Search (98 results, page 2 of 5)

  • × theme_ss:"Inhaltsanalyse"
  1. Yoon, J.W.: Utilizing quantitative users' reactions to represent affective meanings of an image (2010) 0.00
    0.004427025 = product of:
      0.030989174 = sum of:
        0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 3584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0050448296 = score(doc=3584,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 3584, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3584)
        0.025944345 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025944345 = score(doc=3584,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.28943354 = fieldWeight in 3584, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3584)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Emotional meaning is critical for users to retrieve relevant images. However, because emotional meanings are subject to the individual viewer's interpretation, they are considered difficult to implement when designing image retrieval systems. With the intent of making an image's emotional messages more readily accessible, this study aims to test a new approach designed to enhance the accessibility of emotional meanings during the image search process. This approach utilizes image searchers' emotional reactions, which are quantitatively measured. Broadly used quantitative measurements for emotional reactions, Semantic Differential (SD) and Self-Assessment Manikin (SAM), were selected as tools for gathering users' reactions. Emotional representations obtained from these two tools were compared with three image perception tasks: searching, describing, and sorting. A survey questionnaire with a set of 12 images was administered to 58 participants, which were tagged with basic emotions. Results demonstrated that the SAM represents basic emotions on 2-dimensional plots (pleasure and arousal dimensions), and this representation consistently corresponded to the three image perception tasks. This study provided experimental evidence that quantitative users' reactions can be a useful complementary element of current image retrieval/indexing systems. Integrating users' reactions obtained from the SAM into image browsing systems would reduce the efforts of human indexers as well as improve the effectiveness of image retrieval systems.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.7, S.1345-1359
  2. Hutchins, W.J.: ¬The concept of 'aboutness' in subject indexing (1978) 0.00
    0.0044226884 = product of:
      0.030958816 = sum of:
        0.009988253 = weight(_text_:information in 1961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009988253 = score(doc=1961,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 1961, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1961)
        0.020970564 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020970564 = score(doc=1961,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 1961, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1961)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    The common view of the 'aboutness' of documents is that the index entries (or classifications) assigned to documents represent or indicate in some way the total contents of documents; indexing and classifying are seen as processes involving the 'summerization' of the texts of documents. In this paper an alternative concept of 'aboutness' is proposed based on an analysis of the linguistic organization of texts, which is felt to be more appropriate in many indexing environments (particularly in non-specialized libraries and information services) and which has implications for the evaluation of the effectiveness of indexing systems
    Footnote
    Wiederabgedruckt in: Readings in information retrieval. Ed.: K. Sparck Jones u. P. Willett. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann 1997. S.93-97.
  3. Inskip, C.; MacFarlane, A.; Rafferty, P.: Meaning, communication, music : towards a revised communication model (2008) 0.00
    0.0040454194 = product of:
      0.028317936 = sum of:
        0.0071344664 = weight(_text_:information in 2347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0071344664 = score(doc=2347,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 2347, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2347)
        0.021183468 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021183468 = score(doc=2347,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 2347, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2347)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - If an information retrieval system is going to be of value to the user then it must give meaning to the information which matches the meaning given to it by the user. The meaning given to music varies according to who is interpreting it - the author/composer, the performer, cataloguer or the listener - and this affects how music is organized and retrieved. This paper aims to examine the meaning of music, how meaning is communicated and suggests this may affect music retrieval. Design/methodology/approach - Musicology is used to define music and examine its functions leading to a discussion of how music has been organised and described. Various ways of establishing the meaning of music are reviewed, focussing on established musical analysis techniques. It is suggested that traditional methods are of limited use with digitised popular music. A discussion of semiotics and a review of semiotic analysis in western art music leads to a discussion of semiotics of popular music and examines ideas of Middleton, Stefani and Tagg. Findings - Agreeing that music exists when communication takes place, a discussion of selected communication models leads to the proposal of a revised version of Tagg's model, adjusting it to include listener feedback. Originality/value - The outcome of the analysis is a revised version of Tagg's communication model, adapted to reflect user feedback. It is suggested that this revised communication model reflects the way in which meaning is given to music.
