Search (41 results, page 1 of 3)

0.050222576 = sum of:
  0.033842273 = product of:
    0.13536909 = sum of:
      0.13536909 = weight(_text_:authors in 1797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.13536909 = score(doc=1797,freq=16.0), product of:
          0.23755142 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.56985176 = fieldWeight in 1797, product of:
            4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
              16.0 = termFreq=16.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1797)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.0163803 = product of:
    0.0327606 = sum of:
      0.0327606 = weight(_text_:i in 1797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0327606 = score(doc=1797,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.16668847 = fieldWeight in 1797, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1797)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - The authors introduce two semantics-based navigation applications that facilitate information-seeking activities in internal link-based web sites in Wikipedia. These applications aim to help users find concepts within a topic and related articles on a given topic quickly and then gain topical knowledge from internal link-based encyclopedia web sites. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach - The WNavis application consists of three information visualization (IV) tools which are a topic network, a hierarchy topic tree and summaries for topics. The WikiMap application consists of a topic network. The goal of the topic network and topic tree tools is to help users to find the major concepts of a topic and identify relationships between these major concepts easily. In addition, in order to locate specific information and enable users to explore and read topic-related articles quickly, the topic tree and summaries for topics tools support users to gain topical knowledge quickly. The authors then apply the k-clique of cohesive indicator to analyze the sub topics of the seed query and find out the best clustering results via the cosine measure. The authors utilize four metrics, which are correctness, time cost, usage behaviors, and satisfaction, to evaluate the three interfaces. These metrics measure both the outputs and outcomes of applications. As a baseline system for evaluation the authors used a traditional Wikipedia interface. For the evaluation, the authors used an experimental user study with 30 participants.
Findings - The results indicate that both WikiMap and WNavis supported users to identify concepts and their relations better compared to the baseline. In topical tasks WNavis over performed both WikiMap and the baseline system. Although there were no time differences in finding concepts or answering topical questions, the test systems provided users with a greater gain per time unit. The users of WNavis leaned on the hierarchy tree instead of other tools, whereas WikiMap users used the topic map. Research limitations/implications - The findings have implications for the design of IR support tools in knowledge-intensive web sites that help users to explore topics and concepts. Originality/value - The authors explored to what extent the use of each IV support tool contributed to successful exploration of topics in search tasks. The authors propose extended task-based evaluation measures to understand how each application provides useful context for users to accomplish the tasks and attain the search goals. That is, the authors not only evaluate the output of the search results, e.g. the number of relevant items retrieved, but also the outcome provided by the system for assisting users to attain the search goal.

0.04575026 = product of:
  0.09150052 = sum of:
    0.09150052 = sum of:
      0.049140904 = weight(_text_:i in 1709) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049140904 = score(doc=1709,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.25003272 = fieldWeight in 1709, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1709)
      0.042359617 = weight(_text_:22 in 1709) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042359617 = score(doc=1709,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1709, 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=1709)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

4. 2.2015 9:22:39

0.038125217 = product of:
  0.076250434 = sum of:
    0.076250434 = sum of:
      0.04095075 = weight(_text_:i in 4573) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04095075 = score(doc=4573,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.20836058 = fieldWeight in 4573, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4573)
      0.03529968 = weight(_text_:22 in 4573) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03529968 = score(doc=4573,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4573, 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=4573)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

9.12.2018 16:22:25

0.032606155 = sum of:
  0.014956313 = product of:
    0.059825253 = sum of:
      0.059825253 = weight(_text_:authors in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.059825253 = score(doc=5272,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23755142 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.25184128 = fieldWeight in 5272, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5272)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.01764984 = product of:
    0.03529968 = sum of:
      0.03529968 = weight(_text_:22 in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03529968 = score(doc=5272,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5272, 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=5272)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article describes the latest development of a generic approach to detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. The work makes substantial theoretical and methodological contributions to progressive knowledge domain visualization. A specialty is conceptualized and visualized as a time-variant duality between two fundamental concepts in information science: research fronts and intellectual bases. A research front is defined as an emergent and transient grouping of concepts and underlying research issues. The intellectual base of a research front is its citation and co-citation footprint in scientific literature - an evolving network of scientific publications cited by research-front concepts. Kleinberg's (2002) burst-detection algorithm is adapted to identify emergent research-front concepts. Freeman's (1979) betweenness centrality metric is used to highlight potential pivotal points of paradigm shift over time. Two complementary visualization views are designed and implemented: cluster views and time-zone views. The contributions of the approach are that (a) the nature of an intellectual base is algorithmically and temporally identified by emergent research-front terms, (b) the value of a co-citation cluster is explicitly interpreted in terms of research-front concepts, and (c) visually prominent and algorithmically detected pivotal points substantially reduce the complexity of a visualized network. The modeling and visualization process is implemented in CiteSpace II, a Java application, and applied to the analysis of two research fields: mass extinction (1981-2004) and terrorism (1990-2003). Prominent trends and pivotal points in visualized networks were verified in collaboration with domain experts, who are the authors of pivotal-point articles. Practical implications of the work are discussed. A number of challenges and opportunities for future studies are identified.

