Search (91 results, page 2 of 5)

  • × theme_ss:"Verbale Doksprachen im Online-Retrieval"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Kreider, L.J.: LCSH works! : Subject searching effectiveness at the Cleveland Public Library and the growth of Library of Congress Subject Headings through cooperation (2000) 0.00
    0.0041003237 = product of:
      0.01230097 = sum of:
        0.01230097 = product of:
          0.02460194 = sum of:
            0.02460194 = weight(_text_:of in 6576) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02460194 = score(doc=6576,freq=24.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 6576, product of:
                  4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                    24.0 = termFreq=24.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6576)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The nature of a library's collections determines what kind of subject access to provide to those collections. The collections of the Cleveland Public Library serve both the recreational and research needs of a large urban population. The Cleveland Public Library uses Library of Congress Subject Headings to describe its collections. A study of subject searches entered by library patrons over the course of one week reveals several patterns among the types of subject headings used most frequently, reflecting the characteristics of the population served. Other topics discussed include subject access to fiction, juvenileliterature, and specialized collections
    Source
    The LCSH century: one hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system. Ed.: A.T.Stone
  2. Walsh, J.: ¬The use of Library of Congress Subject Headings in digital collections (2011) 0.00
    0.004023675 = product of:
      0.012071025 = sum of:
        0.012071025 = product of:
          0.02414205 = sum of:
            0.02414205 = weight(_text_:of in 4549) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02414205 = score(doc=4549,freq=52.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.35238793 = fieldWeight in 4549, product of:
                  7.2111025 = tf(freq=52.0), with freq of:
                    52.0 = termFreq=52.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4549)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - This paper attempts to explain the wide dissemination of Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) within digital libraries and presents some of the advantages and disadvantages of using this controlled vocabulary in digital collections. The paper also presents other classifications used in digital collections for subject access and explores ways of improving search functionality in digital collections that employ LCSH. Design/methodology/approach - Unlike traditional libraries that use Library of Congress Classification for organization and retrieval, digital libraries use metadata forms for organization and retrieval. The collections exist in cyberspace of the internet which is known for containing the universe of knowledge. The use of LCSH for information retrieval has been widely criticized for its difficulty of use and its information retrieval effectiveness in online environments. The Library of Congress (LOC) has claimed the headings were not based on comprehensive principles nor ever intended to cover the universe of knowledge. Despite these claims and criticisms, LCSH is the most popular choice for subject access in digital libraries. Findings - The number of digital collections increases every year and LCSH is still the most popular choice of controlled vocabulary for subject access. Of the numerous criticisms, difficulties of use and user unfamiliarity are the greatest disadvantages of using LCSH for subject access. Average users only have a vague notion of what they are looking for when initializing a search. More work is required in automated generation of subject headings and increased usage of LCSH in faceted search retrieval systems. This will provide users with better access to the LCSH used in the back end of information retrieval. Originality/value - The Greek researchers who developed the Dissertation DSPace system believe this type of module will eventually replace the traditional keyword-based indexing back ends employed by many information retrieval modules within current digital library systems. The system offers the type of access and interactivity that will acquaint users with how LCSH looks and is used. Faceted search and automated pattern matching using an ontology based on LCSH have the best promise of overcoming the disadvantages that have always plagued the LOC-controlled vocabulary. These retrieval techniques give LCSH an opportunity to finally achieve the optimal precision and recall it has so far failed to deliver.