  4. Lassak, L.: ¬Ein Versuch zur Repräsentation von Charakteren der Kinder- und Jugendbuchserie "Die drei ???" in einer Datenbank (2017) 0.00
    0.004004761 = product of:
      0.028033325 = sum of:
        0.0070627616 = weight(_text_:information in 1784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0070627616 = score(doc=1784,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1784, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1784)
        0.020970564 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020970564 = score(doc=1784,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 1784, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1784)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Die vorliegende Masterarbeit setzt sich mit dem Information Retrieval anhand der Repräsentation von Charakteren der Kinder und Jugendbuchserie "Die drei ???" mit dem Datenbanksystem Access auseinander. Dabei werden sämtliche Aspekte von der Informations- und Datenbeschaffung aus 55 "Die drei ???"-Büchern über die Datenbankerstellung und -aufbereitung bis hin zu den abschließenden Evaluationen beschrieben. Insbesondere versucht die Arbeit die Nutzergruppe Autoren abzudecken, so dass die Datenbank ihnen eine erleichterte Figurenübersicht und eine Hilfestellung bei der Figurensuche geben soll.
  5. Pejtersen, A.M.: Design of a classification scheme for fiction based on an analysis of actual user-librarian communication, and use of the scheme for control of librarians' search strategies (1980) 0.00
    0.003950281 = product of:
      0.027651966 = sum of:
        0.014268933 = weight(_text_:information in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014268933 = score(doc=5835,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
        0.013383033 = product of:
          0.040149096 = sum of:
            0.040149096 = weight(_text_:22 in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.040149096 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.029633347 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Date
    5. 8.2006 13:22:44
    Source
    Theory and application of information research. Proc. of the 2nd Int. Research Forum on Information Science, 3.-6.8.1977, Copenhagen. Ed.: O. Harbo u, L. Kajberg
  6. Allen, R.B.; Wu, Y.: Metrics for the scope of a collection (2005) 0.00
    0.0038537113 = product of:
      0.026975978 = sum of:
        0.020922182 = weight(_text_:web in 4570) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020922182 = score(doc=4570,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 4570, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4570)
        0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 4570) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0060537956 = score(doc=4570,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4570, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4570)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Some collections cover many topics, while others are narrowly focused an a limited number of topics. We introduce the concept of the "scope" of a collection of documents and we compare two ways of measuring lt. These measures are based an the distances between documents. The first uses the overlap of words between pairs of documents. The second measure uses a novel method that calculates the semantic relatedness to pairs of words from the documents. Those values are combined to obtain an overall distance between the documents. The main validation for the measures compared Web pages categorized by Yahoo. Sets of pages sampied from broad categories were determined to have a higher scope than sets derived from subcategories. The measure was significant and confirmed the expected difference in scope. Finally, we discuss other measures related to scope.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.12, S.1243-1249
  7. Knautz, K.; Dröge, E.; Finkelmeyer, S.; Guschauski, D.; Juchem, K.; Krzmyk, C.; Miskovic, D.; Schiefer, J.; Sen, E.; Verbina, J.; Werner, N.; Stock, W.G.: Indexieren von Emotionen bei Videos (2010) 0.00
    0.003790876 = product of:
      0.02653613 = sum of:
        0.00856136 = weight(_text_:information in 3637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00856136 = score(doc=3637,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 3637, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3637)
        0.01797477 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01797477 = score(doc=3637,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 3637, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3637)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Gegenstand der empirischen Forschungsarbeit sind dargestellte wie empfundene Gefühle bei Videos. Sind Nutzer in der Lage, solche Gefühle derart konsistent zu erschließen, dass man deren Angaben für ein emotionales Videoretrieval gebrauchen kann? Wir arbeiten mit einem kontrollierten Vokabular für neun tionen (Liebe, Freude, Spaß, Überraschung, Sehnsucht, Trauer, Ärger, Ekel und Angst), einem Schieberegler zur Einstellung der jeweiligen Intensität des Gefühls und mit dem Ansatz der broad Folksonomy, lassen also unterschiedliche Nutzer die Videos taggen. Versuchspersonen bekamen insgesamt 20 Videos (bearbeitete Filme aus YouTube) vorgelegt, deren Emotionen sie indexieren sollten. Wir erhielten Angaben von 776 Probanden und entsprechend 279.360 Schiebereglereinstellungen. Die Konsistenz der Nutzervoten ist sehr hoch; die Tags führen zu stabilen Verteilungen der Emotionen für die einzelnen Videos. Die endgültige Form der Verteilungen wird schon bei relativ wenigen Nutzern (unter 100) erreicht. Es ist möglich, im Sinne der Power Tags die jeweils für ein Dokument zentralen Gefühle (soweit überhaupt vorhanden) zu separieren und für das emotionale Information Retrieval (EmIR) aufzubereiten.
