Search (144 results, page 1 of 8)

0.12896563 = product of:
  0.25793126 = sum of:
    0.25793126 = sum of:
      0.14521258 = weight(_text_:l in 4899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.14521258 = score(doc=4899,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05199731 = queryNorm
          0.70262593 = fieldWeight in 4899, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
            0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4899)
      0.11271869 = weight(_text_:22 in 4899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11271869 = score(doc=4899,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18208572 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05199731 = queryNorm
          0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4899, 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=4899)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

16. 7.2000 20:58:22

0.080603525 = product of:
  0.16120705 = sum of:
    0.16120705 = sum of:
      0.09075786 = weight(_text_:l in 1032) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09075786 = score(doc=1032,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05199731 = queryNorm
          0.4391412 = fieldWeight in 1032, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1032)
      0.07044918 = weight(_text_:22 in 1032) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07044918 = score(doc=1032,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18208572 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05199731 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1032, 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=1032)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 5.1998 18:45:36

0.06686961 = sum of:
  0.010447147 = product of:
    0.04178859 = sum of:
      0.04178859 = weight(_text_:authors in 2668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04178859 = score(doc=2668,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23704608 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05199731 = queryNorm
          0.17628889 = fieldWeight in 2668, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2668)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.056422465 = sum of:
    0.031765252 = weight(_text_:l in 2668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031765252 = score(doc=2668,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05199731 = queryNorm
        0.15369943 = fieldWeight in 2668, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2668)
    0.024657212 = weight(_text_:22 in 2668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024657212 = score(doc=2668,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18208572 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05199731 = queryNorm
        0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 2668, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2668)

Abstract

Metadata is a key aspect of our evolving infrastructure for information management, social computing, and scientific collaboration. DC-2008 will focus on metadata challenges, solutions, and innovation in initiatives and activities underlying semantic and social applications. Metadata is part of the fabric of social computing, which includes the use of wikis, blogs, and tagging for collaboration and participation. Metadata also underlies the development of semantic applications, and the Semantic Web - the representation and integration of multimedia knowledge structures on the basis of semantic models. These two trends flow together in applications such as Wikipedia, where authors collectively create structured information that can be extracted and used to enhance access to and use of information sources. Recent discussion has focused on how existing bibliographic standards can be expressed as Semantic Web vocabularies to facilitate the ingration of library and cultural heritage data with other types of data. Harnessing the efforts of content providers and end-users to link, tag, edit, and describe their information in interoperable ways ("participatory metadata") is a key step towards providing knowledge environments that are scalable, self-correcting, and evolvable. DC-2008 will explore conceptual and practical issues in the development and deployment of semantic and social applications to meet the needs of specific communities of practice.

Content

Carol Jean Godby, Devon Smith, Eric Childress: Encoding Application Profiles in a Computational Model of the Crosswalk. - Maria Elisabete Catarino, Ana Alice Baptista: Relating Folksonomies with Dublin Core. - Ed Summers, Antoine Isaac, Clay Redding, Dan Krech: LCSH, SKOS and Linked Data. - Xia Lin, Jiexun Li, Xiaohua Zhou: Theme Creation for Digital Collections. - Boris Lauser, Gudrun Johannsen, Caterina Caracciolo, Willem Robert van Hage, Johannes Keizer, Philipp Mayr: Comparing Human and Automatic Thesaurus Mapping Approaches in the Agricultural Domain. - P. Bryan Heidorn, Qin Wei: Automatic Metadata Extraction From Museum Specimen Labels. - Stuart Allen Sutton, Diny Golder: Achievement Standards Network (ASN): An Application Profile for Mapping K-12 Educational Resources to Achievement Standards. - Allen H. Renear, Karen M. Wickett, Richard J. Urban, David Dubin, Sarah L. Shreeves: Collection/Item Metadata Relationships. - Seth van Hooland, Yves Bontemps, Seth Kaufman: Answering the Call for more Accountability: Applying Data Profiling to Museum Metadata. - Thomas Margaritopoulos, Merkourios Margaritopoulos, Ioannis Mavridis, Athanasios Manitsaris: A Conceptual Framework for Metadata Quality Assessment. - Miao Chen, Xiaozhong Liu, Jian Qin: Semantic Relation Extraction from Socially-Generated Tags: A Methodology for Metadata Generation. - Hak Lae Kim, Simon Scerri, John G. Breslin, Stefan Decker, Hong Gee Kim: The State of the Art in Tag Ontologies: A Semantic Model for Tagging and Folksonomies. - Martin Malmsten: Making a Library Catalogue Part of the Semantic Web. - Philipp Mayr, Vivien Petras: Building a Terminology Network for Search: The KoMoHe Project. - Michael Panzer: Cool URIs for the DDC: Towards Web-scale Accessibility of a Large Classification System. - Barbara Levergood, Stefan Farrenkopf, Elisabeth Frasnelli: The Specification of the Language of the Field and Interoperability: Cross-language Access to Catalogues and Online Libraries (CACAO)

