Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

0.012267546 = product of:
  0.08178364 = sum of:
    0.010929758 = weight(_text_:und in 2423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010929758 = score(doc=2423,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.044633795 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02013827 = queryNorm
        0.24487628 = fieldWeight in 2423, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2423)
    0.05975184 = weight(_text_:methoden in 2423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05975184 = score(doc=2423,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10436003 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.1821747 = idf(docFreq=674, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02013827 = queryNorm
        0.5725548 = fieldWeight in 2423, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.1821747 = idf(docFreq=674, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2423)
    0.01110204 = weight(_text_:der in 2423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01110204 = score(doc=2423,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.044984195 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02013827 = queryNorm
        0.2467987 = fieldWeight in 2423, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2423)
  0.15 = coord(3/20)

Abstract

Die "Bedeutung" der Daten schlägt sich darin nieder, wie sie verarbeitet werden oder überhaupt nur verarbeitet werden dürfen. Dieser semantische Aspekt steckt vorwiegend in den Verarbeitungsprogrammen. In mancherlei Situationen ist es jedoch sinnvoll, wenigstens einen Teil davon in die Datenbank zu übernehmen. Hierfür gibt es vielfältige Methoden mit recht unterschiedlichen Voraussetzungen, Auswirkungen und Leistungen ...

0.010289166 = product of:
  0.06859444 = sum of:
    0.022864813 = weight(_text_:23 in 2921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022864813 = score(doc=2921,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07217676 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02013827 = queryNorm
        0.31678912 = fieldWeight in 2921, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2921)
    0.022864813 = weight(_text_:23 in 2921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022864813 = score(doc=2921,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07217676 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02013827 = queryNorm
        0.31678912 = fieldWeight in 2921, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2921)
    0.022864813 = weight(_text_:23 in 2921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022864813 = score(doc=2921,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07217676 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02013827 = queryNorm
        0.31678912 = fieldWeight in 2921, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2921)
  0.15 = coord(3/20)

Date

13. 2.1997 17:57:23

7.275887E-4 = product of:
  0.014551774 = sum of:
    0.014551774 = product of:
      0.04365532 = sum of:
        0.04365532 = weight(_text_:22 in 4368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04365532 = score(doc=4368,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07052079 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4368, 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=4368)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.05 = coord(1/20)

Date

13. 7.2008 19:22:28

5.6194345E-4 = product of:
  0.011238869 = sum of:
    0.011238869 = product of:
      0.022477739 = sum of:
        0.022477739 = weight(_text_:engineering in 4244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022477739 = score(doc=4244,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10819342 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.372528 = idf(docFreq=557, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.20775513 = fieldWeight in 4244, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.372528 = idf(docFreq=557, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4244)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.05 = coord(1/20)

Abstract

Does information science have a theory of information? There seems to be a tendency within information science to seek a theory of information, but the search is apparently unproductive (Hjoerland, 1998; Saracevic, 1999). This review brings together work from inside and outside the field of information science, showing that other perspectives an information theory could be of assistance. Constructivist claims that emphasize the uniqueness of the individual experience of information, maintaining that there is no information independent of our social practices (Cornelius, 1996a), are also mentioned. Such a position would be echoed in a symbolic interactionist approach. Conventionally, the history of attempts to develop a theory of information date from the publication of Claude Shannon's work in 1948, and his joint publication of that work with an essay by Warren Weaver in 1949 (Shannon & Weaver, 1949/1963). Information science found itself alongside many other disciplines attempting to develop a theory of information (Machlup & Mansfield, 1983). From Weaver's essay stems the claim that the basic concepts of Shannon's mathematical theory of communication, which Shannon later referred to as a theory of information, can be applied in disciplines outside electrical engineering, even in the social sciences.

4.816658E-4 = product of:
  0.009633316 = sum of:
    0.009633316 = product of:
      0.019266631 = sum of:
        0.019266631 = weight(_text_:engineering in 5079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019266631 = score(doc=5079,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10819342 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.372528 = idf(docFreq=557, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.17807582 = fieldWeight in 5079, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.372528 = idf(docFreq=557, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=5079)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.05 = coord(1/20)

Abstract

The concept of information as we use it in everyday English, in the sense of knowledge communicated, plays a central role in contemporary society. The development and widespread use of computer networks since the end of World War II, and the emergence of information science as a discipline in the 1950s, are evidence of this focus. Although knowledge and its communication are basic phenomena of every human society, it is the rise of information technology and its global impacts that characterize ours as an information society. It is commonplace to consider information as a basic condition for economic development together with capital, labor, and raw material; but what makes information especially significant at present is its digital nature. The impact of information technology an the natural and social sciences in particular has made this everyday notion a highly controversial concept. Claude Shannon's (1948) "A Mathematical Theory of Communication" is a landmark work, referring to the common use of information with its semantic and pragmatic dimensions, while at the same time redefining the concept within an engineering framework. The fact that the concept of knowledge communication has been designated by the word information seems, prima facie, a linguistic happenstance. For a science like information science (IS), it is of course important how fundamental terms are defined; and in IS, as in other fields, the question of how to define information is often raised. This chapter is an attempt to review the status of the concept of information in IS, with reference also to interdisciplinary trends. In scientific discourse, theoretical concepts are not true or false elements or glimpses of some element of reality; rather, they are constructions designed to do a job in the best possible way. Different conceptions of fundamental terms like information are thus more or less fruitful, depending an the theories (and in the end, the practical actions) they are expected to support. In the opening section, we discuss the problem of defining terms from the perspective of the philosophy of science. The history of a word provides us with anecdotes that are tangential to the concept itself. But in our case, the use of the word information points to a specific perspective from which the concept of knowledge communication has been defined. This perspective includes such characteristics as novelty and relevante; i.e., it refers to the process of knowledge transformation, and particularly to selection and interpretation within a specific context. The discussion leads to the questions of why and when this meaning was designated with the word information. We will explore this history, and we believe that our results may help readers better understand the complexity of the concept with regard to its scientific definitions.