside the scope and context in which they were originally formulated and then used to review the key concepts in the definitions themselves. Social implications When the authors refer to the aforementioned discussion of KM content as well as the presentation of the method followed in this paper, the authors may have a few implications for future research in KM. First the research validates ideas presented by the OECD in 2005 pertaining to KM. It also validates that through the evolution of KM, the authors ended with a description of KM that may be seen as a standardised description. If the authors as academics and practitioners, for example, refer to KM as the same construct and/or idea, it has the potential to speculatively, distinguish between what KM may or may not be. Originality/value By simplifying the term used to define KM, by focusing on the most common definitions, the paper assist in refocusing KM by reconsidering the dimensions that is the most common in how it has been defined over time. This would hopefully assist in reigniting discussions about KM and how it may be used to the benefit of an organisation.
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
-
Ding, Y.; Chowdhury, G.C.; Foo, S.: Incorporating the results of co-word analyses to increase search variety for information retrieval (2000)
0.04
0.03952312 = product of:
0.07904624 = sum of:
0.07904624 = product of:
0.15809248 = sum of:
0.15809248 = weight(_text_:y in 6328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.15809248 = score(doc=6328,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24777827 = queryWeight, product of:
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.6380402 = fieldWeight in 6328, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6328)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
McKevitt, P.; Partridge, D.; Wilks, Y.: Why machines should analyse intention in natural language dialogue (1999)
0.04
0.03952312 = product of:
0.07904624 = sum of:
0.07904624 = product of:
0.15809248 = sum of:
0.15809248 = weight(_text_:y in 366) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.15809248 = score(doc=366,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24777827 = queryWeight, product of:
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.6380402 = fieldWeight in 366, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=366)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Hofstadter, D.: Artificial neural networks today are not conscious (2022)
0.03
0.032935936 = product of:
0.06587187 = sum of:
0.06587187 = product of:
0.13174374 = sum of:
0.13174374 = weight(_text_:y in 860) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.13174374 = score(doc=860,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24777827 = queryWeight, product of:
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.53170013 = fieldWeight in 860, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=860)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- Vgl. auch: Agüera y Arcas, B.: Artificial neural networks are making strides towards consciousness..
-
Noever, D.; Ciolino, M.: ¬The Turing deception (2022)
0.03
0.0306659 = product of:
0.0613318 = sum of:
0.0613318 = product of:
0.2453272 = sum of:
0.2453272 = weight(_text_:3a in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.2453272 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.43651128 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, 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=862)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- https%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fabs%2F2212.06721&usg=AOvVaw3i_9pZm9y_dQWoHi6uv0EN
-
Warner, A.J.: Natural language processing (1987)
0.03
0.02790336 = product of:
0.05580672 = sum of:
0.05580672 = product of:
0.11161344 = sum of:
0.11161344 = weight(_text_:22 in 337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11161344 = score(doc=337,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18030031 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 337, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=337)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 22(1987), S.79-108
-
Polity, Y.: Vers une ergonomie linguistique (1994)
0.03
0.026348747 = product of:
0.052697495 = sum of:
0.052697495 = product of:
0.10539499 = sum of:
0.10539499 = weight(_text_:y in 36) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10539499 = score(doc=36,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24777827 = queryWeight, product of:
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.4253601 = fieldWeight in 36, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=36)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Xianghao, G.; Yixin, Z.; Li, Y.: ¬A new method of news test understanding and abstracting based on speech acts theory (1998)
0.03
0.026348747 = product of:
0.052697495 = sum of:
0.052697495 = product of:
0.10539499 = sum of:
0.10539499 = weight(_text_:y in 3532) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10539499 = score(doc=3532,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24777827 = queryWeight, product of:
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.4253601 = fieldWeight in 3532, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3532)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
McMahon, J.G.; Smith, F.J.: Improved statistical language model performance with automatic generated word hierarchies (1996)
0.02
0.024415439 = product of:
0.048830878 = sum of:
0.048830878 = product of:
0.097661756 = sum of:
0.097661756 = weight(_text_:22 in 3164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.097661756 = score(doc=3164,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18030031 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3164, 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=3164)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Computational linguistics. 22(1996) no.2, S.217-248
-
Ruge, G.: ¬A spreading activation network for automatic generation of thesaurus relationships (1991)
0.02
0.024415439 = product of:
0.048830878 = sum of:
0.048830878 = product of:
0.097661756 = sum of:
0.097661756 = weight(_text_:22 in 4506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.097661756 = score(doc=4506,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18030031 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4506, 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=4506)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 8.10.2000 11:52:22
-
Somers, H.: Example-based machine translation : Review article (1999)
0.02
0.024415439 = product of:
0.048830878 = sum of:
0.048830878 = product of:
0.097661756 = sum of:
0.097661756 = weight(_text_:22 in 6672) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.097661756 = score(doc=6672,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18030031 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6672, 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=6672)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 31. 7.1996 9:22:19
-
New tools for human translators (1997)
0.02
0.024415439 = product of:
0.048830878 = sum of:
0.048830878 = product of:
0.097661756 = sum of:
0.097661756 = weight(_text_:22 in 1179) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.097661756 = score(doc=1179,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18030031 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05148746 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 1179, 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=1179)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 31. 7.1996 9:22:19
