Search (44 results, page 1 of 3)

0.033354014 = product of:
  0.06670803 = sum of:
    0.06670803 = product of:
      0.10006204 = sum of:
        0.038441326 = weight(_text_:12 in 251) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038441326 = score(doc=251,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15724345 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.24447013 = fieldWeight in 251, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=251)
        0.06162072 = weight(_text_:22 in 251) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06162072 = score(doc=251,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19908418 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 251, 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=251)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 5.2021 12:43:05

0.017744549 = product of:
  0.035489097 = sum of:
    0.035489097 = product of:
      0.106467284 = sum of:
        0.106467284 = weight(_text_:objects in 4471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.106467284 = score(doc=4471,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.30216965 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.35234275 = fieldWeight in 4471, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4471)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

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.

0.0147871245 = product of:
  0.029574249 = sum of:
    0.029574249 = product of:
      0.08872274 = sum of:
        0.08872274 = weight(_text_:objects in 2657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08872274 = score(doc=2657,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.30216965 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.29361898 = fieldWeight in 2657, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2657)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In this paper a framework for the construction and organization of knowledge organization and representation languages in the context of digital photograph collections is presented. It analyses exigencies of photographs as documentary objects, as well as several models of indexing, different proposals of languages and a theoretical revision of ontologies in this research field, in relation to visual documents. In considering the photograph as an analysis object, it is appropriate to study all its attributes: features, components or properties of an objeet that can be represented in an information processing system. The attributes which are related to visual features include cognitive and affective answers and elements that describe spatial, semantic, symbolic or emotional features about a photograph. In any case, it is necessary to treat: a) morphological and material attributes (emulsion, state of preservation); b) biographical attributes: (school or trend, publication or exhibition); c) attributes of content: what and how a photograph says something; d) relational attributes: visual documents establish relationships with other documents that can be analysed in order to understand them.

0.0147871245 = product of:
  0.029574249 = sum of:
    0.029574249 = product of:
      0.08872274 = sum of:
        0.08872274 = weight(_text_:objects in 3618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08872274 = score(doc=3618,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.30216965 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.29361898 = fieldWeight in 3618, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3618)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine the art historical antecedents of providing subject access to images. After reviewing the assumptions and limitations inherent in the most prevalent descriptive method, the paper seeks to introduce a new model that allows for more comprehensive representation of visually-based cultural materials. Design/methodology/approach - The paper presents a literature-based conceptual analysis, taking Panofsky's theory of iconography and iconology as the starting-point. Panofsky's conceptual model, while appropriate for art created in the Western academic tradition, ignores or misrepresents work from other eras or cultures. Continued dependence on Panofskian descriptive methods limits the functionality and usefulness of image representation systems. Findings - The paper recommends the development of a more precise and inclusive descriptive model for art objects, which is based on the premise that art is not another sort of text, and should not be interpreted as such. Practical implications - The paper provides suggestions for the development of representation models that will enhance the description of non-textual artifacts. Originality/value - The paper addresses issues in information science, the history of art, and computer science, and suggests that a new descriptive model would be of great value to both humanist and social science scholars.

0.01283765 = product of:
  0.0256753 = sum of:
    0.0256753 = product of:
      0.0770259 = sum of:
        0.0770259 = weight(_text_:22 in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0770259 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19908418 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

5. 8.2006 13:22:44

0.012813776 = product of:
  0.025627552 = sum of:
    0.025627552 = product of:
      0.07688265 = sum of:
        0.07688265 = weight(_text_:12 in 722) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07688265 = score(doc=722,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15724345 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.48894027 = fieldWeight in 722, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=722)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Scandinavian public library quarterly. 11(1978), S.5-12

0.012813776 = product of:
  0.025627552 = sum of:
    0.025627552 = product of:
      0.07688265 = sum of:
        0.07688265 = weight(_text_:12 in 7510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07688265 = score(doc=7510,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15724345 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.48894027 = fieldWeight in 7510, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7510)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Library and information science research. 12(1990) no.3, S.251-262

0.012507755 = product of:
  0.02501551 = sum of:
    0.02501551 = product of:
      0.037523266 = sum of:
        0.014415498 = weight(_text_:12 in 2293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014415498 = score(doc=2293,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15724345 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.0916763 = fieldWeight in 2293, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2293)
        0.023107769 = weight(_text_:22 in 2293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023107769 = score(doc=2293,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19908418 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 2293, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2293)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

