Search (107 results, page 5 of 6)

0.004231272 = product of:
  0.033850174 = sum of:
    0.033850174 = weight(_text_:case in 971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033850174 = score(doc=971,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1742197 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.1942959 = fieldWeight in 971, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=971)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Though much information behaviour takes place in collaborative settings, information behaviour processes are commonly perceived and modelled by information scientists as individual processes. The paper presents and discusses the findings from a qualitative preliminary case study exploring Kuhlthau's Information Search Process (ISP) model in a group-based educational setting. The aim of the study was to explore if members of a group behave differently from the individual modelled in the ISP model and further, if members of a group demonstrate different behaviours or they will assimilate and turn the group into 'an individual', just in another sense. During a project assignment, which lasted seven weeks, two groups of information science students filled out a questionnaire and kept diaries of their activities and information-related behaviour. Further, the students were interviewed three times each during the study. It was found that contextual and social factors seem to affect group members' physical activities and their cognitive and emotional experiences during a project assignment with relevance to information behaviour. Though group members to some extent demonstrated similar cognitive experiences as the individual in the ISP model, these experiences did not only result from information seeking activities but also from work task activities and intragroup interactions. Regarding group members' emotional experiences, no emotional 'turning point' resulting in certainty and relief by the end of the information seeking process was identified. Further, some of the group members still felt uncertain, frustrated and disappointed at the end of the project assignment, which partly was associated with a mis-match in motivations, ambitions and project focus among group members. Regarding the intragroup behaviour, group members did not demonstrate similar behaviours, meaning that 'groups' cannot be perceived or modelled as 'an individual', just in another sense. Groups consist of individuals engaged in and affected by a collaborative problem solving process involving information (seeking) behaviour. A natural extension of the ISP model in relation to group processes is suggested, addressing also the impact of social and contextual factors on the individual's information behaviour.

0.004176224 = product of:
  0.033409793 = sum of:
    0.033409793 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2939) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033409793 = score(doc=2939,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.25664487 = fieldWeight in 2939, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2939)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Libraries, private and public, offer valuable resources to library patrons. As of today, the only way to locate information archived exclusively in libraries is through their catalogs. Library patrons, however, often find it difficult to formulate a proper query, which requires using specific keywords assigned to different fields of desired library catalog records, to obtain relevant results. These improperly formulated queries often yield irrelevant results or no results at all. This negative experience in dealing with existing library systems turns library patrons away from directly querying library catalogs; instead, they rely on Web search engines to perform their searches first, and upon obtaining the initial information (e.g., titles, subject headings, or authors) on the desired library materials, they query library catalogs. This searching strategy is an evidence of failure of today's library systems. In solving this problem, we propose an enhanced library system, which allows partial, similarity matching of (a) tags defined by ordinary users at a folksonomy site that describe the content of books and (b) unrestricted keywords specified by an ordinary library patron in a query to search for relevant library catalog records. The proposed library system allows patrons posting a query Q using commonly used words and ranks the retrieved results according to their degrees of resemblance with Q while maintaining the query processing time comparable with that achieved by current library search engines.

0.004176224 = product of:
  0.033409793 = sum of:
    0.033409793 = weight(_text_:libraries in 1824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033409793 = score(doc=1824,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.25664487 = fieldWeight in 1824, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1824)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Since the adoption of faceted search in a small number of academic libraries in 2006, faceted search interfaces have gained popularity in academic and public libraries. This article clarifies whether faceted search improves the interactions between searchers and library catalogs and sheds light on ways that facets are used during a library search. To study searchers' behaviors in natural situations, we collected from the servers a data set with more than 1.5 million useful search logs. Logs were parsed, statistically analyzed, and manually studied using visualization tools to gain a general understanding of how facets are used in the search process. A user experiment with 24 subjects was conducted to further understand contextual information, such as the searchers' motivations and perceptions. The results indicate that most searchers were able to understand the concept of facets naturally and easily. The faceted search was not able to shorten the search time but was able to improve the search accuracy. Facets were used more for open-ended tasks and difficult tasks that require more effort to learn, investigate, and explore. Overall, the results weaved a detailed "story" about the ways that people use facets and the ways that facets help people use library catalogs.

