Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

0.102214955 = product of:
  0.15332243 = sum of:
    0.074369535 = weight(_text_:subject in 1177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.074369535 = score(doc=1177,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.4791082 = fieldWeight in 1177, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1177)
    0.0789529 = product of:
      0.1579058 = sum of:
        0.1579058 = weight(_text_:headings in 1177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1579058 = score(doc=1177,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.21048847 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043400183 = queryNorm
            0.75018746 = fieldWeight in 1177, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1177)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The Michigan State University Libraries (MSUL) digital repository contains numerous collections of openly available material. Since 2016, the digital repository has been using Faceted Application of Subject Terminology (FAST) subject headings as its primary subject vocabulary in order to streamline faceting, display, and search. The MSUL FAST use case presents some challenges that are not addressed by existing MARC-focused FAST tools. This paper will outline the MSUL digital repository team's justification for including FAST headings in the digital repository as well as workflows for adding FAST headings to Metadata Object Description Schema (MODS) metadata, their maintenance, and utilization for discovery.

0.09195508 = product of:
  0.13793261 = sum of:
    0.10409565 = weight(_text_:subject in 453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10409565 = score(doc=453,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.67061174 = fieldWeight in 453, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=453)
    0.03383696 = product of:
      0.06767392 = sum of:
        0.06767392 = weight(_text_:headings in 453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06767392 = score(doc=453,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21048847 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043400183 = queryNorm
            0.3215089 = fieldWeight in 453, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=453)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

In this paper, we present a case study of how well subject metadata (comprising headings from an international classification scheme) has been deployed in a national data catalogue, and how often data seekers use subject metadata when searching for data. Through an analysis of user search behaviour as recorded in search logs, we find evidence that users utilise the subject metadata for data discovery. Since approximately half of the records ingested by the catalogue did not include subject metadata at the time of harvest, we experimented with automatic subject classification approaches in order to enrich these records and to provide additional support for user search and data discovery. Our results show that automatic methods work well for well represented categories of subject metadata, and these categories tend to have features that can distinguish themselves from the other categories. Our findings raise implications for data catalogue providers; they should invest more effort to enhance the quality of data records by providing an adequate description of these records for under-represented subject categories.

0.021248437 = product of:
  0.06374531 = sum of:
    0.06374531 = weight(_text_:subject in 1152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06374531 = score(doc=1152,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.41066417 = fieldWeight in 1152, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1152)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This study examines subject and genre representation in metadata that describes information resources created for children and young adult audiences. Both quantitative and limited qualitative analyses were applied to the analysis of WorldCat records collected in 2021 and contributed by the Children's and Young Adults' Cataloging Program at the US Library of Congress. This dataset contains records created several years prior to the data collection point and edited by various OCLC member institutions. Findings provide information on the level and patterns of application of these kinds of metadata important for information access, with a focus on the fields, subfields, and controlled vocabularies used. The discussion of results includes a detailed evaluation of genre and subject metadata quality (accuracy, completeness, and consistency).

0.012267791 = product of:
  0.036803372 = sum of:
    0.036803372 = weight(_text_:subject in 721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036803372 = score(doc=721,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.23709705 = fieldWeight in 721, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=721)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Teil eines Themenheftes: Artificial intelligence (AI) and automated processes for subject sccess

0.005880126 = product of:
  0.017640376 = sum of:
    0.017640376 = product of:
      0.035280753 = sum of:
        0.035280753 = weight(_text_:22 in 266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035280753 = score(doc=266,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15198004 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043400183 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 266, 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=266)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 5.2021 12:43:05