Date

22. 7.2006 16:11:05

0.032606155 = sum of:
  0.014956313 = product of:
    0.059825253 = sum of:
      0.059825253 = weight(_text_:authors in 3070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.059825253 = score(doc=3070,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23755142 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.25184128 = fieldWeight in 3070, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3070)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.01764984 = product of:
    0.03529968 = sum of:
      0.03529968 = weight(_text_:22 in 3070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03529968 = score(doc=3070,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3070, 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=3070)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to investigate user experiences with a touch-wall interface featuring both clustering and categorization representations of available e-books in a public library to understand human information interactions under work-focused and recreational contexts. Design/methodology/approach - Researchers collected questionnaires from 251 New Taipei City Library visitors who used the touch-wall interface to search for new titles. The authors applied structural equation modelling to examine relationships among hedonic/utilitarian needs, clustering and categorization representations, perceived ease of use (EU) and the extent to which users experienced anxiety and uncertainty (AU) while interacting with the interface. Findings - Utilitarian users who have an explicit idea of what they intend to find tend to prefer the categorization interface. A hedonic-oriented user tends to prefer clustering interfaces. Users reported EU regardless of which interface they engaged with. Results revealed that use of the clustering interface had a negative correlation with AU. Users that seek to satisfy utilitarian needs tended to emphasize the importance of perceived EU, whilst pleasure-seeking users were a little more tolerant of anxiety or uncertainty. Originality/value - The Online Public Access Catalogue (OPAC) encourages library visitors to borrow digital books through the implementation of an information visualization system. This situation poses an opportunity to validate uses and gratification theory. People with hedonic/utilitarian needs displayed different risk-control attitudes and affected uncertainty using the interface. Knowledge about user interaction with such interfaces is vital when launching the development of a new OPAC.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.032606155 = sum of:
  0.014956313 = product of:
    0.059825253 = sum of:
      0.059825253 = weight(_text_:authors in 4641) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.059825253 = score(doc=4641,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23755142 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.25184128 = fieldWeight in 4641, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4641)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.01764984 = product of:
    0.03529968 = sum of:
      0.03529968 = weight(_text_:22 in 4641) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03529968 = score(doc=4641,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4641, 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=4641)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Studies on the state and structure of digital knowledge concerning science generally relate to macro and meso scales. Supported by visualizations, these studies can deliver knowledge about emerging scientific fields or collaboration between countries, scientific centers, or groups of researchers. Analyses of individual activities or single scientific career paths are rarely presented and discussed. The authors decided to fill this gap and developed a web application for visualizing the scientific output of particular researchers. This free software based on bibliographic data from local databases, provides six layouts for analysis. Researchers can see the dynamic characteristics of their own writing activity, the time and place of publication, and the thematic scope of research problems. They can also identify cooperation networks, and consequently, study the dependencies and regularities in their own scientific activity. The current article presents the results of a study of the application's usability and functionality as well as attempts to define different user groups. A survey about the interface was sent to select researchers employed at Nicolaus Copernicus University. The results were used to answer the question as to whether such a specialized visualization tool can significantly augment the individual information space of the contemporary researcher.

Date

21.12.2018 17:22:13

0.030500174 = product of:
  0.061000347 = sum of:
    0.061000347 = sum of:
      0.0327606 = weight(_text_:i in 2659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0327606 = score(doc=2659,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.16668847 = fieldWeight in 2659, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2659)
      0.028239746 = weight(_text_:22 in 2659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.028239746 = score(doc=2659,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2659, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2659)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) has been developed over the course of more than a century, predating the semantic web by some time. Until the 1986, the only concept-toconcept relationship available was an undifferentiated "See Also" reference, which was used for both associative (RT) and hierarchical (BT/NT) connections. In that year, in preparation for the first release of the headings in machine readable MARC Authorities form, an attempt was made to automatically convert these "See Also" links into the standardized thesaural relations. Unfortunately, the rule used to determine the type of reference to generate relied on the presence of symmetric links to detect associatively related terms; "See Also" references that were only present in one of the related terms were assumed to be hierarchical. This left the process vulnerable to inconsistent use of references in the pre-conversion data, with a marked bias towards promoting relationships to hierarchical status. The Library of Congress was aware that the results of the conversion contained many inconsistencies, and intended to validate and correct the results over the course of time. Unfortunately, twenty years later, less than 40% of the converted records have been evaluated. The converted records, being the earliest encountered during the Library's cataloging activities, represent the most basic concepts within LCSH; errors in the syndetic structure for these records affect far more subordinate concepts than those nearer the periphery. Worse, a policy of patterning new headings after pre-existing ones leads to structural errors arising from the conversion process being replicated in these newer headings, perpetuating and exacerbating the errors. As the LCSH prepares for its second great conversion, from MARC to SKOS, it is critical to address these structural problems. As part of the work on converting the headings into SKOS, I have experimented with different visualizations of the tangled web of broader terms embedded in LCSH. This poster illustrates several of these renderings, shows how they can help users to judge which relationships might not be correct, and shows just exactly how Doorbells and Mammals are related.