0.0039860546 = product of:
  0.031888437 = sum of:
    0.031888437 = product of:
      0.06377687 = sum of:
        0.06377687 = weight(_text_:area in 4252) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06377687 = score(doc=4252,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1952553 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.927245 = idf(docFreq=870, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.32663327 = fieldWeight in 4252, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.927245 = idf(docFreq=870, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4252)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

A frequent problem when dealing with system users or clients is clarifying what they want. Users may be doing things for reasons that are unclear, or may use terms that are vague, ambiguous, or subjective, making communication difficult. Laddering is a technique for eliciting information from people that is particularly useful for the sort of clarification described above. It can be used in several different and complementary ways; for instance, to elicit the respondent's goals, to elicit the respondent's categorization of an area, or to elicit explanations of terms used by the respondent. The technique is simple, quick, and efficient, and does not require anything more elaborate than paper and pen for recording the session. Laddering is widely used, though its simplicity means that it is usually used an an informal basis and has not received as much attention in the literature as more obviously complex methods such as repertory grids. It is also easy to automate, and automated versions can be used in a wide variety of contexts, ranging from query reformulation during online searching to full-scale elicitation tools.

0.0039860546 = product of:
  0.031888437 = sum of:
    0.031888437 = product of:
      0.06377687 = sum of:
        0.06377687 = weight(_text_:area in 101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06377687 = score(doc=101,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1952553 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.927245 = idf(docFreq=870, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.32663327 = fieldWeight in 101, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.927245 = idf(docFreq=870, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=101)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Question Answering is an area of information retrieval with the added challenge of applying sophisticated techniques to identify the complex syntactic and semantic relationships present in text in order to provide a more sophisticated and satisfactory response to the user's information needs. For this reason, the authors see question answering as the next step beyond standard information retrieval. In this chapter state of the art question answering is covered focusing on providing an overview of systems, techniques and approaches that are likely to be employed in the next generations of search engines. Special attention is paid to question answering using the World Wide Web as the data source and to question answering exploiting the possibilities of Semantic Web. Considerations about the current issues and prospects for promising future research are also provided.

0.0039860546 = product of:
  0.031888437 = sum of:
    0.031888437 = product of:
      0.06377687 = sum of:
        0.06377687 = weight(_text_:area in 327) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06377687 = score(doc=327,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1952553 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.927245 = idf(docFreq=870, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.32663327 = fieldWeight in 327, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.927245 = idf(docFreq=870, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=327)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

We present a collection of algorithms to filter a stream of documents in such a way that the filtered documents will cover as well as possible the interest of a person, keeping in mind that, at any given time, the offered documents should not only be relevant, but should also be diversified, in the sense of covering all the interests of the person. We use a modification of the WEBSOM algorithm to create a user model based on a self-organizing network trained using a collection of documents representative of the person's interests. We introduce the concepts of freshness and coverage. A document is fresh if it belongs to a semantic area of interest to a person for which no documents were seen in the recent past; a group of documents has coverage to the extent to which it is a good representation of all the interests of a person. Our tests show that these algorithms can effectively increase the coverage of the documents that are shown to the user without overly affecting precision.

0.0035436437 = product of:
  0.02834915 = sum of:
    0.02834915 = weight(_text_:libraries in 4861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02834915 = score(doc=4861,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.2177704 = fieldWeight in 4861, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4861)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Research has demonstrated that people engage in multiple types of information-seeking strategies when using IR systems; unfortunately, current IR systems are designed to support only one type of information-seeking strategy: specifying queries. The limitation of existing IR systems calls for the need to investigate how to support users as they shift from one information-seeking strategy to another in their attemps to achieve their information-seeking goals. The focus of this study is on the in-depth investigation of shifts in the mico-level of user goals - 'interactive intention' and information-seeking strategies that users engage in within an information-seeking episode. 40 cases of library uses were selected from 4 different types of libraries for this study. The qualitative and quantitative analysis of the data identifies 4 types of shifts of interactive intentions and 3 types of information-seeking strategies. The results of the study are discussed to understand the nature of the interactive IR process, and to further suggest their implications for the design of adaptive IR systems