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 61(2010) H.4, S.221-236
  8. Enser, P.G.B.; Sandom, C.J.; Hare, J.S.; Lewis, P.H.: Facing the reality of semantic image retrieval (2007) 0.00
    0.0033834055 = product of:
      0.047367673 = sum of:
        0.047367673 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047367673 = score(doc=837,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.5284309 = fieldWeight in 837, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=837)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - To provide a better-informed view of the extent of the semantic gap in image retrieval, and the limited potential for bridging it offered by current semantic image retrieval techniques. Design/methodology/approach - Within an ongoing project, a broad spectrum of operational image retrieval activity has been surveyed, and, from a number of collaborating institutions, a test collection assembled which comprises user requests, the images selected in response to those requests, and their associated metadata. This has provided the evidence base upon which to make informed observations on the efficacy of cutting-edge automatic annotation techniques which seek to integrate the text-based and content-based image retrieval paradigms. Findings - Evidence from the real-world practice of image retrieval highlights the existence of a generic-specific continuum of object identification, and the incidence of temporal, spatial, significance and abstract concept facets, manifest in textual indexing and real-query scenarios but often having no directly visible presence in an image. These factors combine to limit the functionality of current semantic image retrieval techniques, which interpret only visible features at the generic extremity of the generic-specific continuum. Research limitations/implications - The project is concerned with the traditional image retrieval environment in which retrieval transactions are conducted on still images which form part of managed collections. The possibilities offered by ontological support for adding functionality to automatic annotation techniques are considered. Originality/value - The paper offers fresh insights into the challenge of migrating content-based image retrieval from the laboratory to the operational environment, informed by newly-assembled, comprehensive, live data.
  9. Fairthorne, R.A.: Temporal structure in bibliographic classification (1985) 0.00
    0.0031870555 = product of:
      0.022309387 = sum of:
        0.01928249 = weight(_text_:wide in 3651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01928249 = score(doc=3651,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.14686027 = fieldWeight in 3651, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3651)
        0.0030268978 = weight(_text_:information in 3651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0030268978 = score(doc=3651,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.058186423 = fieldWeight in 3651, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3651)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    This paper, presented at the Ottawa Conference an the Conceptual Basis of the Classification of Knowledge, in 1971, is one of Fairthorne's more perceptive works and deserves a wide audience, especially as it breaks new ground in classification theory. In discussing the notion of discourse, he makes a "distinction between what discourse mentions and what discourse is about" [emphasis added], considered as a "fundamental factor to the relativistic nature of bibliographic classification" (p. 360). A table of mathematical functions, for example, describes exactly something represented by a collection of digits, but, without a preface, this table does not fit into a broader context. Some indication of the author's intent ls needed to fit the table into a broader context. This intent may appear in a title, chapter heading, class number or some other aid. Discourse an and discourse about something "cannot be determined solely from what it mentions" (p. 361). Some kind of background is needed. Fairthorne further develops the theme that knowledge about a subject comes from previous knowledge, thus adding a temporal factor to classification. "Some extra textual criteria are needed" in order to classify (p. 362). For example, "documents that mention the same things, but are an different topics, will have different ancestors, in the sense of preceding documents to which they are linked by various bibliographic characteristics ... [and] ... they will have different descendants" (p. 363). The classifier has to distinguish between documents that "mention exactly the same thing" but are not about the same thing. The classifier does this by classifying "sets of documents that form their histories, their bibliographic world lines" (p. 363). The practice of citation is one method of performing the linking and presents a "fan" of documents connected by a chain of citations to past work. The fan is seen as the effect of generations of documents - each generation connected to the previous one, and all ancestral to the present document. Thus, there are levels in temporal structure-that is, antecedent and successor documents-and these require that documents be identified in relation to other documents. This gives a set of documents an "irrevocable order," a loose order which Fairthorne calls "bibliographic time," and which is "generated by the fact of continual growth" (p. 364). He does not consider "bibliographic time" to be an equivalent to physical time because bibliographic events, as part of communication, require delay. Sets of documents, as indicated above, rather than single works, are used in classification. While an event, a person, a unique feature of the environment, may create a class of one-such as the French Revolution, Napoleon, Niagara Falls-revolutions, emperors, and waterfalls are sets which, as sets, will subsume individuals and make normal classes.