Source

Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas

0.028665528 = product of:
  0.057331055 = sum of:
    0.057331055 = product of:
      0.11466211 = sum of:
        0.11466211 = weight(_text_:i in 549) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11466211 = score(doc=549,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = queryNorm
            0.58340967 = fieldWeight in 549, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=549)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Interactive information seeking, behaviour and retrieval. Eds.: Ruthven, I. u. D. Kelly

0.019563692 = sum of:
  0.008973788 = product of:
    0.03589515 = sum of:
      0.03589515 = weight(_text_:authors in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03589515 = score(doc=3035,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23755142 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.15110476 = fieldWeight in 3035, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3035)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.010589904 = product of:
    0.021179808 = sum of:
      0.021179808 = weight(_text_:22 in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.021179808 = score(doc=3035,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3035, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3035)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

As the team describe in a paper posted (http://arxiv.org/abs/1605.04951) on arXiv, they found that figures did indeed matter-but not all in the same way. An average paper in PubMed Central has about one diagram for every three pages and gets 1.67 citations. Papers with more diagrams per page and, to a lesser extent, plots per page tended to be more influential (on average, a paper accrued two more citations for every extra diagram per page, and one more for every extra plot per page). By contrast, including photographs and equations seemed to decrease the chances of a paper being cited by others. That agrees with a study from 2012, whose authors counted (by hand) the number of mathematical expressions in over 600 biology papers and found that each additional equation per page reduced the number of citations a paper received by 22%. This does not mean that researchers should rush to include more diagrams in their next paper. Dr Howe has not shown what is behind the effect, which may merely be one of correlation, rather than causation. It could, for example, be that papers with lots of diagrams tend to be those that illustrate new concepts, and thus start a whole new field of inquiry. Such papers will certainly be cited a lot. On the other hand, the presence of equations really might reduce citations. Biologists (as are most of those who write and read the papers in PubMed Central) are notoriously mathsaverse. If that is the case, looking in a physics archive would probably produce a different result.

0.01764984 = product of:
  0.03529968 = sum of:
    0.03529968 = product of:
      0.07059936 = sum of:
        0.07059936 = weight(_text_:22 in 3406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07059936 = score(doc=3406,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3406, 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=3406)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

30. 5.2010 16:22:35

0.01764984 = product of:
  0.03529968 = sum of:
    0.03529968 = product of:
      0.07059936 = sum of:
        0.07059936 = weight(_text_:22 in 2755) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07059936 = score(doc=2755,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2755, 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=2755)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

1. 2.2016 18:25:22

0.017373934 = product of:
  0.03474787 = sum of:
    0.03474787 = product of:
      0.06949574 = sum of:
        0.06949574 = weight(_text_:i in 2906) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06949574 = score(doc=2906,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = queryNorm
            0.35359967 = fieldWeight in 2906, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2906)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The use of research impact metrics and analytics has become an integral component to many aspects of institutional assessment. Many platforms currently exist to provide such analytics, both proprietary and open source; however, the functionality of these systems may not always overlap to serve uniquely specific needs. In this paper, I describe a novel web-based platform, named Manifold, that I built to serve custom research impact assessment needs in the University of Minnesota Medical School. Built on a standard LAMP architecture, Manifold automatically pulls publication data for faculty from Scopus through APIs, calculates impact metrics through automated analytics, and dynamically generates report-like profiles that visualize those metrics. Work on this project has resulted in many lessons learned about challenges to sustainability and scalability in developing a system of such magnitude.