0.056422465 = product of:
  0.11284493 = sum of:
    0.11284493 = sum of:
      0.063530505 = weight(_text_:l in 6128) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.063530505 = score(doc=6128,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05199731 = queryNorm
          0.30739886 = fieldWeight in 6128, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6128)
      0.049314424 = weight(_text_:22 in 6128) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049314424 = score(doc=6128,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18208572 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05199731 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6128, 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=6128)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Series

Cataloging and classification quarterly; vol.22, nos.3/4

Source

Electronic resources: selection and bibliographic control. Ed.: L.-Y.W. Pattie, u. B.J. Cox

0.056422465 = product of:
  0.11284493 = sum of:
    0.11284493 = sum of:
      0.063530505 = weight(_text_:l in 637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.063530505 = score(doc=637,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05199731 = queryNorm
          0.30739886 = fieldWeight in 637, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=637)
      0.049314424 = weight(_text_:22 in 637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049314424 = score(doc=637,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18208572 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05199731 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 637, 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=637)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

2.12.2007 19:35:22

0.047012243 = sum of:
  0.014924496 = product of:
    0.059697986 = sum of:
      0.059697986 = weight(_text_:authors in 5281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.059697986 = score(doc=5281,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23704608 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05199731 = queryNorm
          0.25184128 = fieldWeight in 5281, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5281)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.032087747 = product of:
    0.064175494 = sum of:
      0.064175494 = weight(_text_:l in 5281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.064175494 = score(doc=5281,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05199731 = queryNorm
          0.31051973 = fieldWeight in 5281, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5281)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose For digital libraries, it is useful to understand how users search in a collection. Investigating search patterns can help them to improve the user interface, collection management and search algorithms. However, search patterns may vary widely in different parts of a collection. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how to identify these search patterns within a well-curated historical newspaper collection using the existing metadata. Design/methodology/approach The authors analyzed search logs combined with metadata records describing the content of the collection, using this metadata to create subsets in the logs corresponding to different parts of the collection. Findings The study shows that faceted search is more prevalent than non-faceted search in terms of number of unique queries, time spent, clicks and downloads. Distinct search patterns are observed in different parts of the collection, corresponding to historical periods, geographical regions or subject matter. Originality/value First, this study provides deeper insights into search behavior at a fine granularity in a historical newspaper collection, by the inclusion of the metadata in the analysis. Second, it demonstrates how to use metadata categorization as a way to analyze distinct search patterns in a collection.

0.045136753 = sum of:
  0.017909396 = product of:
    0.071637586 = sum of:
      0.071637586 = weight(_text_:authors in 5230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.071637586 = score(doc=5230,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23704608 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05199731 = queryNorm
          0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 5230, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5230)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.027227357 = product of:
    0.054454714 = sum of:
      0.054454714 = weight(_text_:l in 5230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.054454714 = score(doc=5230,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05199731 = queryNorm
          0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 5230, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5230)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Reports results of a study to evaluate the effectiveness of using the HTML META tag to improve retrieval of World Wide Web documents through Internet search engines. 20 documents were created in 5 subject areas: agricultural trade; farm business statistics; poultry statistics; vegetable statistics; and cotton statistics. 4 pages were created in each subject area: one with no META tags, one with a META tag using the keywords attribute, one with a META tag using the description attribute, and one with META tags using both the keywords and description attributes. Searches were performed in Alta Vista and Infoseek to find terms common to all pages as well as for each keyword term contained in the META tag. Analysis of the searches suggests that use of the keywords attribute in a META tag substantially improves accessibility while use of the description attribute alone does not. Concludes that HTML document authors should consider using keywords attribute META tags and suggests that more search engines index the META tag to improve resource discovery

0.03904415 = sum of:
  0.017909396 = product of:
    0.071637586 = sum of:
      0.071637586 = weight(_text_:authors in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.071637586 = score(doc=4748,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23704608 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05199731 = queryNorm
          0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 4748, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4748)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.021134753 = product of:
    0.042269506 = sum of:
      0.042269506 = weight(_text_:22 in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042269506 = score(doc=4748,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18208572 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05199731 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4748, 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=4748)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Metadata and information technology staff in libraries that are building digital collections typically extract and manipulate MARC metadata sets to provide access to digital content via non-MARC schemes. Metadata processing in these libraries involves defining the relationships between metadata schemes, moving metadata between schemes, and coordinating the intellectual activity and physical resources required to create and manipulate metadata. Actively managing the non-MARC metadata resources used to build digital collections is something most of these libraries have only begun to do. This article proposes strategies for managing MARC metadata repurposing efforts as the first step in a coordinated approach to library metadata management. Guided by lessons learned from Cornell University library mapping and transformation activities, the authors apply the literature of data resource management to library metadata management and propose a model for managing MARC metadata repurposing processes through the implementation of a metadata management design.

