Search (71 results, page 1 of 4)

0.045960538 = product of:
  0.091921076 = sum of:
    0.08023113 = weight(_text_:evolution in 1267) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08023113 = score(doc=1267,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.4096403 = fieldWeight in 1267, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1267)
    0.011689945 = product of:
      0.035069834 = sum of:
        0.035069834 = weight(_text_:22 in 1267) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035069834 = score(doc=1267,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1267, 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=1267)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Date

5. 1.2008 19:22:48

0.039394744 = product of:
  0.07878949 = sum of:
    0.06876954 = weight(_text_:evolution in 479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06876954 = score(doc=479,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.35112026 = fieldWeight in 479, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=479)
    0.010019952 = product of:
      0.030059857 = sum of:
        0.030059857 = weight(_text_:22 in 479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030059857 = score(doc=479,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 479, 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=479)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Date

23. 1.2022 10:22:18

0.02292318 = product of:
  0.09169272 = sum of:
    0.09169272 = weight(_text_:evolution in 5595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09169272 = score(doc=5595,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.46816036 = fieldWeight in 5595, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5595)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The study of the web as a graph is not only fascinating in its own right, but also yields valuable insight into web algorithms for crawling, searching and community discovery, and the sociological phenomena which characterize its evolution. We report on experiments on local and global properties of the web graph using two Altavista crawls each with over 200M pages and 1.5 billion links. Our study indicates that the macroscopic structure of the web is considerably more intricate than suggested by earlier experiments on a smaller scale

0.02292318 = product of:
  0.09169272 = sum of:
    0.09169272 = weight(_text_:evolution in 4081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09169272 = score(doc=4081,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.46816036 = fieldWeight in 4081, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4081)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The improvement of access to scholarly literature caused by electronic journal publishing quickly led to the wish for seamless linking to referenced articles. This article looks at the evolution of linking technologies with a particular focus on OpenURL, now a NISO standard. The implications for stakeholders in the supply chain are explored, including publishers, intermediaries, libraries and readers. The benefits, expectations and business drivers are examined. The article also highlights some novel, existing and potential future, uses, including increased user-empowerment and possibilities beyond referencing traditional bibliographic material.

0.020261422 = product of:
  0.08104569 = sum of:
    0.08104569 = weight(_text_:evolution in 1187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08104569 = score(doc=1187,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.41379923 = fieldWeight in 1187, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1187)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In June of this year, I performed my final official duties as part of the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative management team. It is a happy irony to affix a seal on that service in this journal, as both D-Lib Magazine and the Dublin Core celebrate their tenth anniversaries. This essay is a personal reflection on some of the achievements and lessons of that decade. The OCLC-NCSA Metadata Workshop took place in March of 1995, and as we tried to understand what it meant and who would care, D-Lib magazine came into being and offered a natural venue for sharing our work. I recall a certain skepticism when Bill Arms said "We want D-Lib to be the first place people look for the latest developments in digital library research." These were the early days in the evolution of electronic publishing, and the goal was ambitious. By any measure, a decade of high-quality electronic publishing is an auspicious accomplishment, and D-Lib (and its host, CNRI) deserve congratulations for having achieved their goal. I am grateful to have been a contributor. That first DC workshop led to further workshops, a community, a variety of standards in several countries, an ISO standard, a conference series, and an international consortium. Looking back on this evolution is both satisfying and wistful. While I am pleased that the achievements are substantial, the unmet challenges also provide a rich till in which to cultivate insights on the development of digital infrastructure.