  3. Mischo, W.H.: ¬A subject retrieval function based on computer manipulated Library of Congress Subject Headings (1982) 0.00
    0.0039058835 = product of:
      0.01171765 = sum of:
        0.01171765 = product of:
          0.0234353 = sum of:
            0.0234353 = weight(_text_:of in 2841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0234353 = score(doc=2841,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.34207192 = fieldWeight in 2841, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2841)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Proceedings of the ASIS Annual Meeting. 19(1982), S.197-199
  4. Zeng, L.: Achieving compatibility of indexing languages in online access environment (1992) 0.00
    0.0039058835 = product of:
      0.01171765 = sum of:
        0.01171765 = product of:
          0.0234353 = sum of:
            0.0234353 = weight(_text_:of in 1284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0234353 = score(doc=1284,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.34207192 = fieldWeight in 1284, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1284)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information science. Vol.50, [=Suppl.13]
  5. Gross, T.; Taylor, A.G.; Joudrey, D.N.: Still a lot to lose : the role of controlled vocabulary in keyword searching (2015) 0.00
    0.0039058835 = product of:
      0.01171765 = sum of:
        0.01171765 = product of:
          0.0234353 = sum of:
            0.0234353 = weight(_text_:of in 2007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0234353 = score(doc=2007,freq=16.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.34207192 = fieldWeight in 2007, product of:
                  4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                    16.0 = termFreq=16.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2007)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    In their 2005 study, Gross and Taylor found that more than a third of records retrieved by keyword searches would be lost without subject headings. A review of the literature since then shows that numerous studies, in various disciplines, have found that a quarter to a third of records returned in a keyword search would be lost without controlled vocabulary. Other writers, though, have continued to suggest that controlled vocabulary be discontinued. Addressing criticisms of the Gross/Taylor study, this study replicates the search process in the same online catalog, but after the addition of automated enriched metadata such as tables of contents and summaries. The proportion of results that would be lost remains high.
  6. Takeda, N.: Problems in hierarchical structures in thesauri : their influences on the results of information retrieval (1994) 0.00
    0.003865822 = product of:
      0.011597466 = sum of:
        0.011597466 = product of:
          0.023194931 = sum of:
            0.023194931 = weight(_text_:of in 2642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023194931 = score(doc=2642,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.33856338 = fieldWeight in 2642, product of:
                  3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                    12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2642)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    In online retrieval search results do not always match the intent in spite of using correct keywords (descriptors). One of the causes of this problem is found in the hierarchical structures of the thesaurus, which often contains relations between broader and narrower concepts, the opposite of which is not necessarily true. Some examples are described from 2 thesauri, MeSH and JICST. In these cases searchers need to make an effort to increase precision
  7. Schabas, A.H.: Postcoordinate retrieval : a comparison of two retrieval languages (1982) 0.00
    0.003743066 = product of:
      0.0112291975 = sum of:
        0.0112291975 = product of:
          0.022458395 = sum of:
            0.022458395 = weight(_text_:of in 1202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022458395 = score(doc=1202,freq=20.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 1202, product of:
                  4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                    20.0 = termFreq=20.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1202)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This article reports on a comparison of the postcoordinate retrieval effectiveness of two indexing languages: LCSH and PRECIS. The effect of augmenting each with title words was also studies. The database for the study was over 15.000 UK MARC records. Users returned 5.326 relevant judgements for citations retrieved for 61 SDI profiles, representing a wide variety of subjects. Results are reported in terms of precision and relative recall. Pure/applied sciences data and social science data were analyzed separately. Cochran's significance tests for ratios were used to interpret the findings. Recall emerged as the more important measure discriminating the behavior of the two languages. Addition of title words was found to improve recall of both indexing languages significantly. A direct relationship was observed between recall and exhaustivity. For the social sciences searches, recalls from PRECIS alone and from PRECIS with title words were significantly higher than those from LCSH alone and from LCSH with title words, respectively. Corresponding comparisons for the pure/applied sciences searches revealed no significant differences
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 33(1982), S.32-37
  8. Lucarelli, A.: Semantic authority control and New Soggettario (2004) 0.00
    0.003743066 = product of:
      0.0112291975 = sum of:
        0.0112291975 = product of:
          0.022458395 = sum of:
            0.022458395 = weight(_text_:of in 5674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022458395 = score(doc=5674,freq=20.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 5674, product of:
                  4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                    20.0 = termFreq=20.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5674)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The project of the renewal of the Subject Headings for Italian Library Catalogues (Soggettario), financed by the National Central Library in Florence, proposes a pre-coordinated language, both analytic and synthetic, complying with international rules on vocabulary control and structure, based on category analysis of semantic relationships. It envisages a strict distinction between semantic relationships and syntactic ones, and bases its citation order of subject strings on the analysis model for logical relationships. Thanks to its features, the new Soggettario agrees both with the logic of Guidelines for Subject Authority and Reference Entries and of UNIMARC. Authorities, and with FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records). The rigorous structure of the thesaurus will facilitate the transfer of controlled terminology to lists or authority files and archives. The Italian National Bibliography (BNI) will have to play a leading role on the control of coherence of semantic access points. It will validate the strings created by other libraries and control their coherence according to the syntax rules envisaged in the new method.