    The fan of past documents may be seen across time as a philosophical "wake," translated documents as a sideways relationship and future documents as another fan spreading forward from a given document (p. 365). The "overlap of reading histories can be used to detect common interests among readers," (p. 365) and readers may be classified accordingly. Finally, Fairthorne rejects the notion of a "general" classification, which he regards as a mirage, to be replaced by a citation-type network to identify classes. An interesting feature of his work lies in his linkage between old and new documents via a bibliographic method-citations, authors' names, imprints, style, and vocabulary - rather than topical (subject) terms. This is an indirect method of creating classes. The subject (aboutness) is conceived as a finite, common sharing of knowledge over time (past, present, and future) as opposed to the more common hierarchy of topics in an infinite schema assumed to be universally useful. Fairthorne, a mathematician by training, is a prolific writer an the foundations of classification and information. His professional career includes work with the Royal Engineers Chemical Warfare Section and the Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE). He was the founder of the Computing Unit which became the RAE Mathematics Department.
  10. From information to knowledge : conceptual and content analysis by computer (1995) 0.00
    0.0031590632 = product of:
      0.02211344 = sum of:
        0.0071344664 = weight(_text_:information in 5392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0071344664 = score(doc=5392,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 5392, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5392)
        0.014978974 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014978974 = score(doc=5392,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 5392, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5392)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Content
    SCHMIDT, K.M.: Concepts - content - meaning: an introduction; DUCHASTEL, J. et al.: The SACAO project: using computation toward textual data analysis; PAQUIN, L.-C. u. L. DUPUY: An approach to expertise transfer: computer-assisted text analysis; HOGENRAAD, R., Y. BESTGEN u. J.-L. NYSTEN: Terrorist rhetoric: texture and architecture; MOHLER, P.P.: On the interaction between reading and computing: an interpretative approach to content analysis; LANCASHIRE, I.: Computer tools for cognitive stylistics; MERGENTHALER, E.: An outline of knowledge based text analysis; NAMENWIRTH, J.Z.: Ideography in computer-aided content analysis; WEBER, R.P. u. J.Z. Namenwirth: Content-analytic indicators: a self-critique; McKINNON, A.: Optimizing the aberrant frequency word technique; ROSATI, R.: Factor analysis in classical archaeology: export patterns of Attic pottery trade; PETRILLO, P.S.: Old and new worlds: ancient coinage and modern technology; DARANYI, S., S. MARJAI u.a.: Caryatids and the measurement of semiosis in architecture; ZARRI, G.P.: Intelligent information retrieval: an application in the field of historical biographical data; BOUCHARD, G., R. ROY u.a.: Computers and genealogy: from family reconstitution to population reconstruction; DEMÉLAS-BOHY, M.-D. u. M. RENAUD: Instability, networks and political parties: a political history expert system prototype; DARANYI, S., A. ABRANYI u. G. KOVACS: Knowledge extraction from ethnopoetic texts by multivariate statistical methods; FRAUTSCHI, R.L.: Measures of narrative voice in French prose fiction applied to textual samples from the enlightenment to the twentieth century; DANNENBERG, R. u.a.: A project in computer music: the musician's workbench
  11. Andersen, J.; Christensen, F.S.: Wittgenstein and indexing theory (2001) 0.00
    0.0031590632 = product of:
      0.02211344 = sum of:
        0.0071344664 = weight(_text_:information in 1590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0071344664 = score(doc=1590,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 1590, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1590)
        0.014978974 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014978974 = score(doc=1590,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 1590, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1590)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    The paper considers indexing an activity that deals with linguistic entities. It rests an the assumption that a theory of indexing should be based an a philosophy of language, because indexing is concerned with the linguistic representation of meaning. The paper consists of four sections: It begins with some basic considerations an the nature of indexing and the requirements for a theory an this; it is followed by a short review of the use of Wittgenstein's philosophy in LIS-literature; next is an analysis of Wittgenstein's work Philosophical Investigations; finally, we deduce a theory of indexing from this philosophy. Considering an indexing theory a theory of meaning entails that, for the purpose of retrieval, indexing is a representation of meaning. Therefore, an indexing theory is concerned with how words are used in the linguistic context. Furthermore, the indexing process is a communicative process containing an interpretative element. Through the philosophy of the later Wittgenstein, it is shown that language and meaning are publicly constituted entities. Since they form the basis of indexing, a theory hereof must take into account that no single actor can define the meaning of documents. Rather this is decided by the social, historical and linguistic context in which the document is produced, distributed and exchanged. Indexing must clarify and reflect these contexts.
