Search (10 results, page 1 of 1)

0.020887807 = product of:
  0.041775614 = sum of:
    0.01699316 = weight(_text_:information in 863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01699316 = score(doc=863,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 863, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=863)
    0.024782453 = product of:
      0.049564905 = sum of:
        0.049564905 = weight(_text_:organization in 863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049564905 = score(doc=863,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.27574396 = fieldWeight in 863, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=863)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Footnote

Rez. in: Technical services quarterly. 9(1992) no.3, S.87-88 (H.L. Hoerman); Knowledge organization 20(1993) no.3, S.165-166 (O. Oberhauser); JASIS 44(1993) S.593 (D. Vizine-Goetz)

LCSH

Information retrieval

Subject

Information retrieval

0.016071692 = product of:
  0.032143384 = sum of:
    0.022129761 = weight(_text_:standards in 664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022129761 = score(doc=664,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09848571 = fieldWeight in 664, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=664)
    0.010013623 = product of:
      0.020027246 = sum of:
        0.020027246 = weight(_text_:organization in 664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020027246 = score(doc=664,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.11141739 = fieldWeight in 664, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=664)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Footnote

Rez. in: Knowledge organization 34(2007) no.1, S.58-60 (P. Buizza): "This Nuovo soggettario is the first sign of subject indexing renewal in Italy. Italian subject indexing has been based until now on Soggettario per i cataloghi delle biblioteche italiane (Firenze, 1956), a list of preferred terms and see references, with suitable hierarchical subdivisions and cross references, derived from the subject catalogue of the National Library in Florence (BNCF). New headings later used in Bibliografia nazionale italiana (BNI) were added without references, nor indeed with any real maintenance. Systematic instructions on how to combine the terms are lacking: the indexer using this instrument is obliged to infer the order of terms absent from the lists by consulting analogous entries. Italian libraries are suffering from the limits of this subject catalogue: vocabulary is inadequate, obsolete and inconsistent, the syndetic structure incomplete and inaccurate, and the syntax ill-defined, poorly explained and unable to reflect complex subjects. In the nineties, the Subject Indexing Research Group (Gruppo di ricerca sull'indicizzazione per soggetto, GRIS) of the AIB (Italian Library Association) developed the indexing theory and some principles of PRECIS and drew up guidelines based on consistent principles for vocabulary, semantic relationships and subject string construction, the latter according to role syntax (Guida 1997). In overhauling the Soggettario, the National Library in Florence aimed at a comprehensive indexing system. (A report on the method and evolution of the work has been published in Knowledge Organization (Lucarelli 2005), while the feasibility study is available in Italian (Per un nuovo Soggettario 2002). Any usable terms from the old Soggettario will be transferred to the new system, while taking into consideration international norms and interlinguistic compatibility, as well as applications outside the immediate library context. The terms will be accessible via a suitable OPAC operating on the most advanced software.
The guide Nuovo soggettario was presented on February 8' 2007 at a one-day seminar in the Palazzo Vecchio, Florence, in front of some 500 spellbound people. The Nuovo soggettario comes in two parts: the guide in book-form and an accompanying CD-ROM, by way of which a prototype of the thesaurus may be accessed on the Internet. In the former, rules are stated; the latter contains a pdf version of the guide and the first installment of the controlled vocabulary, which is to be further enriched and refined. Syntactic instructions (general application guidelines, as well as special annotations of particular terms) and the compiled subject strings file have yet to be added. The essentials of the new system are: 1) an analytic-synthetic approach, 2) use of terms (units of controlled vocabulary) and subject strings (which represent subjects by combining terms in linear order to form syntactic relationships), instead of main headings and subdivisions, 3) specificity of terms and strings, with a view to the co-extension of subject string and subject matter and 4) a clear distinction between semantic and syntactic relationships, with full control of them both. Basic features of the vocabulary include the uniformity and univocality of terms and thesaural management of a priori (semantic) relationships. Starting from its definition, each term can be categorially analyzed: four macro-categories are represented (agents, action, things, time), for which there are subcategories called facets (e.g., for actions: activities, disciplines, processes), which in turn have sub-facets. Morphological instructions conform to national and international standards, including BS 8723, ANSI/ NISO Z39.19 and the IFLA draft of Guidelines for multilingual thesauri, even for syntactic factorization. Different kinds of semantic relationships are represented thoroughly, and particular attention is paid to poly-hierarchies, which are used only in moderation: both top terms must actually be relevant. Node labels are used to specify the principle of division applied. Instance relationships are also used.

