Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.03025792 = product of:
  0.12103168 = sum of:
    0.12103168 = weight(_text_:fields in 3135) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12103168 = score(doc=3135,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.38295972 = fieldWeight in 3135, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3135)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

A thourough understanding of current subject cataloging practice, especially Library of Congress practice, will assist librarians in making the best use of new and emerging technology to ease the task of constructing subject headings. To gain insight into the most current subject cataloging practices at the Library of Congress, a random sample of one thousand bibliographic records with one or more 6XX fields and Library of Congress card numbers assigned from 1988 to the present was drawn from the BOOKSM database. Library of Congress catalogers rely heavily on the system of free-floating subdivisions in the process of constructing subject headings. Attempts to improve the subject cataloging process must take into account this fundamental characteristic of the Library of Congress subject headings system

0.025942523 = product of:
  0.10377009 = sum of:
    0.10377009 = weight(_text_:22 in 3985) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10377009 = score(doc=3985,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3985, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3985)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

25.11.2005 18:37:22

0.0216128 = product of:
  0.0864512 = sum of:
    0.0864512 = weight(_text_:fields in 2187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0864512 = score(doc=2187,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31604284 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.27354267 = fieldWeight in 2187, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.951651 = idf(docFreq=849, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2187)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

A subject indexing language (SIL) is an artificial language used for formulating names of subjects and is composed of (a) a vocabulary, (b) a list of elementary categories, and (c) the rules of syntax. A string indexing language is an SIL, whose expressions are multiple overlappimg index entries, constructed accordingly to explicit syntax rules. PRECIS, developed by Austin, and POPSI, developed by Bhattacharyya, are two such string indexing languages. DSIS is a more versatile version of the POPSI system, developed by Devadason. There have been several attempts to compare and evaluate the superiority of one system over another, with the exception that none of these tried to compare their performances from the searcher's point of view. This present study tries to compare the efficiency and effectiveness of printed subject indexes produced by PRECIS and DSIS on a non-empirical basis and based on the following five major characteristics of index entries identified by Craven as desirable from the searcher's viewpoint: (1) predicitibility, (2) collocation, (3) clarity, (4) succinctness, and (5) eliminability. A representative sample of 600 documents (both macro and micro), chosen from three different social science subject fields, has been used as the test data. The main points of discussion are (a) the term structure, (b) the term relationships, and (c) the entry structure, generated by the two systems. On the whole, a PRECIS index performs better than a DSIS index in terms of most of the above characteristics. It has been concluded that the user will search the former more efficiently and effectively than the latter

0.015133139 = product of:
  0.060532555 = sum of:
    0.060532555 = weight(_text_:22 in 3789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060532555 = score(doc=3789,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3789, 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=3789)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Rez. in: Knowledge organization 22(1995) no.1, S.45-46 (M.P. Satija)

0.0129712615 = product of:
  0.051885046 = sum of:
    0.051885046 = weight(_text_:22 in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051885046 = score(doc=4411,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4411, 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=4411)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.1, S.27-37

0.0129712615 = product of:
  0.051885046 = sum of:
    0.051885046 = weight(_text_:22 in 3788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051885046 = score(doc=3788,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2235069 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06382575 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3788, 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=3788)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Vorgänger: 'List of Subject Headings for small libraries, compiled from lists used in nine representative small libraries', Ed.: M.E. Sears. - 1st ed. 1923. - 2nd ed. 1926. - 3rd ed. 1933. - 4th ed. 1939, Ed.: I.S. Monro. - 5th ed. 1944: 'Sears List of Subject Headings', Ed. I. S. Monro. - 6th ed. 1950, Ed.: B.M. Frick. - 7th ed. 1954 - 8th ed. 1959. - 'List of Subject Headings'. - 9th. ed. 1965, Ed.: B.M. Westby. - 10th ed. 1972. - 11th ed. 1977. - 12th ed. 1982. - 13th ed. 1986, Ed.: C. Rovira u. C. Reyes. - 14th ed. 1991. Ed. M.T. Mooney. - 15th ed. 1994, Ed.: J. Miller // Rez. 15th ed.: Knowledge organization 22(1995) no.1, S.45-46 (M.P. Satija)