    Imprint
    Medford, NJ : Information Today
    Theme
    Information
  12. Xie, H.; Li, X.; Wang, T.; Lau, R.Y.K.; Wong, T.-L.; Chen, L.; Wang, F.L.; Li, Q.: Incorporating sentiment into tag-based user profiles and resource profiles for personalized search in folksonomy (2016) 0.00
    0.0031456926 = product of:
      0.022019848 = sum of:
        0.013948122 = weight(_text_:web in 2671) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013948122 = score(doc=2671,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.14422815 = fieldWeight in 2671, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2671)
        0.008071727 = weight(_text_:information in 2671) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008071727 = score(doc=2671,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 2671, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2671)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    In recent years, there has been a rapid growth of user-generated data in collaborative tagging (a.k.a. folksonomy-based) systems due to the prevailing of Web 2.0 communities. To effectively assist users to find their desired resources, it is critical to understand user behaviors and preferences. Tag-based profile techniques, which model users and resources by a vector of relevant tags, are widely employed in folksonomy-based systems. This is mainly because that personalized search and recommendations can be facilitated by measuring relevance between user profiles and resource profiles. However, conventional measurements neglect the sentiment aspect of user-generated tags. In fact, tags can be very emotional and subjective, as users usually express their perceptions and feelings about the resources by tags. Therefore, it is necessary to take sentiment relevance into account into measurements. In this paper, we present a novel generic framework SenticRank to incorporate various sentiment information to various sentiment-based information for personalized search by user profiles and resource profiles. In this framework, content-based sentiment ranking and collaborative sentiment ranking methods are proposed to obtain sentiment-based personalized ranking. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work of integrating sentiment information to address the problem of the personalized tag-based search in collaborative tagging systems. Moreover, we compare the proposed sentiment-based personalized search with baselines in the experiments, the results of which have verified the effectiveness of the proposed framework. In addition, we study the influences by popular sentiment dictionaries, and SenticNet is the most prominent knowledge base to boost the performance of personalized search in folksonomy.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 52(2016) no.1, S.61-72
  13. Langridge, D.W.: Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Methoden (1994) 0.00
    0.002787284 = product of:
      0.039021976 = sum of:
        0.039021976 = weight(_text_:bibliothek in 3923) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039021976 = score(doc=3923,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.121660605 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.32074454 = fieldWeight in 3923, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3923)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    RSWK
    Bibliothek / Klassifikation (ÖVK)
    Subject
    Bibliothek / Klassifikation (ÖVK)
  14. Ornager, S.: View a picture : theoretical image analysis and empirical user studies on indexing and retrieval (1996) 0.00
    0.0025944347 = product of:
      0.036322083 = sum of:
        0.036322083 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 904) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036322083 = score(doc=904,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.40520695 = fieldWeight in 904, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=904)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Abstract
    Examines Panofsky's and Barthes's theories of image analysis and reports on a study of criteria for analysis and indexing of images and the different types of user queries used in 15 Danish newspaper image archives. A structured interview method and observation and various categories for subject analysis were used. The results identify a list of the minimum number of elements and led to user typology of 5 categories. The requirement for retrieval may involve combining images in a more visual way with text-based image retrieval
  15. Austin, J.; Pejtersen, A.M.: Fiction retrieval: experimental design and evaluation of a search system based on user's value criteria. Pt.1 (1983) 0.00
    0.0025678244 = product of:
      0.03594954 = sum of:
        0.03594954 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 142) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03594954 = score(doc=142,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 142, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=142)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