0.016721666 = product of:
  0.03344333 = sum of:
    0.03344333 = product of:
      0.13377333 = sum of:
        0.13377333 = weight(_text_:authors in 2596) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13377333 = score(doc=2596,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.23755142 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = queryNorm
            0.5631342 = fieldWeight in 2596, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2596)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - To describe how information visualization can be used in the design of interface tools for large-scale repositories. Design/methodology/approach - One challenge for designers in the context of large-scale repositories is to create interface tools that help users find specific information of interest. In order to be most effective, these tools need to leverage the cognitive characteristics of the target users. At the Los Alamos National Laboratory, the authors' target users are scientists and engineers who can be characterized as higher-order, analytical thinkers. In this paper, the authors describe a visualization tool they have created for making the authors' large-scale digital object repositories more usable for them: SearchGraph, which facilitates data set analysis by displaying search results in the form of a two- or three-dimensional interactive scatter plot. Findings - Using SearchGraph, users can view a condensed, abstract visualization of search results. They can view the same dataset from multiple perspectives by manipulating several display, sort, and filter options. Doing so allows them to see different patterns in the dataset. For example, they can apply a logarithmic transformation in order to create more scatter in a dense cluster of data points or they can apply filters in order to focus on a specific subset of data points. Originality/value - SearchGraph is a creative solution to the problem of how to design interface tools for large-scale repositories. It is particularly appropriate for the authors' target users, who are scientists and engineers. It extends the work of the first two authors on ActiveGraph, a read-write digital library visualization tool.

0.0163803 = product of:
  0.0327606 = sum of:
    0.0327606 = product of:
      0.0655212 = sum of:
        0.0655212 = weight(_text_:i in 3887) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0655212 = score(doc=3887,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = queryNorm
            0.33337694 = fieldWeight in 3887, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3887)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.015520505 = sum of:
  0.008460568 = product of:
    0.033842273 = sum of:
      0.033842273 = weight(_text_:authors in 1789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.033842273 = score(doc=1789,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.23755142 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.14246294 = fieldWeight in 1789, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1789)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.0070599364 = product of:
    0.014119873 = sum of:
      0.014119873 = weight(_text_:22 in 1789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.014119873 = score(doc=1789,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 1789, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1789)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

23. 3.2008 19:10:22

Footnote

In 13 chapters, Part Two provides an introduction to KDD, an overview of data mining techniques, and examples of the usefulness of data model visualizations. The importance of visualization throughout the KDD process is stressed in many of the chapters. In particular, the need for measures of visualization effectiveness, benchmarking for identifying best practices, and the use of standardized sample data sets is convincingly presented. Many of the important data mining approaches are discussed in this complementary context. Cluster and outlier detection, classification techniques, and rule discovery algorithms are presented as the basic techniques common to the KDD process. The potential effectiveness of using visualization in the data modeling process are illustrated in chapters focused an using visualization for helping users understand the KDD process, ask questions and form hypotheses about their data, and evaluate the accuracy and veracity of their results. The 11 chapters of Part Three provide an overview of the KDD process and successful approaches to integrating KDD, data mining, and visualization in complementary domains. Rhodes (Chapter 21) begins this section with an excellent overview of the relation between the KDD process and data mining techniques. He states that the "primary goals of data mining are to describe the existing data and to predict the behavior or characteristics of future data of the same type" (p. 281). These goals are met by data mining tasks such as classification, regression, clustering, summarization, dependency modeling, and change or deviation detection. Subsequent chapters demonstrate how visualization can aid users in the interactive process of knowledge discovery by graphically representing the results from these iterative tasks. Finally, examples of the usefulness of integrating visualization and data mining tools in the domain of business, imagery and text mining, and massive data sets are provided. This text concludes with a thorough and useful 17-page index and lengthy yet integrating 17-page summary of the academic and industrial backgrounds of the contributing authors. A 16-page set of color inserts provide a better representation of the visualizations discussed, and a URL provided suggests that readers may view all the book's figures in color on-line, although as of this submission date it only provides access to a summary of the book and its contents. The overall contribution of this work is its focus an bridging two distinct areas of research, making it a valuable addition to the Morgan Kaufmann Series in Database Management Systems. The editors of this text have met their main goal of providing the first textbook integrating knowledge discovery, data mining, and visualization. Although it contributes greatly to our under- standing of the development and current state of the field, a major weakness of this text is that there is no concluding chapter to discuss the contributions of the sum of these contributed papers or give direction to possible future areas of research. "Integration of expertise between two different disciplines is a difficult process of communication and reeducation. Integrating data mining and visualization is particularly complex because each of these fields in itself must draw an a wide range of research experience" (p. 300). Although this work contributes to the crossdisciplinary communication needed to advance visualization in KDD, a more formal call for an interdisciplinary research agenda in a concluding chapter would have provided a more satisfying conclusion to a very good introductory text.
With contributors almost exclusively from the computer science field, the intended audience of this work is heavily slanted towards a computer science perspective. However, it is highly readable and provides introductory material that would be useful to information scientists from a variety of domains. Yet, much interesting work in information visualization from other fields could have been included giving the work more of an interdisciplinary perspective to complement their goals of integrating work in this area. Unfortunately, many of the application chapters are these, shallow, and lack complementary illustrations of visualization techniques or user interfaces used. However, they do provide insight into the many applications being developed in this rapidly expanding field. The authors have successfully put together a highly useful reference text for the data mining and information visualization communities. Those interested in a good introduction and overview of complementary research areas in these fields will be satisfied with this collection of papers. The focus upon integrating data visualization with data mining complements texts in each of these fields, such as Advances in Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (Fayyad et al., MIT Press) and Readings in Information Visualization: Using Vision to Think (Card et. al., Morgan Kauffman). This unique work is a good starting point for future interaction between researchers in the fields of data visualization and data mining and makes a good accompaniment for a course focused an integrating these areas or to the main reference texts in these fields."