0.014326988 = product of:
  0.05730795 = sum of:
    0.05730795 = weight(_text_:evolution in 4108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05730795 = score(doc=4108,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.2926002 = fieldWeight in 4108, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4108)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Kernpunkt dieser Arbeit ist das Multistrategie-Lernsystem GELOG. Unser Ziel ist, die Vorteile der Methoden der genetischen Algorithmen und induktiven logischen Programmierung zu nutzen und in einem System zu kombinieren. Mit GELOG können logische Programme erzeugt werden, die eine Lösung für eine gegebene Aufgabe darstellen. Die erlernten Programme liegen anschließend als Quelltext in der logischen Programmiersprache PROLOG vor und sind in dieser Form direkt ausführbar. Das Grundsystem wird um drei Adaptionsverfahren erweitert, die die Anwendungswahrscheinlichkeiten der genetischen Operatoren während der Evolution entsprechend dem Betrag der Fitnessänderung beziehungsweise der Erfolgsrate der Operatoren anpassen. Außerdem besteht die Möglichkeit, eine Metaevolution zu starten, um gleichzeitig auf verschiedene lokale Optima hinzuarbeiten und sich auf das jeweils beste Optimum auszurichten. Daher werden hier mehrere Evolutionen parallel durchgeführt, die ihre Zwischenergebnisse über einen Metaalgorithmus untereinander austauschen. Später wird die Verarbeitung von Building-Blocks mit Hilfe des Lernens von Zusammenhängen verbessert, um GELOG zu ermöglichen, für genetische Algorithmen schwere Probleme leichter zu lösen. Außerdem wurde eine Strategie für die Integration problemspezifischen Wissens implementiert, um GELOG besser an das Problem anpassen zu können, mit dem es konfrontiert wird. Die Nutzbarkeit von GELOG wird anhand bekannter Beispiele aus der Theorie des maschinellen Lernens getestet und die erreichten Ergebnisse werden mit anderen, von bekannten Lernmethoden erzielten Lösungen verglichen.

0.01146159 = product of:
  0.04584636 = sum of:
    0.04584636 = weight(_text_:evolution in 6774) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04584636 = score(doc=6774,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.23408018 = fieldWeight in 6774, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=6774)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

This Digital Library Tool Kit was sponsored by Sun Microsystems, Inc. to address some of the leading questions that academic institutions, public libraries, government agencies, and museums face in trying to develop, manage, and distribute digital content. The evolution of Java programming, digital object standards, Internet access, electronic commerce, and digital media management models is causing educators, CIOs, and librarians to rethink many of their traditional goals and modes of operation. New audiences, continuous access to collections, and enhanced services to user communities are enabled. As one of the leading technology providers to education and library communities, Sun is pleased to present this comprehensive introduction to digital libraries

0.01146159 = product of:
  0.04584636 = sum of:
    0.04584636 = weight(_text_:evolution in 2) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04584636 = score(doc=2,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.23408018 = fieldWeight in 2, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In the present work we discuss opportunities, problems, tools and techniques encountered when interconnecting discipline-specific subject classifications, primarily organized as search devices in bibliographic databases, with general classifications originally devised for book shelving in public libraries. We first state the fundamental distinction between topical (or subject) classifications and object classifications. Then we trace the structural limitations that have constrained subject classifications since their library origins, and the devices that were used to overcome the gap with genuine knowledge representation. After recalling some general notions on structure, dynamics and interferences of subject classifications and of the objects they refer to, we sketch a synthetic overview on discipline-specific classifications in Mathematics, Computing and Physics, on one hand, and on general classifications on the other. In this setting we present The Scientific Classifications Page, which collects groups of Web pages produced by a pool of software tools for developing hypertextual presentations of single or paired subject classifications from sequential source files, as well as facilities for gathering information from KWIC lists of classification descriptions. Further we propose a concept-oriented methodology for interconnecting subject classifications, with the concrete support of a relational analysis of the whole Mathematics Subject Classification through its evolution since 1959. Finally, we recall a very basic method for interconnection provided by coreference in bibliographic records among index elements from different systems, and point out the advantages of establishing the conditions of a more widespread application of such a method. A part of these contents was presented under the title Mathematics Subject Classification and related Classifications in the Digital World at the Eighth International Conference Crimea 2001, "Libraries and Associations in the Transient World: New Technologies and New Forms of Cooperation", Sudak, Ukraine, June 9-17, 2001, in a special session on electronic libraries, electronic publishing and electronic information in science chaired by Bernd Wegner, Editor-in-Chief of Zentralblatt MATH.