  9. Jin, Q.: Is FAST the right direction for a new system of subject cataloging and metadata? (2008) 0.00
    0.003743066 = product of:
      0.0112291975 = sum of:
        0.0112291975 = product of:
          0.022458395 = sum of:
            0.022458395 = weight(_text_:of in 791) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022458395 = score(doc=791,freq=20.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 791, product of:
                  4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                    20.0 = termFreq=20.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=791)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The Subject Analysis Committee Subcommittee on FAST of the Association for Library Collections & Technical Services (ALCTS) was established in the fall of 2004 to explore issues related to the implementation of the Faceted Application of Subject Terminology (FAST) subject heading schema. FAST is being developed at the Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) and is derived from the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) with a simplified syntax. This paper is based on comments by the Subject Analysis Committee Subcommittee on FAST, which reviewed a sample of 5,000 bibliographic records with both LCSH and FAST headings. It provides the library community with some understanding of FAST, a new system of subject cataloging and metadata.
    Footnote
    Beitrag eines Themenheftes "The Intellectual and Professional World of Cataloging"
  10. O'Neill, E.T.; Chan, L.M.: FAST - a new approach to controlled subject access (2008) 0.00
    0.003743066 = product of:
      0.0112291975 = sum of:
        0.0112291975 = product of:
          0.022458395 = sum of:
            0.022458395 = weight(_text_:of in 2181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022458395 = score(doc=2181,freq=20.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 2181, product of:
                  4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                    20.0 = termFreq=20.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2181)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Recent trends, driven to a large extent by the rapid proliferation of digital resources, are forcing changes in bibliographic control to make it easier to use, understand, and apply subject data. Subject headings are no exception. The enormous volume and rapid growth of digital libraries and repositories and the emergence of numerous metadata schemes have spurred a reexamination of the way subject data are to be provided for such resources efficiently and effectively. To address this need, OCLC in cooperation with the Library of Congress, has taken a new approach, called FAST (Faceted Application of Subject Terminology). FAST headings are based on the existing vocabulary in Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), but are applied with a simpler syntax than required by Library of Congress application policies. Adapting the LCSH vocabulary in a simplified faceted syntax retains the rich vocabulary of LCSH while making it easier to understand, control, apply, and use.
    Source
    New pespectives on subject indexing and classification: essays in honour of Magda Heiner-Freiling. Red.: K. Knull-Schlomann, u.a
  11. Tirilly, P.; Julien, C.-A.: Random walks for subject hierarchy simplification (2012) 0.00
    0.003743066 = product of:
      0.0112291975 = sum of:
        0.0112291975 = product of:
          0.022458395 = sum of:
            0.022458395 = weight(_text_:of in 835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022458395 = score(doc=835,freq=20.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 835, product of:
                  4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                    20.0 = termFreq=20.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=835)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Although subject hierarchies are widely used to index document collections, few tools leverage their structure to facilitate collection browsing. This is mostly due to the complexity of such structures that include thousands of nodes. This paper proposes a new approach to simplify subject hierarchies based on the distribution of documents among the nodes. A random walk algorithm simulates the route of a user within the hierarchy, under the assumption that the user is attracted by the most populated nodes. Poorly visited nodes can be identified and eliminated, leaving a structure containing only the nodes that best represent the content of the collection. Experiments on a collection indexed using the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) show that, as compared to the state-of-the-art simplification method, the random walk-based approach gives access to a larger part of the collection for the same structure size, and offers more flexibility to customize the complexity of thestructure.