0.008582841 = product of:
  0.034331363 = sum of:
    0.034331363 = weight(_text_:information in 4593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034331363 = score(doc=4593,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.38790947 = fieldWeight in 4593, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4593)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

LCSH

Information retrieval

RSWK

Schlagwortnormdatei / Information Retrieval

Subject

Schlagwortnormdatei / Information Retrieval
Information retrieval

0.006195613 = product of:
  0.024782453 = sum of:
    0.024782453 = product of:
      0.049564905 = sum of:
        0.049564905 = weight(_text_:organization in 6113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049564905 = score(doc=6113,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.27574396 = fieldWeight in 6113, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6113)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Rez. in: Knowledge organization 28(2001) no.4, S.206-208 (C. Arsenault):"Overall, this is an excellent work, on an ever increasingly pertinent topic. This long-awaited second edition provides a thorough and comprehensive update of an already important text. I very highly recommend it to professionals and academics alike ; both neophytes and veterans will find it valuable. It is a fundamental work that cannot be ignored in the field of subject analysis and retrieval for all bibliographic systems, including online catalogs."

0.0061891745 = product of:
  0.024756698 = sum of:
    0.024756698 = weight(_text_:information in 1545) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024756698 = score(doc=1545,freq=26.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.2797255 = fieldWeight in 1545, product of:
          5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
            26.0 = termFreq=26.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1545)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Information or Document Retrieval is the subject of this book. It is not an introductory book, although it is self-contained in the sense that it is not necessary to have a background in the theory or practice of Information Retrieval in order to understand its arguments. The book presents, as clearly as possible, one particular perspective on Information Retrieval, and attempts to say that certain aspects of the theory or practice of the management of documents are more important than others. The majority of Information Retrieval research has been aimed at the more experimentally tractable small-scale systems, and although much of that work has added greatly to our understanding of Information Retrieval it is becoming increasingly apparent that retrieval systems with large data bases of documents are a fundamentally different genre of systems than small-scale systems. If this is so, which is the thesis of this book, then we must now study large information retrieval systems with the same rigor and intensity that we once studied small-scale systems. Hegel observed that the quantitative growth of any system caused qualitative changes to take place in its structure and processes.

COMPASS

Information retrieval

LCSH

Information Retrieval

RSWK

Information Retrieval

Subject

Information retrieval
Information Retrieval
Information Retrieval

0.0042914203 = product of:
  0.017165681 = sum of:
    0.017165681 = weight(_text_:information in 2306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017165681 = score(doc=2306,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 2306, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2306)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Series

Advances in library information technology; 2

0.004226233 = product of:
  0.016904932 = sum of:
    0.016904932 = product of:
      0.033809863 = sum of:
        0.033809863 = weight(_text_:22 in 4360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033809863 = score(doc=4360,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.19150631 = fieldWeight in 4360, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4360)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

15. 7.2018 16:22:16

Footnote

Rez. in: Mitteilungen VÖB 48(1995) H.1, S.66-68 (K. Niedermair) - Vgl. auch Lepsky, K. in: Bibliotheksdienst 29(1995) H.3, S.500-519; Bibliothek: Forschung u. Praxis 19(1995) H.2, S.251-254 (G. Hartwieg; auch in: LDV-Forum Bd. 12, Nr. 2, Jg. 1995, S.22-29 [unter: http://www.jlcl.org/1995_Heft2/Rezensionen_19-27.pdf]) .

0.0036413912 = product of:
  0.014565565 = sum of:
    0.014565565 = weight(_text_:information in 386) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014565565 = score(doc=386,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 386, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=386)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Using subject headings for Online Retrieval is an indispensable tool for online system desingners who are developing new systems or refining exicting ones. The book describes subject analysis and subject searching in online catalogs, including the limitations of retrieval, and demonstrates how such limitations can be overcome through system design and programming. The book describes the Library of Congress Subject headings system and system characteristics, shows how information is stored in machine readable files, and offers examples of and recommendations for successful methods. Tables are included to support these recommendations, and diagrams, graphs, and bar charts are used to provide results of data analyses.

