Search (46 results, page 1 of 3)

0.11258229 = product of:
  0.22516458 = sum of:
    0.22516458 = sum of:
      0.17712456 = weight(_text_:class in 88) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.17712456 = score(doc=88,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05065357 = queryNorm
          0.6184341 = fieldWeight in 88, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=88)
      0.048040017 = weight(_text_:22 in 88) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048040017 = score(doc=88,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17738017 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05065357 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 88, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=88)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper presents a study conducted at the University of Colorado at Boulder (CU-Boulder) to assess the extent to which its catalogers were using Classification Web (Class Web), the subscription-based, online cataloging documentation resource provided by the Library of Congress. In addition, this paper will explore assumptions made by management regarding CU-Boulder catalogers' use of the product, possible reasons for the lower-than-expected use, and recommendations for promoting a more efficient and cost-effective use of Class Web at other institutions similar to CU-Boulder.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.086642995 = product of:
  0.17328599 = sum of:
    0.17328599 = sum of:
      0.12524597 = weight(_text_:class in 4321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.12524597 = score(doc=4321,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05065357 = queryNorm
          0.43729892 = fieldWeight in 4321, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4321)
      0.048040017 = weight(_text_:22 in 4321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048040017 = score(doc=4321,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17738017 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05065357 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4321, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4321)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Ab Januar 2006 wird Die Deutsche Bibliothek ein neues Webangebot mit dem Namen Melvil starten, das ein Ergebnis ihres Engagements für die DDC und das Projekt DDC Deutsch ist. Der angebotene Webservice basiert auf der Übersetzung der 22. Ausgabe der DDC, die im Oktober 2005 als Druckausgabe im K. G. Saur Verlag erscheint. Er bietet jedoch darüber hinausgehende Features, die den Klassifizierer bei seiner Arbeit unterstützen und erstmals eine verbale Recherche für Endnutzer über DDCerschlossene Titel ermöglichen. Der Webservice Melvil gliedert sich in drei Anwendungen: - MelvilClass, - MelvilSearch und - MelvilSoap.

Object

Melvil Class

0.07156913 = product of:
  0.14313826 = sum of:
    0.14313826 = product of:
      0.28627652 = sum of:
        0.28627652 = weight(_text_:class in 109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.28627652 = score(doc=109,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.9995404 = fieldWeight in 109, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=109)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.07156913 = product of:
  0.14313826 = sum of:
    0.14313826 = product of:
      0.28627652 = sum of:
        0.28627652 = weight(_text_:class in 765) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.28627652 = score(doc=765,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.9995404 = fieldWeight in 765, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=765)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

21-CLASS-1-G (dt. Übers.)

0.07156913 = product of:
  0.14313826 = sum of:
    0.14313826 = product of:
      0.28627652 = sum of:
        0.28627652 = weight(_text_:class in 1146) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.28627652 = score(doc=1146,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.9995404 = fieldWeight in 1146, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1146)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In addition to using title keywords and subject headings for searching in the online catalog, the searcher may also use class numbers as access points. Library of Congress class or call numbers are particular effective in certain kinds of specific-item subject searching and serve as supplements to keywords and descriptors, improving precision and recall. Class number searching in the database can produce unique results because these numbers collect citations in ways that differ from those of keywords and descriptors

0.054233104 = product of:
  0.10846621 = sum of:
    0.10846621 = product of:
      0.21693242 = sum of:
        0.21693242 = weight(_text_:class in 2991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.21693242 = score(doc=2991,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.757424 = fieldWeight in 2991, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2991)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a survey examining the extent to which working catalogers use Classification Web, the Library of Congress' online resource for subject heading and classification documentation. An earlier survey analyzed Class Web's usefulness on an institutional level. This broader survey expands on that analysis and provides information on such questions as: what types of institutions subscribe to Class Web; what are the reasons for using Class Web when performing original or copy cataloging; and what other resources do catalogers use for classification/subject heading analysis?

