Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Indexierungsstudien"
  • × year_i:[1980 TO 1990}
  1. Deaves, J.C.; Pache, J.E.: Chemical and numerical indexing for the INSPEC database (1989) 0.02 
    0.015679834 = product of:
  0.06271934 = sum of:
    0.06271934 = weight(_text_:data in 2289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06271934 = score(doc=2289,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.42357713 = fieldWeight in 2289, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2289)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    The wealth of chemical information on the INSPEC database is easily retrieved using the printed subject indexes to the associated abstract journals. However, this subject indexing is insufficient for machine retrieval, and free-text searching has special difficulties. An easy-to-use retrieval system has been developed which overcomes many problems, especially the retrieval of non-stoichiometric compositions, which are a feature solid-state chemistry. The scheme is limited to inorganic material, but allows flexibility and identification of dopants, interfaces and surfaces or substrates. At the same time, a system has been introduced for the online retrieval of numerical data included in the data base. This has successfully standardized the way in which such data is held for searching, enabling further refinement of searches where numerical information is significant
  2. Chartron, G.; Dalbin, S.; Monteil, M.-G.; Verillon, M.: Indexation manuelle et indexation automatique : dépasser les oppositions (1989) 0.01 
    0.009052756 = product of:
  0.036211025 = sum of:
    0.036211025 = weight(_text_:data in 3516) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036211025 = score(doc=3516,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.24455236 = fieldWeight in 3516, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3516)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Report of a study comparing 2 methods of indexing: LEXINET, a computerised system for indexing titles and summaries only; and manual indexing of full texts, using the thesaurus developed by French Electricity (EDF). Both systems were applied to a collection of approximately 2.000 documents on artifical intelligence from the EDF data base. The results were then analysed to compare quantitative performance (number and range of terms) and qualitative performance (ambiguity of terms, specificity, variability, consistency). Overall, neither system proved ideal: LEXINET was deficient as regards lack of accessibility and excessive ambiguity; while the manual system gave rise to an over-wide variation of terms. The ideal system would appear to be a combination of automatic and manual systems, on the evidence produced here.

Authors

Languages