0.0035436437 = product of:
  0.02834915 = sum of:
    0.02834915 = weight(_text_:libraries in 644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02834915 = score(doc=644,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.2177704 = fieldWeight in 644, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=644)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

While the search interfaces used by common academic digital libraries provide easy access to a wealth of peer-reviewed literature, their interfaces provide little support for exploratory browsing. When faced with a complex search task (such as one that requires knowledge discovery), exploratory browsing is an important first step in an exploratory search process. To more effectively support exploratory browsing, we have designed and implemented a novel academic digital library search interface (KLink Search) with two new features: visually linked keywords and an interactive workspace. To study the potential value of these features, we have conducted a controlled laboratory study with 32 participants, comparing KLink Search to a baseline digital library search interface modeled after that used by IEEE Xplore. Based on subjective opinions, objective performance, and behavioral data, we show the value of adding lightweight visual and interactive features to academic digital library search interfaces to support exploratory browsing.

0.003355627 = product of:
  0.026845016 = sum of:
    0.026845016 = product of:
      0.05369003 = sum of:
        0.05369003 = weight(_text_:22 in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05369003 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5835, 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=5835)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

5. 8.2006 13:22:44

0.0033217126 = product of:
  0.0265737 = sum of:
    0.0265737 = product of:
      0.0531474 = sum of:
        0.0531474 = weight(_text_:area in 2405) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0531474 = score(doc=2405,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1952553 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.927245 = idf(docFreq=870, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.27219442 = fieldWeight in 2405, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.927245 = idf(docFreq=870, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2405)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

This study investigated the effects of subject knowledge and search experience on novices' and experienced searchers' use of search tactics in online searches. Novice and experienced searchers searched a practice question and two test questions in the ERIC database on the DIALOG system and their use of search tactics were recorded by protocols, transaction logs, and observation. Search tactics were idetified from the literature and verified in 10 pretests, and nine search tactics variables were operationalized to describe the differences between the two searcher groups. Data analyses showed that that subject knowledge interacted with search experience, and both variables affected searchers' behavior in four ways: (1) when questions in their subject area were searched, experience affected searchers' use of synonymous terms, monitoring of the search process, and combinations of serch terms; (2) when questions outside their subject areas were searched, experience affected searchers' reliance on their own terminology, use of the thesaurus, offline term selection, use of synonymous terms, and combinations of search terms; (3) within the same experience group, subject knowledge had no effect on novice searchers; but (4) subject knowledge affected experienced searcher's reliance on their own language, use of the thesaurus, offline term selection, use of synonymous terms, monitoring of the search, and combinations of search terms. The results showed that search experience affected searchers' use of many search tactics, and suggested that subject knowledge became a factor only after searchers have had a certain amount of search experience

0.0033217126 = product of:
  0.0265737 = sum of:
    0.0265737 = product of:
      0.0531474 = sum of:
        0.0531474 = weight(_text_:area in 2565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0531474 = score(doc=2565,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1952553 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.927245 = idf(docFreq=870, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.27219442 = fieldWeight in 2565, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.927245 = idf(docFreq=870, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2565)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims to report a number of factors that are perceived by web users as influential elements in their search procedure. The paper introduces a new conceptual measure called "web search efficacy" (hereafter WSE) to evaluate the performance of searches mainly based on users' perceptions. Design/methodology/approach - A rich dataset of a wider study was inductively re-explored to identify different categories that are perceived influential by web users on the final outcome of their searches. A selective review of the literature was carried out to discover to what extent previous research supports the findings of the current study. Findings - The analysis of the dataset led to the identification of five categories of influential factors. Within each group different factors have been recognized. Accordingly, the concept of WSE has been introduced. The five "Ss" which determine WSE are searcher's performance, search tool's performance, search strategy, search topic, and search situation. Research limitations/implications - The research body is scattered in different areas and it is difficult to carry out a comprehensive review. The WSE table, which is derived from the empirical data and was supported by previous research, can be employed for further research in various groups of web users. Originality/value - The paper contributes to the area of information seeking on the web by providing researchers with a new conceptual framework to evaluate the efficiency of each search session and identify the underlying factors on the final outcome of web searching.