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.144-152

0.036303144 = product of:
  0.07260629 = sum of:
    0.07260629 = product of:
      0.14521258 = sum of:
        0.14521258 = weight(_text_:l in 3304) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14521258 = score(doc=3304,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05199731 = queryNorm
            0.70262593 = fieldWeight in 3304, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3304)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.031765252 = product of:
  0.063530505 = sum of:
    0.063530505 = product of:
      0.12706101 = sum of:
        0.12706101 = weight(_text_:l in 4879) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12706101 = score(doc=4879,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05199731 = queryNorm
            0.6147977 = fieldWeight in 4879, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4879)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.031765252 = product of:
  0.063530505 = sum of:
    0.063530505 = product of:
      0.12706101 = sum of:
        0.12706101 = weight(_text_:l in 6334) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12706101 = score(doc=6334,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05199731 = queryNorm
            0.6147977 = fieldWeight in 6334, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6334)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.031765252 = product of:
  0.063530505 = sum of:
    0.063530505 = product of:
      0.12706101 = sum of:
        0.12706101 = weight(_text_:l in 4102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12706101 = score(doc=4102,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05199731 = queryNorm
            0.6147977 = fieldWeight in 4102, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4102)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.030974977 = sum of:
  0.01688514 = product of:
    0.06754056 = sum of:
      0.06754056 = weight(_text_:authors in 367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06754056 = score(doc=367,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.23704608 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05199731 = queryNorm
          0.28492588 = fieldWeight in 367, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=367)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.014089836 = product of:
    0.028179672 = sum of:
      0.028179672 = weight(_text_:22 in 367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.028179672 = score(doc=367,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18208572 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05199731 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 367, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=367)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The proliferation of discipline-specific metadata schemes contributes to artificial barriers that can impede interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research. The authors considered this problem by examining the domains, objectives, and architectures of nine metadata schemes used to document scientific data in the physical, life, and social sciences. They used a mixed-methods content analysis and Greenberg's () metadata objectives, principles, domains, and architectural layout (MODAL) framework, and derived 22 metadata-related goals from textual content describing each metadata scheme. Relationships are identified between the domains (e.g., scientific discipline and type of data) and the categories of scheme objectives. For each strong correlation (>0.6), a Fisher's exact test for nonparametric data was used to determine significance (p < .05). Significant relationships were found between the domains and objectives of the schemes. Schemes describing observational data are more likely to have "scheme harmonization" (compatibility and interoperability with related schemes) as an objective; schemes with the objective "abstraction" (a conceptual model exists separate from the technical implementation) also have the objective "sufficiency" (the scheme defines a minimal amount of information to meet the needs of the community); and schemes with the objective "data publication" do not have the objective "element refinement." The analysis indicates that many metadata-driven goals expressed by communities are independent of scientific discipline or the type of data, although they are constrained by historical community practices and workflows as well as the technological environment at the time of scheme creation. The analysis reveals 11 fundamental metadata goals for metadata documenting scientific data in support of sharing research data across disciplines and domains. The authors report these results and highlight the need for more metadata-related research, particularly in the context of recent funding agency policy changes.

0.029889056 = product of:
  0.059778113 = sum of:
    0.059778113 = product of:
      0.119556226 = sum of:
        0.119556226 = weight(_text_:22 in 5743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.119556226 = score(doc=5743,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18208572 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05199731 = queryNorm
            0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 5743, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5743)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

30. 3.2002 19:45:22

Source

Revista Española de Documentaçion Cientifica. 22(1999) no.2, S.198-219

0.028179672 = product of:
  0.056359343 = sum of:
    0.056359343 = product of:
      0.11271869 = sum of:
        0.11271869 = weight(_text_:22 in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11271869 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18208572 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05199731 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2840, 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=2840)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1

0.027227357 = product of:
  0.054454714 = sum of:
    0.054454714 = product of:
      0.10890943 = sum of:
        0.10890943 = weight(_text_:l in 2389) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10890943 = score(doc=2389,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05199731 = queryNorm
            0.52696943 = fieldWeight in 2389, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2389)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.024657212 = product of:
  0.049314424 = sum of:
    0.049314424 = product of:
      0.09862885 = sum of:
        0.09862885 = weight(_text_:22 in 4407) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09862885 = score(doc=4407,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18208572 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05199731 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4407, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4407)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

28. 3.2002 9:22:34

0.024657212 = product of:
  0.049314424 = sum of:
    0.049314424 = product of:
      0.09862885 = sum of:
        0.09862885 = weight(_text_:22 in 7196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09862885 = score(doc=7196,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18208572 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05199731 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7196, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7196)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1

0.024657212 = product of:
  0.049314424 = sum of:
    0.049314424 = product of:
      0.09862885 = sum of:
        0.09862885 = weight(_text_:22 in 2841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09862885 = score(doc=2841,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18208572 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05199731 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2841, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2841)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2

0.022689465 = product of:
  0.04537893 = sum of:
    0.04537893 = product of:
      0.09075786 = sum of:
        0.09075786 = weight(_text_:l in 911) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09075786 = score(doc=911,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05199731 = queryNorm
            0.4391412 = fieldWeight in 911, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=911)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)