0.014976388 = product of:
  0.029952776 = sum of:
    0.029952776 = product of:
      0.05990555 = sum of:
        0.05990555 = weight(_text_:22 in 3355) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05990555 = score(doc=3355,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = queryNorm
            0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 3355, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3355)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 1.2017 16:54:03
22. 1.2017 17:10:56

0.014478277 = product of:
  0.028956555 = sum of:
    0.028956555 = product of:
      0.05791311 = sum of:
        0.05791311 = weight(_text_:i in 3285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05791311 = score(doc=3285,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = queryNorm
            0.29466638 = fieldWeight in 3285, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3285)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This book is the outcome of the Dagstuhl Seminar on "Information Visualization - Human-Centered Issues in Visual Representation, Interaction, and Evaluation" held at Dagstuhl Castle, Germany, from May 28 to June 1, 2007. Information Visualization (InfoVis) is a relatively new research area, which focuses on the use of visualization techniques to help people understand and analyze data.This book documents and extends the findings and discussions of the various sessions in detail. The seven contributions cover the most important topics: Part I is on general reflections on the value of information visualization; evaluating information visualizations; theoretical foundations of information visualization; teaching information visualization. Part II deals with specific aspects on creation and collaboration: engaging new audiences for information visualization; process and pitfalls in writing information visualization research papers; and visual analytics: definition, process, and challenges.

Content

Inhalt: Part I. General Reflections The Value of Information Visualization / Jean-Daniel Fekete, Jarke J van Wijk, John T. Stasko, Chris North Evaluating Information Visualizations / Sheelagh Carpendale Theoretical Foundations of Information Visualization / Helen C. Purchase, Natalia Andrienko, T.J. Jankun-Kelly, Matthew Ward Teaching Information Visualization / Andreas Kerren, John T. Stasko, Jason Dykes Part II. Specific Aspects Creation and Collaboration: Engaging New Audiences for Information Visualization / Jeffrey Heer, Frank van Ham, Sheelagh Carpendale, Chris Weaver, Petra Isenberg Process and Pitfalls in Writing Information Visualization Research Papers / Tamara Munzner Visual Analytics: Definition, Process, and Challenges / Daniel Keim, Gennady Andrienko, Jean-Daniel Fekete, Carsten Görg, Jörn Kohlhammer, Guy Melancon

0.014332764 = product of:
  0.028665528 = sum of:
    0.028665528 = product of:
      0.057331055 = sum of:
        0.057331055 = weight(_text_:i in 232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057331055 = score(doc=232,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = queryNorm
            0.29170483 = fieldWeight in 232, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=232)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper examines some traditional information searching methods and their role in Hungarian OPACs. What challenges are there in the digital and online environment? How do users work with them and do they give users satisfactory results? What kinds of techniques are users employing? In this paper I examine the user interfaces of UDC, thesauri, subject headings etc. in the Hungarian library. The key question of the paper is whether a universal system or local solutions is the best approach for searching in the digital environment.

0.014332764 = product of:
  0.028665528 = sum of:
    0.028665528 = product of:
      0.057331055 = sum of:
        0.057331055 = weight(_text_:i in 2615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057331055 = score(doc=2615,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = queryNorm
            0.29170483 = fieldWeight in 2615, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2615)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.012354888 = product of:
  0.024709776 = sum of:
    0.024709776 = product of:
      0.049419552 = sum of:
        0.049419552 = weight(_text_:22 in 2500) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049419552 = score(doc=2500,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05210816 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2500, 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=2500)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

30. 1.2007 18:22:41