0.0029530365 = product of:
  0.023624292 = sum of:
    0.023624292 = weight(_text_:libraries in 1300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023624292 = score(doc=1300,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.18147534 = fieldWeight in 1300, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1300)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

This paper describes a new OPAC system called The Book House and discusses its relevance as a solution to current OPAC developments. The Book House is an interactive, multimedia, online public access catalogue system designed to support casual and/or novice end-users in information retrieval. It runs on a Macintosh and is available on CD-ROM and disks in English and Danish (it can be purchased from Risø for $100). It comprises an interface and module for classifying and indexing fact and fiction books in the database called Book House Write. It uses icons, text and animation in the display interface in order to enhance the utility of the system for the general public. Both words and pictures can be used for searching, which makes the system suitable for all age groups. It plays on users' previous experiencees with computer games to support learning by doing something in an enjoyable way. A prerequisite for the design of The Book House was a new approach to cognitive analysis of retrieval in libraries. Based on the success of this approach, it is claimed that OPAC systems will only be really useful and widespread (1) when their domain and task characteristics allow supplementary information to be added to existing descriptions of book content in online card catalogues in order to match end-users' intentions and needs, and (2) when the user interface and routes to the databases are configured as an integrated and uniform set of displays which match the search strategies of users, as well as their mental capabilities and limitations

0.0020133762 = product of:
  0.01610701 = sum of:
    0.01610701 = product of:
      0.03221402 = sum of:
        0.03221402 = weight(_text_:22 in 3450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03221402 = score(doc=3450,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3450, 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=3450)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

10. 4.2005 14:52:22

0.0020133762 = product of:
  0.01610701 = sum of:
    0.01610701 = product of:
      0.03221402 = sum of:
        0.03221402 = weight(_text_:22 in 3612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03221402 = score(doc=3612,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3612, 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=3612)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

2. 7.2005 12:22:50

0.0020133762 = product of:
  0.01610701 = sum of:
    0.01610701 = product of:
      0.03221402 = sum of:
        0.03221402 = weight(_text_:22 in 5047) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03221402 = score(doc=5047,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5047, 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=5047)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

5. 6.2006 11:22:23

0.0020133762 = product of:
  0.01610701 = sum of:
    0.01610701 = product of:
      0.03221402 = sum of:
        0.03221402 = weight(_text_:22 in 331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03221402 = score(doc=331,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 331, 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=331)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

27. 5.2007 13:55:22

0.0020133762 = product of:
  0.01610701 = sum of:
    0.01610701 = product of:
      0.03221402 = sum of:
        0.03221402 = weight(_text_:22 in 3589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03221402 = score(doc=3589,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3589, 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=3589)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Information searching in practice seldom is an end in itself. In work, work task (WT) performance forms the context, which information searching should serve. Therefore, information retrieval (IR) systems development/evaluation should take the WT context into account. The present paper analyzes how WT features: task complexity and task types, affect information searching in authentic work: the types of information needs, search processes, and search media. We collected data on 22 information professionals in authentic work situations in three organization types: city administration, universities, and companies. The data comprise 286 WTs and 420 search tasks (STs). The data include transaction logs, video recordings, daily questionnaires, interviews. and observation. The data were analyzed quantitatively. Even if the participants used a range of search media, most STs were simple throughout the data, and up to 42% of WTs did not include searching. WT's effects on STs are not straightforward: different WT types react differently to WT complexity. Due to the simplicity of authentic searching, the WT/ST types in interactive IR experiments should be reconsidered.

0.0016778135 = product of:
  0.013422508 = sum of:
    0.013422508 = product of:
      0.026845016 = sum of:
        0.026845016 = weight(_text_:22 in 2603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026845016 = score(doc=2603,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2603, 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=2603)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

1. 1.2009 10:22:40

0.0016778135 = product of:
  0.013422508 = sum of:
    0.013422508 = product of:
      0.026845016 = sum of:
        0.026845016 = weight(_text_:22 in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026845016 = score(doc=2680,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2680, 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=2680)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

25. 1.2016 18:46:22

0.0016778135 = product of:
  0.013422508 = sum of:
    0.013422508 = product of:
      0.026845016 = sum of:
        0.026845016 = weight(_text_:22 in 3340) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026845016 = score(doc=3340,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3340, 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=3340)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.1, S.22-35