0.044730708 = product of:
  0.089461416 = sum of:
    0.089461416 = product of:
      0.17892283 = sum of:
        0.17892283 = weight(_text_:class in 3614) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17892283 = score(doc=3614,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.62471277 = fieldWeight in 3614, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3614)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this study is twofold: to investigate whether it is meaningful to use the Engineering Index (Ei) classification scheme for browsing, and then, if proven useful, to investigate the performance of an automated classification algorithm based on the Ei classification scheme. Design/methodology/approach - A user study was conducted in which users solved four controlled searching tasks. The users browsed the Ei classification scheme in order to examine the suitability of the classification systems for browsing. The classification algorithm was evaluated by the users who judged the correctness of the automatically assigned classes. Findings - The study showed that the Ei classification scheme is suited for browsing. Automatically assigned classes were on average partly correct, with some classes working better than others. Success of browsing showed to be correlated and dependent on classification correctness. Research limitations/implications - Further research should address problems of disparate evaluations of one and the same web page. Additional reasons behind browsing failures in the Ei classification scheme also need further investigation. Practical implications - Improvements for browsing were identified: describing class captions and/or listing their subclasses from start; allowing for searching for words from class captions with synonym search (easily provided for Ei since the classes are mapped to thesauri terms); when searching for class captions, returning the hierarchical tree expanded around the class in which caption the search term is found. The need for improvements of classification schemes was also indicated. Originality/value - A user-based evaluation of automated subject classification in the context of browsing has not been conducted before; hence the study also presents new findings concerning methodology.

0.03873793 = product of:
  0.07747586 = sum of:
    0.07747586 = product of:
      0.15495172 = sum of:
        0.15495172 = weight(_text_:class in 1492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15495172 = score(doc=1492,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.5410171 = fieldWeight in 1492, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1492)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Describes the features und capabilities of the software SATSAN AUTOMATRIX version 1 for semi-automatic synthesis of Colon Class number (CCN) for a given subject according to the Postulational Approach formulated by S.R. Ranganathan. The present Auto-Matrix version l gives the user more facilities to carry out facet analysis of a subject (simple, compound. or complex) preparatory to synthesizing the corresponding CCN. The software also enables searching for and using previously constructed class numbers automatically, maintenance and use of databases of CC Index, facet formulae and CC schedules for subjects going with different Basic Subjects. The paper begins with a brief account of the authors' consultations with und directions received from. Prof A. Neelameghan in the course of developing the software. Oracle 8 and VB6 have been used in writing the programmes. But for operating SATSAN it is not necessary for users to he proficient in VB6 and Oracle 8 languages. Any computer literate with the basic knowledge of Microsoft Word will he able to use this application software.

0.03795526 = product of:
  0.07591052 = sum of:
    0.07591052 = product of:
      0.15182105 = sum of:
        0.15182105 = weight(_text_:class in 3735) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15182105 = score(doc=3735,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.53008634 = fieldWeight in 3735, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3735)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Describes the development by the Defence Metallurgical Research Laboratory, Hyderabad, India, of an expert system for classification of technical documents using the UDC schedule for metallurgy as knowledge base and the UDC classification rules as rule base. The scheme was modified from its enumerative structure to an analytico-synthetic structure which is best suited to such an expert system. Some benefits of the expert system are that: it interacts with the classifier making them conform to the route suggested by the classification scheme; it alerts the classifier to the minor variations in the scheme thus avoiding overlooking them; it leads to consistency in class number generation; and it ensures that the classifier has incorporated als the concepts of the subject in the class number, by leading him or her through all the groups, which is not possible in the manual scheme

0.035784565 = product of:
  0.07156913 = sum of:
    0.07156913 = product of:
      0.14313826 = sum of:
        0.14313826 = weight(_text_:class in 403) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14313826 = score(doc=403,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.4997702 = fieldWeight in 403, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=403)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Description of an attempt to improve OPAC subject access at Kobe University Library using Nippon Decimal Classification, 8th ed. (NDC8). Examines the theoretical aspects of using a classification for subject searching, then explains the Kobe system. Using the NDC8 machine-readable data file, a database was created for the OPAC, incorporating class numbers and subject headings. Difficulties arise from subdivisions and the structure of NDC8 itself, but it is an important area for development

0.031629387 = product of:
  0.063258775 = sum of:
    0.063258775 = product of:
      0.12651755 = sum of:
        0.12651755 = weight(_text_:class in 84) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12651755 = score(doc=84,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.44173864 = fieldWeight in 84, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=84)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to determine some of the structural features of the classification schemes used in the directories (guides, channels) of search engines to organise information sources on the Internet. Ten search engines were examined at the main class level and the full hierarchies of a sample of three specific subjects were analysed in four of these engines, namely Excite, Infoseek, Lycos and Yahoo! It was found that there are major differences between the main classes of the search engines and those found in standard library schemes like Dewey, UDC and LCC. There are large gaps in subject coverage at main class level in the search engines and the general tendency is to use a topic-based approach in the formation of classes, rather than a discipline-based approach. The subdivision of the main classes is according to hierarchical tree structures, but a number of anomalies in this regard were identified. Another deviation from library classification theory is that various principles of division are employed to form classes at the same hierarchical level. In an analysis of citation orders many examples were found that conform to the principles followed in library classifications, but a number of inconsistencies in this regard were also noted