0.01146159 = product of:
  0.04584636 = sum of:
    0.04584636 = weight(_text_:evolution in 533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04584636 = score(doc=533,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.23408018 = fieldWeight in 533, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=533)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Recently, a growing amount of systems that allow personal content annotation (tagging) are being created, ranging from personal sites for organising bookmarks (del.icio.us), photos (flickr.com) or videos (video.google.com, youtube.com) to systems for managing bibliographies for scientific research projects (citeulike.org, connotea.org). Simultaneously, a debate on the pro and cons of allowing users to add personal keywords to digital content has arisen. One recurrent point-of-discussion is whether tagging can solve the well-known vocabulary problem: In order to support successful retrieval in complex environments, it is necessary to index an object with a variety of aliases (cf. Furnas 1987). In this spirit, social tagging enhances the pool of rigid, traditional keywording by adding user-created retrieval vocabularies. Furthermore, tagging goes beyond simple personal content-based keywords by providing meta-keywords like funny or interesting that "identify qualities or characteristics" (Golder and Huberman 2006, Kipp and Campbell 2006, Kipp 2007, Feinberg 2006, Kroski 2005). Contrarily, tagging systems are claimed to lead to semantic difficulties that may hinder the precision and recall of tagging systems (e.g. the polysemy problem, cf. Marlow 2006, Lakoff 2005, Golder and Huberman 2006). Empirical research on social tagging is still rare and mostly from a computer linguistics or librarian point-of-view (Voß 2007) which focus either on the automatic statistical analyses of large data sets, or intellectually inspect single cases of tag usage: Some scientists studied the evolution of tag vocabularies and tag distribution in specific systems (Golder and Huberman 2006, Hammond 2005). Others concentrate on tagging behaviour and tagger characteristics in collaborative systems. (Hammond 2005, Kipp and Campbell 2007, Feinberg 2006, Sen 2006). However, little research has been conducted on the functional and linguistic characteristics of tags.1 An analysis of these patterns could show differences between user wording and conventional keywording. In order to provide a reasonable basis for comparison, a classification system for existing tags is needed.

0.01146159 = product of:
  0.04584636 = sum of:
    0.04584636 = weight(_text_:evolution in 1214) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04584636 = score(doc=1214,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.23408018 = fieldWeight in 1214, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1214)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Biological classification may seem like an esoteric problem better left to librarians than field researchers, but it is reaching unprecedented importance as discoveries swell the existing rolls of some 1.8 million known species, and prominent scientists such as E.O. Wilson throw their backing behind an ambitious project to make taxonomic data for all of life on Earth accessible online. Classification systems, meanwhile, have themselves become the subject of intensive study, thanks to the explosion in data-labeling and -sorting procedures allowed by digital media. Linnaeus, a devout Christian with no concept of evolution, today might barely recognize much of the system he spawned. But his approach was remarkably modern. He bridged religious and scientific conceptions of nature, ordering the world as was most convenient, rather than seeking to describe how it truly was. His goal was not to uncover the hidden connections between organisms, but simply to give labels to ensure biologists could agree on what they were talking about. "Linnaeus did a masterful job of creating a hierarchy by which we could communicate (about phylogeny)," said Craig Moritz, the director of the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology at the University of California at Berkeley. "That system has really stood the test of time."

