Search (109 results, page 5 of 6)

  • × theme_ss:"Social tagging"
  1. Naderi, H.; Rumpler, B.: PERCIRS: a system to combine personalized and collaborative information retrieval (2010) 0.00 
    0.0029731835 = product of:
  0.011892734 = sum of:
    0.011892734 = weight(_text_:information in 3960) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011892734 = score(doc=3960,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.1343758 = fieldWeight in 3960, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3960)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Purpose - This paper aims to discuss and test the claim that utilization of the personalization techniques can be valuable to improve the efficiency of collaborative information retrieval (CIR) systems. Design/methodology/approach - A new personalized CIR system, called PERCIRS, is presented based on the user profile similarity calculation (UPSC) formulas. To this aim, the paper proposes several UPSC formulas as well as two techniques to evaluate them. As the proposed CIR system is personalized, it could not be evaluated by Cranfield, like evaluation techniques (e.g. TREC). Hence, this paper proposes a new user-centric mechanism, which enables PERCIRS to be evaluated. This mechanism is generic and can be used to evaluate any other personalized IR system. Findings - The results show that among the proposed UPSC formulas in this paper, the (query-document)-graph based formula is the most effective. After integrating this formula into PERCIRS and comparing it with nine other IR systems, it is concluded that the results of the system are better than the other IR systems. In addition, the paper shows that the complexity of the system is less that the complexity of the other CIR systems. Research limitations/implications - This system asks the users to explicitly rank the returned documents, while explicit ranking is still not widespread enough. However it believes that the users should actively participate in the IR process in order to aptly satisfy their needs to information. Originality/value - The value of this paper lies in combining collaborative and personalized IR, as well as introducing a mechanism which enables the personalized IR system to be evaluated. The proposed evaluation mechanism is very valuable for developers of personalized IR systems. The paper also introduces some significant user profile similarity calculation formulas, and two techniques to evaluate them. These formulas can also be used to find the user's community in the social networks.
  2. Furner, J.: User tagging of library resources : toward a framework for system evaluation (2007) 0.00 
    0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=703,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 703, 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=703)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich: WORLD LIBRARY AND INFORMATION CONGRESS: 73RD IFLA GENERAL CONFERENCE AND COUNCIL 19-23 August 2007, Durban, South Africa. - 157 - Classification and Indexing
  3. Rafferty, P.; Hidderley, R.: Flickr and democratic Indexing : dialogic approaches to indexing (2007) 0.00 
    0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=752,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 752, 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=752)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is two-fold: to examine three models of subject indexing (i.e. expert-led indexing, author-generated indexing, and user-orientated indexing); and to compare and contrast two user-orientated indexing approaches (i.e. the theoretically-based Democratic Indexing project, and Flickr, a working system for describing photographs). Design/methodology/approach - The approach to examining Flickr and Democratic Indexing is evaluative. The limitations of Flickr are described and examples are provided. The Democratic Indexing approach, which the authors believe offers a method of marshalling a "free" user-indexed archive to provide useful retrieval functions, is described. Findings - The examination of both Flickr and the Democratic Indexing approach suggests that, despite Shirky's claim of philosophical paradigm shifting for social tagging, there is a residing doubt amongst information professionals that self-organising systems can work without there being some element of control and some form of "representative authority". Originality/value - This paper contributes to the literature of user-based indexing and social tagging.
  4. Pammer, V.; Ley, T.; Lindstaedt, S.: tagr: Unterstützung in kollaborativen Tagging-Umgebungen durch semantische und assoziative Netzwerke (2008) 0.00 
    0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 2898) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=2898,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2898, 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=2898)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Stellen Sie sich vor, Sie laden ein Bild auf Flickr hoch und bekommen automatisch Vorschläge für Tags sowie Beispiele, wie ähnliche Bilder verschlagwortet worden sind. Wir stellen den Forschungsprototypen tagr vor, der auf Basis von vorhandenen Tags Information über die Benutzerin sowie eine Analyse des Bildes neue Tags für ein Bild vorschlägt. Wir verstehen kollaboratives Tagging als einen Prozess der verteilten Kognition, den wir mit entsprechenden Diensten unterstützen wollen. Wir gehen in diesem Artikel genauer auf den Termähnlichkeitsservice ein, der sich ein semantisches Netzwerk (WordNet) und ein assoziatives Netzwerk (Kookkurrenz der verwendeten Tags) zu Nutze macht. Wir diskutieren die Evaluierung des Prototypen und schließen mit einem Ausblick auf unsere weiteren Arbeiten.