0.031629387 = product of:
  0.063258775 = sum of:
    0.063258775 = product of:
      0.12651755 = sum of:
        0.12651755 = weight(_text_:class in 4327) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12651755 = score(doc=4327,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.44173864 = fieldWeight in 4327, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4327)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The suggestion that classifications for retrieval should be constructed automatically raises some serious problems concerning the sorts of classification which are required, and the way in which formal classification theories should be exploited, given that a retrieval classification is required for a purpose. These difficulties have not been sufficiently considered, and the paper therefore attempts an analysis of them, though no solution of immediate application can be suggested. Starting with the illustrative proposition that a polythetic, multiple, unordered classification is required in automatic thesaurus construction, this is considered in the context of classification in general, where eight sorts of classification can be distinguished, each covering a range of class definitions and class-finding algorithms. The problem which follows is that since there is generally no natural or best classification of a set of objects as such, the evaluation of alternative classifications requires either formal criteria of goodness of fit, or, if a classification is required for a purpose, a precises statement of that purpose. In any case a substantive theory of classification is needed, which does not exist; and since sufficiently precise specifications of retrieval requirements are also lacking, the only currently available approach to automatic classification experiments for information retrieval is to do enough of them

0.031629387 = product of:
  0.063258775 = sum of:
    0.063258775 = product of:
      0.12651755 = sum of:
        0.12651755 = weight(_text_:class in 4392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12651755 = score(doc=4392,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.44173864 = fieldWeight in 4392, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4392)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper was originally published in 1970 (Journal of documentation. 26(1970), S.89-101), considered the suggestion that classifications for retrieval should be constructed automatically and raised some serious problems concerning the sorts of classification which were required, and the way in which formal classification theories should be exploited, given that a retrieval classification is required for a purpose. These difficulties had not been sufficiently considered, and the paper, therefore, aims to attempt an analysis of them, though no solutions of immediate application could be suggested. Design/methodology/approach - Starting with the illustrative proposition that a polythetic, multiple, unordered classification is required in automatic thesaurus construction, this is considered in the context of classification in general, where eight sorts of classification can be distinguished, each covering a range of class definitions and class-finding algorithms. Findings - Since there is generally no natural or best classification of a set of objects as such, the evaluation of alternative classifications requires either formal criteria of goodness of fit, or, if a classification is required for a purpose, a precise statement of that purpose. In any case a substantive theory of classification is needed, which does not exist; and, since sufficiently precise specifications of retrieval requirements are also lacking, the only currently available approach to automatic classification experiments for information retrieval is to do enough of them. Originality/value - Gives insights into the classification of material for information retrieval.

0.031311493 = product of:
  0.06262299 = sum of:
    0.06262299 = product of:
      0.12524597 = sum of:
        0.12524597 = weight(_text_:class in 3221) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12524597 = score(doc=3221,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.43729892 = fieldWeight in 3221, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3221)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The automation of Bucharest University Central Library involved the compilation of a dictionary of terms to facilitate postcoordinated searching in accordance with the UDC notation attached to every bibliographic record. Describes the project and demonstrates why a multilingual UDC based thesaurus is considered as ideal indexing and searching tool. The experiment, which applied to Class 8 of UDC (Linguisitcs and Literature), illustrates how all UDC tables can be successfully used to build a thesaurus and the ways in which their limitations can be overcome by a thesaurus

0.027451439 = product of:
  0.054902878 = sum of:
    0.054902878 = product of:
      0.109805755 = sum of:
        0.109805755 = weight(_text_:22 in 7684) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.109805755 = score(doc=7684,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17738017 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 7684, 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=7684)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Journal of academic librarianship. 10(1984), S.17-22