0.007163494 = product of:
  0.028653976 = sum of:
    0.028653976 = weight(_text_:evolution in 1216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028653976 = score(doc=1216,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.1463001 = fieldWeight in 1216, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1216)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Metadata is not monolithic. Instead, it is helpful to think of metadata as multiple views that can be projected from a single information object. Such views can form the basis of customized information services, such as search engines. Multiple views -- different types of metadata associated with a Web resource -- can facilitate a "drill-down" search paradigm, whereby people start their searches at a high level and later narrow their focus using domain-specific search categories. In Figure 1, for example, Mona Lisa may be viewed from the perspective of non-specialized searchers, with categories that are valid across domains (who painted it and when?); in the context of a museum (when and how was it acquired?); in the geo-spatial context of a walking tour using mobile devices (where is it in the gallery?); and in a legal framework (who owns the rights to its reproduction?). Multiple descriptive views imply a modular approach to metadata. Modularity is the basis of metadata architectures such as the Resource Description Framework (RDF), which permit different communities of expertise to associate and maintain multiple metadata packages for Web resources. As noted elsewhere, static association of multiple metadata packages with resources is but one way of achieving modularity. Another method is to computationally derive order-making views customized to the current needs of a client. This paper examines the evolution and scope of the Dublin Core from this perspective of metadata modularization. Dublin Core began in 1995 with a specific goal and scope -- as an easy-to-create and maintain descriptive format to facilitate cross-domain resource discovery on the Web. Over the years, this goal of "simple metadata for coarse-granularity discovery" came to mix with another goal -- that of community and domain-specific resource description and its attendant complexity. A notion of "qualified Dublin Core" evolved whereby the model for simple resource discovery -- a set of simple metadata elements in a flat, document-centric model -- would form the basis of more complex descriptions by treating the values of its elements as entities with properties ("component elements") in their own right.

0.006534878 = product of:
  0.026139513 = sum of:
    0.026139513 = product of:
      0.07841854 = sum of:
        0.07841854 = weight(_text_:22 in 1936) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07841854 = score(doc=1936,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.6055961 = fieldWeight in 1936, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1936)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Dewey Decimal Classification and Relative Index, Edition 22 (DDC 22) will be issued simultaneously in print and web versions in July 2003. The new edition is the first full print update to the Dewey Decimal Classification system in seven years-it includes several significant updates and many new numbers and topics. DDC 22 also features some fundamental structural changes that have been introduced with the goals of promoting classifier efficiency and improving the DDC for use in a variety of applications in the web environment. Most importantly, the content of the new edition has been shaped by the needs and recommendations of Dewey users around the world. The worldwide user community has an important role in shaping the future of the DDC.

Object

DDC-22

0.005904314 = product of:
  0.023617256 = sum of:
    0.023617256 = product of:
      0.070851766 = sum of:
        0.070851766 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.070851766 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 7.2006 15:22:28

0.0058449726 = product of:
  0.02337989 = sum of:
    0.02337989 = product of:
      0.07013967 = sum of:
        0.07013967 = weight(_text_:22 in 4643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07013967 = score(doc=4643,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4643, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4643)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 9.2007 15:41:14

0.005009976 = product of:
  0.020039905 = sum of:
    0.020039905 = product of:
      0.060119715 = sum of:
        0.060119715 = weight(_text_:22 in 3184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060119715 = score(doc=3184,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3184, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3184)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Vortrag anläasslich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".

0.005009976 = product of:
  0.020039905 = sum of:
    0.020039905 = product of:
      0.060119715 = sum of:
        0.060119715 = weight(_text_:22 in 4888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060119715 = score(doc=4888,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4888, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4888)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

1. 3.2013 14:56:22

0.005009976 = product of:
  0.020039905 = sum of:
    0.020039905 = product of:
      0.060119715 = sum of:
        0.060119715 = weight(_text_:22 in 6888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060119715 = score(doc=6888,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6888, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6888)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

26.12.2011 12:30:22

0.005009976 = product of:
  0.020039905 = sum of:
    0.020039905 = product of:
      0.060119715 = sum of:
        0.060119715 = weight(_text_:22 in 3895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060119715 = score(doc=3895,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3895, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3895)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

24. 8.2005 19:20:22

0.005009976 = product of:
  0.020039905 = sum of:
    0.020039905 = product of:
      0.060119715 = sum of:
        0.060119715 = weight(_text_:22 in 6048) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060119715 = score(doc=6048,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6048, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6048)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 9.2007 15:41:14

0.005009976 = product of:
  0.020039905 = sum of:
    0.020039905 = product of:
      0.060119715 = sum of:
        0.060119715 = weight(_text_:22 in 100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060119715 = score(doc=100,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 100, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=100)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 9.2007 15:41:14