Footnote

Rez. in: Information processing and management 31(1995) no.3, S.450-451 (R.R. Larson); Library resources and technical services 41(1997) no.1, S.60-67 (B.H. Weinberg)

0.002427594 = product of:
  0.009710376 = sum of:
    0.009710376 = weight(_text_:information in 753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009710376 = score(doc=753,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.10971737 = fieldWeight in 753, 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=753)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Inhalt: Editorial - Michael Franke-Maier, Anna Kasprzik, Andreas Ledl und Hans Schürmann Qualität in der Inhaltserschließung - Ein Überblick aus 50 Jahren (1970-2020) - Andreas Ledl Fit for Purpose - Standardisierung von inhaltserschließenden Informationen durch Richtlinien für Metadaten - Joachim Laczny Neue Wege und Qualitäten - Die Inhaltserschließungspolitik der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek - Ulrike Junger und Frank Scholze Wissensbasen für die automatische Erschließung und ihre Qualität am Beispiel von Wikidata - Lydia Pintscher, Peter Bourgonje, Julián Moreno Schneider, Malte Ostendorff und Georg Rehm Qualitätssicherung in der GND - Esther Scheven Qualitätskriterien und Qualitätssicherung in der inhaltlichen Erschließung - Thesenpapier des Expertenteams RDA-Anwendungsprofil für die verbale Inhaltserschließung (ET RAVI) Coli-conc - Eine Infrastruktur zur Nutzung und Erstellung von Konkordanzen - Uma Balakrishnan, Stefan Peters und Jakob Voß Methoden und Metriken zur Messung von OCR-Qualität für die Kuratierung von Daten und Metadaten - Clemens Neudecker, Karolina Zaczynska, Konstantin Baierer, Georg Rehm, Mike Gerber und Julián Moreno Schneider Datenqualität als Grundlage qualitativer Inhaltserschließung - Jakob Voß Bemerkungen zu der Qualitätsbewertung von MARC-21-Datensätzen - Rudolf Ungváry und Péter Király Named Entity Linking mit Wikidata und GND - Das Potenzial handkuratierter und strukturierter Datenquellen für die semantische Anreicherung von Volltexten - Sina Menzel, Hannes Schnaitter, Josefine Zinck, Vivien Petras, Clemens Neudecker, Kai Labusch, Elena Leitner und Georg Rehm Ein Protokoll für den Datenabgleich im Web am Beispiel von OpenRefine und der Gemeinsamen Normdatei (GND) - Fabian Steeg und Adrian Pohl Verbale Erschließung in Katalogen und Discovery-Systemen - Überlegungen zur Qualität - Heidrun Wiesenmüller Inhaltserschließung für Discovery-Systeme gestalten - Jan Frederik Maas Evaluierung von Verschlagwortung im Kontext des Information Retrievals - Christian Wartena und Koraljka Golub Die Qualität der Fremddatenanreicherung FRED - Cyrus Beck Quantität als Qualität - Was die Verbünde zur Verbesserung der Inhaltserschließung beitragen können - Rita Albrecht, Barbara Block, Mathias Kratzer und Peter Thiessen Hybride Künstliche Intelligenz in der automatisierten Inhaltserschließung - Harald Sack

Footnote

Vgl.: https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110691597/html. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110691597. Rez. in: Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis 73(2022) H.2-3, S.131-132 (B. Lorenz u. V. Steyer). Weitere Rezension in: o-bib 9(20229 Nr.3. (Martin Völkl) [https://www.o-bib.de/bib/article/view/5843/8714].

0.0021457102 = product of:
  0.008582841 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 2011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=2011,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2011, 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=2011)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Over the past ten years, various organizations, both public and private, have expressed interest in implementing FAST in their cataloging workflows. As interest in FAST has grown, so too has interest in knowing how FAST is being used and by whom. Since 2002 eighteen institutions (see table 1) in six countries have expressed interest in learning more about FAST and how it could be implemented in cataloging workflows. Currently OCLC is aware of nine agencies that have actually adopted or support FAST for resource description. This study, the first systematic census of FAST users undertaken by OCLC, was conducted, in part, to address these inquiries. Its purpose was to examine: how FAST is being utilized; why FAST was chosen as the cataloging vocabulary; what benefits FAST provides; and what can be done to enhance the value of FAST. Interview requests were sent to all parties that had previously contacted OCLC about FAST. Of the eighteen organizations contacted, sixteen agreed to provide information about their decision whether to use FAST (nine adopters, seven non-adopters).