0.026838424 = product of:
  0.053676847 = sum of:
    0.053676847 = product of:
      0.107353695 = sum of:
        0.107353695 = weight(_text_:class in 942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.107353695 = score(doc=942,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.37482765 = fieldWeight in 942, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=942)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

http://www.lub.lu.se/tk/demos/class-ws/index.html

0.026838424 = product of:
  0.053676847 = sum of:
    0.053676847 = product of:
      0.107353695 = sum of:
        0.107353695 = weight(_text_:class in 492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.107353695 = score(doc=492,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.37482765 = fieldWeight in 492, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=492)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This response to the paper by Dr. Chan, while accepting the merits of call number searching in the theoretical sense, raises questions about its usefulness in typical library situations. Compares searching on-line with call numbers and the use of classified catalogues and shelflists. Asks who is expected to do call number searching. Considers the availability of indexes to the classification scheme, problems created by the provision of only 1 class number per document, and the use of multiple cutter numbers to express the subject of a document.

0.026838424 = product of:
  0.053676847 = sum of:
    0.053676847 = product of:
      0.107353695 = sum of:
        0.107353695 = weight(_text_:class in 588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.107353695 = score(doc=588,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.37482765 = fieldWeight in 588, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=588)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Für fachspezifische bibliographische Online-Recherchen werden in den meisten Fällen die Ergebnisse nur der verbalen inhaltlichen Erschliessung genutzt (Deskriptoren, Schlagwörter, Stichwörter, Abstract-Texte). Viele bibliographische Datenbanken sind aber auch mit Hilfe von Notationen aus Klassifikationssystemen recherchierbar. Dieser Beitrag behandelt die letztere Form des sachlichen Zugriffs und streicht die Rolle von Notationen ("class codes") als nützliche Ergänzung zur verbalen Recherche heraus. Im ersten Teil werden folgende Fragen thematisiert: In welchem Ausmass sind Klassifikationsschemata als sachliche Zugriffsmöglichkeit in bibliographischen Datenbanken vorhanden? Welcher Art sind diese Schemata und ihre Notationen? Der zweite Teil veranschaulicht mehrere vorteilhafte Möglichkeiten der Anwendung von Notationen bei der bibliographischen Recherche. Der dritte Teil beschäftigt sich mit Änderungen von Klassifikationssystemen - dem Hauptproblem ihrer Verwendung bei der Online-Recherche. Der Rechercheur muss daher nicht nur wissen, wie Klassifikationen zur Verbesserung der Suchstrategie eingesetzt werden, sondern auch, wie Schwierigkeiten dieser Art zu bewältigen sind.

0.026838424 = product of:
  0.053676847 = sum of:
    0.053676847 = product of:
      0.107353695 = sum of:
        0.107353695 = weight(_text_:class in 2229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.107353695 = score(doc=2229,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.37482765 = fieldWeight in 2229, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2229)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Modern fact databses contain abundant data classified through several classifications. Typically, users msut consult these classifications in separate manuals or files, thus making their effective use difficult. Contemporary database systems do little support deductive use of classifications. In this study we show how deductive data management techniques can be applied to the utilization of data value classifications. Computation of transitive class relationships is of primary importance here. We define a representation of classifications which supports transitive computation and present an operation-oriented deductive query language tailored for classification-based deductive information retrieval. The operations of this language are on the same abstraction level as relational algebra operations and can be integrated with these to form a powerful and flexible query language for deductive information retrieval. We define the integration of these operations and demonstrate the usefulness of the language in terms of several sample queries

0.022365354 = product of:
  0.044730708 = sum of:
    0.044730708 = product of:
      0.089461416 = sum of:
        0.089461416 = weight(_text_:class in 5163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.089461416 = score(doc=5163,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.31235638 = fieldWeight in 5163, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5163)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

A new design for the DDC allows for display of the schedules and indexes in a hypertextual browser which was originally designed for the more conventional thesaurus with BT-NT, RT and USE-UF relations. Features of the DDC which approxumate those relations and the presentation of the rich vocabulary found in the hierarchical structure, captions, index entries and notes are represented for the library user's perusal and choice before searching a library's holdings. By dragging and dropping parts from such a display into a search window, the search for bibliographic items can begin and revised painlessly. Information such as class numbers of subject headings for retrieved items can be dragged and dropped into the searchw indow of the Visual Dewey display window as it suits the user to review vocabulary or revise the search results. This seamless to-ing and fro-ing allows for a truly interactive and spontaneous search environment, with maximum assistance at point of need. 'File folders' exist for saving any Visual Dewey information, any retrieved items, etc.