27. 9.2005 14:22:19

Footnote

Rez. in: Knowledge organization 30(2003) no.2, S.114-115 (M. Hudon); "This most interesting contribution to the literature of subject cataloguing originates in the author's doctoral dissertation, prepared under the direction of jerry Saye at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. In seven highly readable chapters, Alenka Sauperl develops possible answers to her principal research question: How do cataloguers determine or identify the topic of a document and choose appropriate subject representations? Specific questions at the source of this research an a process which has not been a frequent object of study include: Where do cataloguers look for an overall sense of what a document is about? How do they get an overall sense of what a document is about, especially when they are not familiar with the discipline? Do they consider only one or several possible interpretations? How do they translate meanings in appropriate and valid class numbers and subject headings? Using a strictly qualitative methodology, Dr. Sauperl's research is a study of twelve cataloguers in reallife situation. The author insists an the holistic rather than purely theoretical understanding of the process she is targeting. Participants in the study were professional cataloguers, with at least one year experience in their current job at one of three large academic libraries in the Southeastern United States. All three libraries have a large central cataloguing department, and use OCLC sources and the same automated system; the context of cataloguing tasks is thus considered to be reasonably comparable. All participants were volunteers in this study which combined two datagathering techniques: the think-aloud method and time-line interviews. A model of the subject cataloguing process was first developed from observations of a group of six cataloguers who were asked to independently perform original cataloguing an three nonfiction, non-serial items selected from materials regularly assigned to them for processing. The model was then used for follow-up interviews. Each participant in the second group of cataloguers was invited to reflect an his/her work process for a recent challenging document they had catalogued. Results are presented in 12 stories describing as many personal approaches to subject cataloguing. From these stories a summarization is offered and a theoretical model of subject cataloguing is developed which, according to the author, represents a realistic approach to subject cataloguing. Stories alternate comments from the researcher and direct quotations from the observed or interviewed cataloguers. Not surprisingly, the participants' stories reveal similarities in the sequence and accomplishment of several tasks in the process of subject cataloguing. Sauperl's proposed model, described in Chapter 5, includes as main stages: 1) Examination of the book and subject identification; 2) Search for subject headings; 3) Classification. Chapter 6 is a hypothetical Gase study, using the proposed model to describe the various stages of cataloguing a hypothetical resource. ...

0.011212054 = product of:
  0.022424107 = sum of:
    0.022424107 = product of:
      0.06727232 = sum of:
        0.06727232 = weight(_text_:12 in 1640) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06727232 = score(doc=1640,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15724345 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.42782274 = fieldWeight in 1640, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1640)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

2.12.2015 12:00:15

0.011212054 = product of:
  0.022424107 = sum of:
    0.022424107 = product of:
      0.06727232 = sum of:
        0.06727232 = weight(_text_:12 in 5270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06727232 = score(doc=5270,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15724345 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.42782274 = fieldWeight in 5270, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5270)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

28. 9.1996 20:12:47

0.010350986 = product of:
  0.020701973 = sum of:
    0.020701973 = product of:
      0.062105916 = sum of:
        0.062105916 = weight(_text_:objects in 3648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.062105916 = score(doc=3648,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.30216965 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.20553327 = fieldWeight in 3648, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3648)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

One knows one is in the presence of "theory" when fundamental questions of a "why" nature are asked. Too often it happens that those involved in the design of bibliographic information systems have no time for brooding. It is thus noteworthy when someone appears an the bibliographic scene who troubles to address, and pursue with philosophic rigor, fundamental questions about the way we organize information. Such a person is Patrick Wilson, formerly philosophy professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, and since 1965, an the faculty of the School of Library and Information Studies, University of California, Berkeley. Bibliographic control is the central concept of Wilson's book Two Kinds of Power. It is represented as a kind of power-a power over knowledge. That power is of two kinds: descriptive and exploitive. Descriptive power is the power to retrieve all writings that satisfy some "evaluatively neutral" description, for instance, all writings by Hobbes or all writings an the subject of eternat recurrence. Descriptive power is achieved insofar as the items in our bibliographic universe are fitted with descriptions and these descriptions are syndetically related. Exploitive power is a less-familiar concept, but it is more important since it can be used to explain why we attempt to order our bibliographic universe in the first place. Exploitive power is the power to obtain the best textual means to an end. Unlike the concept of descriptive power, that of exploitive power has a normative aspect to it. Someone possessing such power would understand the goal of all bibliographic activity; that is, he would understand the diversity of user purposes and the relativity of what is valuable; he would be omniscient both as a bibliographer and as a psychologist. Since exploitive power is ever out of reach, descriptive power is used as a substitute or approximation for it. How adequate this approximation is is the subject of Wilson's book. The particular chapter excerpted in this volume deals with the adequacy of subject access methods. Cutter's statement that one of the objects of a library catalog is to show what the library has an a given subject is generally accepted, as though it were obvious what "being an a given subject" means. It is far from obvious. Wilson challenges the underlying presumption that for any document a heading can be found that is coextensive with its subject. This presumption implies that there is such a thing as the (singular) subject of a document and that it can be identified. But, as Wilson Shows in his elaborate explication, the notion of "subject" is essentially indeterminate, with the consequence that we are limited in our attempts to achieve either descriptive or exploitive power.