  16. Wyllie, J.: Concept indexing : the world beyond the windows (1990) 0.00
    0.0025678244 = product of:
      0.03594954 = sum of:
        0.03594954 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2977) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03594954 = score(doc=2977,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 2977, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2977)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Abstract
    This paper argues that the realisation of the electronic hypermedia of the future depends on integrating the technology of free text retrieval with the classification-based discipline of content analysis
  17. Greisdorf, H.; O'Connor, B.: Modelling what users see when they look at images : a cognitive viewpoint (2002) 0.00
    0.0022238013 = product of:
      0.031133216 = sum of:
        0.031133216 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031133216 = score(doc=4471,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.34732026 = fieldWeight in 4471, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4471)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Abstract
    Analysis of user viewing and query-matching behavior furnishes additional evidence that the relevance of retrieved images for system users may arise from descriptions of objects and content-based elements that are not evident or not even present in the image. This investigation looks at how users assign pre-determined query terms to retrieved images, as well as looking at a post-retrieval process of image engagement to user cognitive assessments of meaningful terms. Additionally, affective/emotion-based query terms appear to be an important descriptive category for image retrieval. A system for capturing (eliciting) human interpretations derived from cognitive engagements with viewed images could further enhance the efficiency of image retrieval systems stemming from traditional indexing methods and technology-based content extraction algorithms. An approach to such a system is posited.
  18. Chen, S.-J.; Lee, H.-L.: Art images and mental associations : a preliminary exploration (2014) 0.00
    0.002011945 = product of:
      0.014083615 = sum of:
        0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 1416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0060537956 = score(doc=1416,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1416, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1416)
        0.008029819 = product of:
          0.024089456 = sum of:
            0.024089456 = weight(_text_:22 in 1416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.024089456 = score(doc=1416,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.029633347 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1416, 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=1416)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    This paper reports on the preliminary findings of a study that explores mental associations made by novices viewing art images. In a controlled environment, 20 Taiwanese college students responded to the question "What does the painting remind you of?" after viewing each digitized image of 15 oil paintings by a famous Taiwanese artist. Rather than focusing on the representation or interpretation of art, the study attempted to solicit information about how non-experts are stimulated by art. This paper reports on the analysis of participant responses to three of the images, and describes a12-type taxonomy of association emerged from the analysis. While 9 of the types are derived and adapted from facets in the Art & Architecture Thesaurus, three new types - Artistic Influence Association, Reactive Association, and Prototype Association - are discovered. The conclusion briefly discusses both the significance of the findings and the implications for future research.
    Source
    Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
  19. Allen, B.; Reser, D.: Content analysis in library and information science research (1990) 0.00
    0.0016307352 = product of:
      0.022830293 = sum of:
        0.022830293 = weight(_text_:information in 7510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022830293 = score(doc=7510,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.43886948 = fieldWeight in 7510, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7510)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Source
    Library and information science research. 12(1990) no.3, S.251-262
  20. Schlapfer, K.: ¬The information content of images (1995) 0.00
    0.001497926 = product of:
      0.020970963 = sum of:
        0.020970963 = weight(_text_:information in 521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020970963 = score(doc=521,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.40312737 = fieldWeight in 521, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=521)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Abstract
    Reviews the methods of calculating the information content of images, with particular reference to the information content of printed and photographic images; and printed and television images

Languages

  • e 87
  • d 11

Types

  • a 88
  • m 4
  • x 3
  • d 2
  • el 2
  • s 1
  • More… Less…