  5. Wolfram, D.; Olson, H.A.; Bloom, R.: Measuring consistency for multiple taggers using vector space modeling (2009) 0.00 
    0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 3113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=3113,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3113, 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=3113)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.10, S.1995-2003
  6. Antin, J.; Earp, M.: With a little help from my friends : self-interested and prosocial behavior on MySpace Music (2010) 0.00 
    0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 3458) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=3458,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3458, 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=3458)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.5, S.952-963
  7. Heuwing, B.: Erfahrungen an der Universitätsbibliothek Hildesheim : Social Tagging in Bibliotheken (2010) 0.00 
    0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 4013) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=4013,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4013, 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=4013)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 61(2010) H.6/7, S.407-411
  8. Wang, J.; Clements, M.; Yang, J.; Vries, A.P. de; Reinders, M.J.T.: Personalization of tagging systems (2010) 0.00 
    0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 4229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=4229,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4229, 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=4229)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 46(2010) no.1, S.58-70
  9. Web-2.0-Dienste als Ergänzung zu algorithmischen Suchmaschinen (2008) 0.00 
    0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 4323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=4323,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4323, 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=4323)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Issue
    Ergebnisse des Fachprojektes "Einbindung von Frage-Antwort-Diensten in die Web-Suche" am Department Information der Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften Hamburg (WS 2007/2008).
  10. Raban, D.R.; Ronen, I.; Guy, I.: Acting or reacting? : Preferential attachment in a people-tagging system (2011) 0.00 
    0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 4371) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=4371,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4371, 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=4371)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.4, S.738-747
  11. Golbeck, J.; Koepfler, J.; Emmerling, B.: ¬An experimental study of social tagging behavior and image content (2011) 0.00 
    0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=4748,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4748, 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=4748)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.9, S.1750-1760
  12. Estellés Arolas, E.; González Ladrón-de-Guevar, F.: Uses of explicit and implicit tags in social bookmarking (2012) 0.00 
    0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 4984) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=4984,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4984, 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=4984)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.2, S.313-322
  13. Heck, T.: Analyse von sozialen Informationen für Autorenempfehlungen (2012) 0.00 
    0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 407) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=407,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 407, 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=407)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 63(2012) H.4, S.261-272
  14. Choi, Y.: ¬A complete assessment of tagging quality : a consolidated methodology (2015) 0.00 
    0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 1730) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=1730,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1730, 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=1730)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.4, S.798-817
  15. Huang, S.-L.; Lin, S.-C.; Chan, Y.-C.: Investigating effectiveness and user acceptance of semantic social tagging for knowledge sharing (2012) 0.00 
    0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 2732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=2732,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2732, 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=2732)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 48(2012) no.4, S.599-617
  16. Yoon, J.W.: Towards a user-oriented thesaurus for non-domain-specific image collections (2009) 0.00 
    0.002427594 = product of:
  0.009710376 = sum of:
    0.009710376 = weight(_text_:information in 4221) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009710376 = score(doc=4221,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.10971737 = fieldWeight in 4221, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4221)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    This study explored how user-supplied tags can be applied to designing a thesaurus that reflects the unique features of image documents. Tags from the popular image-sharing Web site Flickr were examined in terms of two central components of a thesaurus-selected concepts and their semantic relations-as well as the features of image documents. Shatford's facet category and Rosch et al.'s basic-level theory were adopted for examining concepts to be included in a thesaurus. The results suggested that the best approach to Color and Generic category descriptors is to focus on basic-level terms and to include frequently used superordinate- and subordinate-level terms. In the Abstract category, it was difficult to specify a set of abstract terms