0.010270121 = product of:
  0.020540241 = sum of:
    0.020540241 = product of:
      0.06162072 = sum of:
        0.06162072 = weight(_text_:22 in 5830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06162072 = score(doc=5830,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19908418 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5830, 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=5830)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

5. 8.2006 13:22:08

0.00907759 = product of:
  0.01815518 = sum of:
    0.01815518 = product of:
      0.054465536 = sum of:
        0.054465536 = weight(_text_:22 in 4888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054465536 = score(doc=4888,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.19908418 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 4888, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4888)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 1.2012 13:02:10

Source

Knowledge organization. 39(2012) no.1, S.13-22

0.00792812 = product of:
  0.01585624 = sum of:
    0.01585624 = product of:
      0.047568716 = sum of:
        0.047568716 = weight(_text_:12 in 5187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047568716 = score(doc=5187,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15724345 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.30251637 = fieldWeight in 5187, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5187)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Chen arranged with an Art History instructor to require 20 medieval art images in papers received from 29 students. Participants completed a self administered presearch and postsearch questionnaire, and were interviewed after questionnaire analysis, in order to collect both the keywords and phrases they planned to use, and those actually used. Three MLIS student reviewers then mapped the queries to Enser and McGregor's four categories, Jorgensen's 12 classes, and Fidel's 12 feature data and object poles providing a degree of match on a seven point scale (one not at all to 7 exact). The reviewers give highest scores to Enser and McGregor;'s categories. Modifications to both the Enser and McGregor and Jorgensen schemes are suggested

0.00770259 = product of:
  0.01540518 = sum of:
    0.01540518 = product of:
      0.046215538 = sum of:
        0.046215538 = weight(_text_:22 in 6525) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046215538 = score(doc=6525,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19908418 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 6525, 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=6525)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) no.2, S.5-18

0.00770259 = product of:
  0.01540518 = sum of:
    0.01540518 = product of:
      0.046215538 = sum of:
        0.046215538 = weight(_text_:22 in 1416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046215538 = score(doc=1416,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19908418 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

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

0.00770259 = product of:
  0.01540518 = sum of:
    0.01540518 = product of:
      0.046215538 = sum of:
        0.046215538 = weight(_text_:22 in 5589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046215538 = score(doc=5589,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19908418 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5589, 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=5589)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Library trends. 55(2006) no.1, S.22-45

0.006795531 = product of:
  0.013591062 = sum of:
    0.013591062 = product of:
      0.040773187 = sum of:
        0.040773187 = weight(_text_:12 in 1751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040773187 = score(doc=1751,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15724345 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.25929976 = fieldWeight in 1751, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1751)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

12. 9.1997 19:47:46
24. 3.2008 12:29:34

0.006795531 = product of:
  0.013591062 = sum of:
    0.013591062 = product of:
      0.040773187 = sum of:
        0.040773187 = weight(_text_:12 in 3953) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040773187 = score(doc=3953,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15724345 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.25929976 = fieldWeight in 3953, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3953)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

12. 3.2001 11:34:20
29. 8.2010 12:40:35

0.006406888 = product of:
  0.012813776 = sum of:
    0.012813776 = product of:
      0.038441326 = sum of:
        0.038441326 = weight(_text_:12 in 2489) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038441326 = score(doc=2489,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15724345 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.056851476 = queryNorm
            0.24447013 = fieldWeight in 2489, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2489)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

19. 2.1997 12:36:07