Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Suchmaschinen"
  • × type_ss:"el"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Maurer, H.; Balke, T.; Kappe,, F.; Kulathuramaiyer, N.; Weber, S.; Zaka, B.: Report on dangers and opportunities posed by large search engines, particularly Google (2007) 0.01 
    0.01296768 = product of:
  0.05187072 = sum of:
    0.05187072 = weight(_text_:fields in 754) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05187072 = score(doc=754,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.16412559 = fieldWeight in 754, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=754)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    The preliminary intended and approved list was: Section 1: To concentrate on Google as virtual monopoly, and Google's reported support of Wikipedia. To find experimental evidence of this support or show that the reports are not more than rumours. Section 2: To address the copy-past syndrome with socio-cultural consequences associated with it. Section 3: To deal with plagiarism and IPR violations as two intertwined topics: how they affect various players (teachers and pupils in school; academia; corporations; governmental studies, etc.). To establish that not enough is done concerning these issues, partially due to just plain ignorance. We will propose some ways to alleviate the problem. Section 4: To discuss the usual tools to fight plagiarism and their shortcomings. Section 5: To propose ways to overcome most of above problems according to proposals by Maurer/Zaka. To examples, but to make it clear that do this more seriously a pilot project is necessary beyond this particular study. Section 6: To briefly analyze various views of plagiarism as it is quite different in different fields (journalism, engineering, architecture, painting, .) and to present a concept that avoids plagiarism from the very beginning. Section 7: To point out the many other dangers of Google or Google-like undertakings: opportunistic ranking, analysis of data as window into commercial future. Section 8: To outline the need of new international laws. Section 9: To mention the feeble European attempts to fight Google, despite Google's growing power. Section 10. To argue that there is no way to catch up with Google in a frontal attack.
  2. Boldi, P.; Santini, M.; Vigna, S.: PageRank as a function of the damping factor (2005) 0.01 
    0.010809385 = product of:
  0.04323754 = sum of:
    0.04323754 = weight(_text_:22 in 2564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04323754 = score(doc=2564,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2564, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2564)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    16. 1.2016 10:22:28
  3. Baeza-Yates, R.; Boldi, P.; Castillo, C.: Generalizing PageRank : damping functions for linkbased ranking algorithms (2006) 0.01 
    0.010809385 = product of:
  0.04323754 = sum of:
    0.04323754 = weight(_text_:22 in 2565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04323754 = score(doc=2565,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2565, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2565)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    16. 1.2016 10:22:28

Authors