    Source
    Categories, contexts and relations in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Twelfth International ISKO Conference 6-9 August 2012, Mysore, India. Eds.: Neelameghan, A. u. K.S. Raghavan
  12. DeHart, F.E.; Glazier, J.: Computer searching on PRECIS : an exploration of measuring comparative retrieval effectiveness (1984) 0.00
    0.0036536194 = product of:
      0.010960858 = sum of:
        0.010960858 = product of:
          0.021921717 = sum of:
            0.021921717 = weight(_text_:of in 828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.021921717 = score(doc=828,freq=14.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 828, product of:
                  3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                    14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=828)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Designing research on the retrieval effectiveness of computer searches on PRECIS compared with retrieval effectiveness of searches on other types of subject analysis used in computer-based information sources is a complex process. This paper explores the complexity of measuring comparative retrieval effectiveness through a comparison of the subject analysis provided by the PRECIS system for fifty articles with the subject analysis provided for the same articles by three computer-based information sources: ERIC/CIJE, LLBA/Online and PsycINFO. Objectives are: (1) to discover factors that should be taken into account when designing this type of research; and (2) to identify extraneous variables that work against internal validity in research design .
  13. Voorbij, H.: ¬Een goede titel behoeft geen trefwoord, of toch wel? : een vergelijkend oderzoek titelwoorden - trefwoorden (1997) 0.00
    0.0036536194 = product of:
      0.010960858 = sum of:
        0.010960858 = product of:
          0.021921717 = sum of:
            0.021921717 = weight(_text_:of in 1446) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.021921717 = score(doc=1446,freq=14.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 1446, product of:
                  3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                    14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1446)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    A recent survey at the Royal Library in the Netherlands showed that subject headings are more efficient than title keywords for retrieval purposes. 475 Dutch publications were selected at random and assigned subject headings. The study showed that subject headings provided additional useful information in 56% of titles. Subsequent searching of the library's online catalogue showed that 88% of titles were retrieved via subject headings against 57% through title keywords. Further precision may be achieved with the help of indexing staff, but at considerable cost
    Footnote
    Übers. d. Titels: A good title has no need of subject headings, or does it?: a comparative study of title keywords against subject headings
  14. Zimmerman, N.: User study: implementation of OCLC FAST subject headings in the Lafayette digital repository (2023) 0.00
    0.0036536194 = product of:
      0.010960858 = sum of:
        0.010960858 = product of:
          0.021921717 = sum of:
            0.021921717 = weight(_text_:of in 1176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.021921717 = score(doc=1176,freq=14.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 1176, product of:
                  3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                    14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1176)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Digital repository migrations present a periodic opportunity to assess metadata quality and to perform strategic enhancements. Lafayette College Libraries implemented OCLC FAST (Faceted Application of Subject Terminology) for its digital image collections as part of a migration from multiple repositories to a single one built on the Samvera Hyrax open-source framework. Application of FAST has normalized subject headings across dissimilar collections in a way that tremendously improves descriptive consistency for staff and discoverability for end users. However, the process of applying FAST headings was complicated by several features of in-scope metadata as well as gaps in available controlled subject authorities.
    Footnote
    Beitrag in Themenheft: Implementation of Faceted Vocabularies.
  15. McJunkin, M.C.: Precision and recall in title keyword searching (1995) 0.00
    0.0035509837 = product of:
      0.010652951 = sum of:
        0.010652951 = product of:
          0.021305902 = sum of:
            0.021305902 = weight(_text_:of in 3351) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.021305902 = score(doc=3351,freq=18.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.3109903 = fieldWeight in 3351, product of:
                  4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                    18.0 = termFreq=18.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3351)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Investigates the extent to which title keywords convey subject content and compares the relative effectiveness of searching title keywords using 2 search strategies to examine whether adjacency operators in title keyword searches are effective in improving recall and precision of online searching. Title keywords from a random sample of titles in the field of economics were searched on FirstSearch, using the WorldCat database, which is equivalent in coverage to the OCLC OLUC, with and without adjacency of the keywords specified. The LCSH of the items retrieved were compared with the sample title subject headings to determine the degree of match or relevance and the values for precision and recall were calculated. Results indicated that, when keywords were discipline specific, adjacency operators improved precision with little degradation of recall. Systems that allow positional operators or rank output by proximity of terms may increase search success
  16. Cochrane, P.A.: Improving LCSH for use in online catalogs revisited : What progress has been made? What issues still remain? (2000) 0.00
    0.0035509837 = product of:
      0.010652951 = sum of:
        0.010652951 = product of:
          0.021305902 = sum of:
            0.021305902 = weight(_text_:of in 5609) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.021305902 = score(doc=5609,freq=18.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.3109903 = fieldWeight in 5609, product of:
                  4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                    18.0 = termFreq=18.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5609)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    In 1986 Libraries Unlimited published Cochrane's book, Improving LCSH for Use in Online Catalogs; Exercises for Self-Help with a Selection of Background Readings. This was preceded in 1981 by an ERIC publication (ED 208 900) by Cochrane, with Monika Kirtland Bibliographic and Bibliometric Essay which documented critical views of LCSH and an analysis of vocabulary control in LCSH (parts of which were published in Cataloging & Classification Quarterly' 1(2/3) (1982), 71-94). Three features of LCSH will be re-examined to check on progress since the time of these earlier publications: notes, structure of relationships between headings in the list, and links between Library of Congress classification numbers and LCSH or other vocabularies
    Source
    The LCSH century: one hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system. Ed.: A.T. Stone
  17. Svenonius, E.: Design of controlled vocabularies in the context of emerging technologies (1988) 0.00
    0.0035289964 = product of:
      0.010586989 = sum of:
        0.010586989 = product of:
          0.021173978 = sum of:
            0.021173978 = weight(_text_:of in 762) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.021173978 = score(doc=762,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.3090647 = fieldWeight in 762, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=762)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Delineates on the changing role of vocabulary control devices such as classification, subject headings, and thesaurus. Identifies the basic issue in the design and development of these devices and their role in the changing information technology. The paper identifies the differentiations needed in the new roles of these devices in data base technology
  18. Keen, E.M.: Aspects of computer-based indexing languages (1991) 0.00
    0.0035289964 = product of:
      0.010586989 = sum of:
        0.010586989 = product of:
          0.021173978 = sum of:
            0.021173978 = weight(_text_:of in 5072) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.021173978 = score(doc=5072,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.3090647 = fieldWeight in 5072, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5072)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Comments on the relative rarity of research articles on theoretical aspects of subject indexing in computerised retrieval systems and the predominance of articles on software packages and hardware. Concludes that controlled indexing still has a future but points to major differences from the past
    Source
    Computers in libraries international 91. Proceedings of the 5th Annual Conference on Computers in Libraries, London, February 1991
  19. Devadason, F.J.; Kumbhar, M.R.: Language and indexing language : Nalimor and Gardin revised (1988) 0.00
    0.0034169364 = product of:
      0.010250809 = sum of:
        0.010250809 = product of:
          0.020501617 = sum of:
            0.020501617 = weight(_text_:of in 2852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020501617 = score(doc=2852,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 2852, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2852)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Studies the salient features of ordinary language as a means of designing languages for information storage and retrieval systems. Pays particular attention to the POPSI (Postulate-based Permuted Subject Indexing) language.
    Source
    Annals of library science and documentation. 35(1988) no.2, S.58-68
  20. Broughton, V.: Structural, linguistic and mathematical elements in indexing languages and search engines : implications for the use of index languages in electronic and non-LIS environments (2000) 0.00
    0.0034169364 = product of:
      0.010250809 = sum of:
        0.010250809 = product of:
          0.020501617 = sum of:
            0.020501617 = weight(_text_:of in 96) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020501617 = score(doc=96,freq=24.0), product of:
                0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043811057 = queryNorm
                0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 96, product of:
                  4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                    24.0 = termFreq=24.0
                  1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=96)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The paper looks at ways in which traditional classification and indexing tools have dealt with the relationships between constituent terms; variations in these are examined and compared with the methods used in machine searching, particularly of the Internet and World Wide Web. Apparent correspondences with features of index languages are identified, and further methods of applying classification and indexing theory to machine retrieval are proposed. There are various ways in which indexing and retrieval systems, both conventional and electronic, deal with the problem of searching for documents on a subject basis, and various approaches to the analysis and processing of a query. There appear to be three basic models; the taxonomic or structural system, in which the user is offered a map of the `universe of knowledge'; the language based system, which offers a vocabulary of the subject and a grammar for dealing with compound statements; and the mathematical model using the language of symbolic logic or the algebra of set theory
    Source
    Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the 6th International ISKO-Conference, 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada. Ed.: C. Beghtol et al

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 86
  • d 2
  • f 1
  • ja 1
  • nl 1
  • More… Less…