that can be used consistently and dominantly, so it was suggested to enhance browsability using hierarchical and associative relations. Study results also indicate a need for greater inclusion of Specific category terms, which were shown to be an important tool in establishing related tags. Regarding semantic relations, the study indicated that in the identification of related terms, it is important that descriptors not be limited only to the category in which a main entry belongs but broadened to include terms from other categories as well. Although future studies are needed to ensure the effectiveness of this user-oriented approach, this study yielded promising results, demonstrating that user-supplied tags can be a helpful tool in selecting concepts to be included in a thesaurus and in identifying semantic relations among the selected concepts. It is hoped that the results of this study will provide a practical guideline for designing a thesaurus for image documents that takes into account both the unique features of these documents and the unique information-seeking behaviors of general users.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 45(2009) no.4, S.452-468
  17. Shirky, C.: Ontology is overrated : categories, links, and tags (2005) 0.00 
    0.0021457102 = product of:
  0.008582841 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 1265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=1265,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 1265, 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=1265)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Today I want to talk about categorization, and I want to convince you that a lot of what we think we know about categorization is wrong. In particular, I want to convince you that many of the ways we're attempting to apply categorization to the electronic world are actually a bad fit, because we've adopted habits of mind that are left over from earlier strategies. I also want to convince you that what we're seeing when we see the Web is actually a radical break with previous categorization strategies, rather than an extension of them. The second part of the talk is more speculative, because it is often the case that old systems get broken before people know what's going to take their place. (Anyone watching the music industry can see this at work today.) That's what I think is happening with categorization. What I think is coming instead are much more organic ways of organizing information than our current categorization schemes allow, based on two units -- the link, which can point to anything, and the tag, which is a way of attaching labels to links. The strategy of tagging -- free-form labeling, without regard to categorical constraints -- seems like a recipe for disaster, but as the Web has shown us, you can extract a surprising amount of value from big messy data sets.
  18. Santini, M.: Zero, single, or multi? : genre of web pages through the users' perspective (2008) 0.00 
    0.0021457102 = product of:
  0.008582841 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 2059) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=2059,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2059, 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=2059)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 44(2008) no.2, S.702-737
  19. Lüth, J.: Inhaltserschließung von Internetquellen durch Nutzerinnen und Nutzer : Ergebnisse eines Tests mit Internetquellen der Virtuellen Fachbibliothek EconBiz (2009) 0.00 
    0.0021457102 = product of:
  0.008582841 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 2784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=2784,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2784, 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=2784)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Theme
    Information Gateway
  20. Niemann, C.: Intelligenz im Chaos : erste Schritte zur Analyse des Kreativen Potenzials eines Tagging-Systems (2010) 0.00 
    0.0021457102 = product of:
  0.008582841 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 4375) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=4375,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 4375, 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=4375)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Die Auszeichnung digitaler Medien durch Tagging ist zur festen Größe für das Wissensmanagement im Internet avanciert. Im Kontext des zunehmenden information overload' stehen wissenschaftliche Bibliotheken vor der Aufgabe, die große Flut digital publizierter Artikel und Werke möglichst inhaltlich erschlossen verfügbar zu machen. Die Frage ist, ob durch den Einsatz von Tagging-Systemen die kollaborative Intelligenz der NutzerInnen für die Sacherschließung eingesetzt werden kann, während diese von einer intuitiven und individuellen Wissensorganisation profitieren. Die große Freiheit bei der Vergabe von Deskriptoren durch die NutzerInnen eines Tagging-Systems ist nämlich ein ambivalentes Phänomen: Kundennähe und kreatives Potenzial stehen der großen Menge völlig unkontrollierter Meta-Informationen gegenüber, deren inhaltliche Qualität und Aussagekraft noch unklar ist. Bisherige Forschungsbemühungen konzentrieren sich hauptsächlich auf die automatische Hierarchisierung bzw. Relationierung der Tag-Daten (etwa mittels Ähnlichkeitsalgorithmen) oder auf die Analyse des (Miss-)Erfolgs, den die NutzerInnen bei einer Suchanfrage subjektiv erfahren. Aus der Sicht stark strukturierter Wissensorganisation, wie sie Experten z. B. durch die Anwendung von Klassifikationen realisieren, handelt es sich bei den zunächst unvermittelt nebeneinander stehenden Tags allerdings kurz gesagt um Chaos. Dass in diesem Chaos aber auch Struktur und wertvolles Wissen als Gemeinschaftsprodukt erzeugt werden kann, ist eine der zentralen Thesen dieses Artikels.

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 91
  • d 18

Types

  • a 96
  • el 7
  • m 7
  • s 3
  • b 2
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications