Search (296 results, page 2 of 15)

  • × type_ss:"el"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Voß, J.: Classification of knowledge organization systems with Wikidata (2016) 0.03 
    0.03148804 = product of:
  0.12595215 = sum of:
    0.12595215 = sum of:
      0.08496841 = weight(_text_:organization in 3082) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08496841 = score(doc=3082,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050415643 = queryNorm
          0.47270393 = fieldWeight in 3082, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3082)
      0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 3082) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04098374 = score(doc=3082,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050415643 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3082, 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=3082)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    This paper presents a crowd-sourced classification of knowledge organization systems based on open knowledge base Wikidata. The focus is less on the current result in its rather preliminary form but on the environment and process of categorization in Wikidata and the extraction of KOS from the collaborative database. Benefits and disadvantages are summarized and discussed for application to knowledge organization of other subject areas with Wikidata.
    Pages
    S.15-22
    Source
    Proceedings of the 15th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems Workshop (NKOS 2016) co-located with the 20th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries 2016 (TPDL 2016), Hannover, Germany, September 9, 2016. Edi. by Philipp Mayr et al. [http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1676/=urn:nbn:de:0074-1676-5]
  2. Treude, L.: ¬Das Problem der Konzeptdefinition in der Wissensorganisation : über einen missglückten Versuch der Klärung (2013) 0.03 
    0.028642137 = product of:
  0.11456855 = sum of:
    0.11456855 = sum of:
      0.07358481 = weight(_text_:organization in 3060) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07358481 = score(doc=3060,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050415643 = queryNorm
          0.40937364 = fieldWeight in 3060, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3060)
      0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 3060) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04098374 = score(doc=3060,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050415643 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3060, 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=3060)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Alon Friedman und Richard P. Smiraglia kündigen in ihrem aktuellen Artikel "Nodes and arcs: concept map, semiotics, and knowledge organization" an, eine "empirical demonstration of how the domain [of knowledge organisation] itself understands the meaning of a concept" durchzuführen. Die Klärung des Konzeptbegriffs ist ein begrüßenswertes Vorhaben, das die Autoren in einer empirischen Untersuchung von concept maps (also Konzeptdiagrammen) aus dem Bereich der Wissensorganisation nachvollziehen wollen. Beschränkte sich Friedman 2011 in seinem Artikel "Concept theory and semiotics in knowledge organization" [Fn 01] noch ausschließlich auf Sprache als Medium im Zeichenprozess, bezieht er sich nun auf Visualisierungen als Repräsentationsform und scheint somit seinen Ansatz um den Aspekt der Bildlichkeit zu erweitern. Zumindest erwartet man dies nach der Lektüre der Beschreibung des aktuellen Vorhabens von Friedman und Smiraglia, das - wie die Autoren verkünden - auf einer semiotischen Grundlage durchgeführt worden sei.
    Content
    Vgl.: http://www.libreas.eu/09treude.htm. Bezug zu: Alon Friedman, Richard P. Smiraglia, (2013): Nodes and arcs: concept map, semiotics, and knowledge organization. In: Journal of Documentation, Vol. 69/1, S.27-48.
    Source
    LIBREAS: Library ideas. no.22, 2013, S.xx-xx
  3. Takhirov, N.; Aalberg, T.; Duchateau, F.; Zumer, M.: FRBR-ML: a FRBR-based framework for semantic interoperability (2012) 0.03 
    0.028076127 = product of:
  0.056152254 = sum of:
    0.011892734 = weight(_text_:information in 134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011892734 = score(doc=134,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.1343758 = fieldWeight in 134, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=134)
    0.044259522 = weight(_text_:standards in 134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044259522 = score(doc=134,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.19697142 = fieldWeight in 134, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=134)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Metadata related to cultural items such as literature, music and movies is a valuable resource that is currently exploited in many applications and services based on semantic web technologies. A vast amount of such information has been created by memory institutions in the last decades using different standard or ad hoc schemas, and a main challenge is to make this legacy data accessible as reusable semantic data. On one hand, this is a syntactic problem that can be solved by transforming to formats that are compatible with the tools and services used for semantic aware services. On the other hand, this is a semantic problem. Simply transforming from one format to another does not automatically enable semantic interoperability and legacy data often needs to be reinterpreted as well as transformed. The conceptual model in the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records, initially developed as a conceptual framework for library standards and systems, is a major step towards a shared semantic model of the products of artistic and intellectual endeavor of mankind. The model is generally accepted as sufficiently generic to serve as a conceptual framework for a broad range of cultural heritage metadata. Unfortunately, the existing large body of legacy data makes a transition to this model difficult. For instance, most bibliographic data is still only available in various MARC-based formats which is hard to render into reusable and meaningful semantic data. Making legacy bibliographic data accessible as semantic data is a complex problem that includes interpreting and transforming the information. In this article, we present our work on transforming and enhancing legacy bibliographic information into a representation where the structure and semantics of the FRBR model is explicit.
  4. Eckert, K.: SKOS: eine Sprache für die Übertragung von Thesauri ins Semantic Web (2011) 0.03 
    0.027822647 = product of:
  0.11129059 = sum of:
    0.11129059 = sum of:
      0.056645606 = weight(_text_:organization in 4331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.056645606 = score(doc=4331,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050415643 = queryNorm
          0.31513596 = fieldWeight in 4331, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4331)
      0.054644987 = weight(_text_:22 in 4331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.054644987 = score(doc=4331,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050415643 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4331, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4331)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Das Semantic Web - bzw. Linked Data - hat das Potenzial, die Verfügbarkeit von Daten und Wissen, sowie den Zugriff darauf zu revolutionieren. Einen großen Beitrag dazu können Wissensorganisationssysteme wie Thesauri leisten, die die Daten inhaltlich erschließen und strukturieren. Leider sind immer noch viele dieser Systeme lediglich in Buchform oder in speziellen Anwendungen verfügbar. Wie also lassen sie sich für das Semantic Web nutzen? Das Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) bietet eine Möglichkeit, die Wissensorganisationssysteme in eine Form zu "übersetzen", die im Web zitiert und mit anderen Resourcen verknüpft werden kann.
    Date
    15. 3.2011 19:21:22
  5. Guerrini, M.: Cataloguing based on bibliographic axiology (2010) 0.03 
    0.027315754 = product of:
  0.05463151 = sum of:
    0.017839102 = weight(_text_:information in 2624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017839102 = score(doc=2624,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 2624, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2624)
    0.036792405 = product of:
      0.07358481 = sum of:
        0.07358481 = weight(_text_:organization in 2624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07358481 = score(doc=2624,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.40937364 = fieldWeight in 2624, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2624)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The article presents the work of Elaine Svenonius The Intellectual Foundation of Information Organization, translated in Italian and published by Le Lettere of Florence, within the series Pinakes, with the title Il fondamento intellettuale dell'organizzazione dell'informazione. The Intellectual Foundation of Information Organization defines the theoretical aspects of library science, its philosophical basics and principles, the purposes that must be kept in mind, abstracting from the technology used in a library. The book deals with information organization and bibliographic universe, in particular using the bibliographic entities defined in FRBR, at first. Then, it analyzes all the specific languages by which works and subjects are treated. This work, already acknowledged as a classic, organizes, synthesizes and make easily understood the whole complex of knowledge, practices and procedures developed in the last 150 years.
  6. Thornton, K: Powerful structure : inspecting infrastructures of information organization in Wikimedia Foundation projects (2016) 0.03 
    0.026535526 = product of:
  0.05307105 = sum of:
    0.02303018 = weight(_text_:information in 3288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02303018 = score(doc=3288,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 3288, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3288)
    0.030040871 = product of:
      0.060081743 = sum of:
        0.060081743 = weight(_text_:organization in 3288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060081743 = score(doc=3288,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.33425218 = fieldWeight in 3288, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3288)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    This dissertation investigates the social and technological factors of collaboratively organizing information in commons-based peer production systems. To do so, it analyzes the diverse strategies that members of Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) project communities use to organize information. Key findings from this dissertation show that conceptual structures of information organization are encoded into the infrastructure of WMF projects. The fact that WMF projects are commons-based peer production systems means that we can inspect the code that enables these systems, but a specific type of technical literacy is required to do so. I use three methods in this dissertation. I conduct a qualitative content analysis of the discussions surrounding the design, implementation and evaluation of the category system; a quantitative analysis using descriptive statistics of patterns of editing among editors who contributed to the code of templates for information boxes; and a close reading of the infrastructure used to create the category system, the infobox templates, and the knowledge base of structured data.
  7. Smiraglia, R.P.: Facets as discourse in knowledge organization : a case study in LISTA (2017) 0.03 
    0.026284594 = product of:
  0.05256919 = sum of:
    0.017165681 = weight(_text_:information in 3855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017165681 = score(doc=3855,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 3855, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3855)
    0.035403505 = product of:
      0.07080701 = sum of:
        0.07080701 = weight(_text_:organization in 3855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07080701 = score(doc=3855,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.39391994 = fieldWeight in 3855, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3855)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Knowledge Organization Systems (KOSs) use arrays of related concepts to capture the ontological content of a domain; hierarchical structures are typical of such systems. Some KOSs also employ sets of crossconceptual descriptors that express different dimensions within a domain-facets. The recent increase in the prominence of facets and faceted systems has had major impact on the intension of the KO domain and this is visible in the domain's literature. An interesting question is how the discourse surrounding facets in KO and in related domains such as information science might be described. The present paper reports one case study in an ongoing research project to investigate the discourse of facets in KO. In this particular case, the formal current research literature represented by inclusion in the "Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts, Full Text" (LISTA) database is analyzed to discover aspects of the research front and its ongoing discourse concerning facets. A datasets of 1682 citations was analyzed. Results show thinking concerning information retrieval and the semantic web resides alongside implementation of faceted searching and the growth of faceted thesauri. Faceted classification remains important to the discourse, but the use of facet analysis is linked directly to applied aspects of information science.
    Content
    Beitrag bei: NASKO 2017: Visualizing Knowledge Organization: Bringing Focus to Abstract Realities. The sixth North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization (NASKO 2017), June 15-16, 2017, in Champaign, IL, USA.
  8. RDA Toolkit (4) : Dezember 2017 (2017) 0.03 
    0.025562897 = product of:
  0.051125795 = sum of:
    0.006866273 = weight(_text_:information in 4283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006866273 = score(doc=4283,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 4283, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4283)
    0.044259522 = weight(_text_:standards in 4283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044259522 = score(doc=4283,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.19697142 = fieldWeight in 4283, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4283)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Am 12. Dezember 2017 ist das neue Release des RDA Toolkits erschienen. Dabei gab es, aufgrund des 3R-Projekts (RDA Toolkit Restruction and Redesign Project), keine inhaltlichen Änderungen am RDA-Text. Es wurden ausschließlich die Übersetzungen in finnischer und französischer Sprache, ebenso wie die dazugehörigen Policy statements, aktualisiert. Für den deutschsprachigen Raum wurden in der Übersetzung zwei Beziehungskennzeichnungen geändert: Im Anhang I.2.2 wurde die Änderung von "Sponsor" zu "Träger" wieder rückgängig gemacht. In Anhang K.2.3 wurde "Sponsor" zu "Person als Sponsor" geändert. Außerdem wurde die Übersetzung der Anwendungsrichtlinien (D-A-CH AWR) ins Französische aktualisiert. Dies ist das vorletzte Release vor dem Rollout des neuen Toolkits. Das letzte Release im Januar/Februar 2018 wird die norwegische Übersetzung enthalten. Im Juni 2018 wird das RDA Toolkit ein Relaunch erfahren und mit einer neuen Oberfläche erscheinen. Dieser beinhaltet ein Redesign der Toolkit-Oberfläche und die inhaltliche Anpassung des Standards RDA an das Library Reference Model (IFLA LRM) sowie die künftige stärkere Ausrichtung auf die aktuellen technischen Möglichkeiten. Zunächst wird im Juni 2018 die englische Originalausgabe der RDA in der neuen Form erscheinen. Alle Übersetzungen werden in einer Übergangszeit angepasst. Hierfür wird die alte Version des RDA Toolkit für ein weiteres Jahr zur Verfügung gestellt. Der Stand Dezember 2017 der deutschen Ausgabe und die D-A-CH-Anwendungsrichtlinien bleiben bis zur Anpassung eingefroren. Nähere Information zum Rollout finden Sie unter dem folgenden Link<http://www.rdatoolkit.org/3Rproject/SR3>. [Inetbib vom 13.12.2017]
  9. Allo, P.; Baumgaertner, B.; D'Alfonso, S.; Fresco, N.; Gobbo, F.; Grubaugh, C.; Iliadis, A.; Illari, P.; Kerr, E.; Primiero, G.; Russo, F.; Schulz, C.; Taddeo, M.; Turilli, M.; Vakarelov, O.; Zenil, H.: ¬The philosophy of information : an introduction (2013) 0.02 
    0.02473972 = product of:
  0.04947944 = sum of:
    0.016284797 = weight(_text_:information in 3380) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016284797 = score(doc=3380,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.18400162 = fieldWeight in 3380, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3380)
    0.033194643 = weight(_text_:standards in 3380) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033194643 = score(doc=3380,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.14772856 = fieldWeight in 3380, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3380)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    In April 2010, Bill Gates gave a talk at MIT in which he asked: 'are the brightest minds working on the most important problems?' Gates meant improving the lives of the poorest; improving education, health, and nutrition. We could easily add improving peaceful interactions, human rights, environmental conditions, living standards and so on. Philosophy of Information (PI) proponents think that Gates has a point - but this doesn't mean we should all give up philosophy. Philosophy can be part of this project, because philosophy understood as conceptual design forges and refines the new ideas, theories, and perspectives that we need to understand and address these important problems that press us so urgently. Of course, this naturally invites us to wonder which ideas, theories, and perspectives philosophers should be designing now. In our global information society, many crucial challenges are linked to information and communication technologies: the constant search for novel solutions and improvements demands, in turn, changing conceptual resources to understand and cope with them. Rapid technological development now pervades communication, education, work, entertainment, industrial production and business, healthcare, social relations and armed conflicts. There is a rich mine of philosophical work to do on the new concepts created right here, right now.
    Philosophy "done informationally" has been around a long time, but PI as a discipline is quite new. PI takes age-old philosophical debates and engages them with up-to-the minute conceptual issues generated by our ever-changing, information-laden world. This alters the philosophical debates, and makes them interesting to many more people - including many philosophically-minded people who aren't subscribing philosophers. We, the authors, are young researchers who think of our work as part of PI, taking this engaged approach. We're excited by it and want to teach it. Students are excited by it and want to study it. Writing a traditional textbook takes a while, and PI is moving quickly. A traditional textbook doesn't seem like the right approach for the philosophy of the information age. So we got together to take a new approach, team-writing this electronic text to make it available more rapidly and openly.
    Content
    Vgl. auch unter: http://www.socphilinfo.org/teaching/book-pi-intro: "This book serves as the main reference for an undergraduate course on Philosophy of Information. The book is written to be accessible to the typical undergraduate student of Philosophy and does not require propaedeutic courses in Logic, Epistemology or Ethics. Each chapter includes a rich collection of references for the student interested in furthering her understanding of the topics reviewed in the book. The book covers all the main topics of the Philosophy of Information and it should be considered an overview and not a comprehensive, in-depth analysis of a philosophical area. As a consequence, 'The Philosophy of Information: a Simple Introduction' does not contain research material as it is not aimed at graduate students or researchers. The book is available for free in multiple formats and it is updated every twelve months by the team of the p Research Network: Patrick Allo, Bert Baumgaertner, Anthony Beavers, Simon D'Alfonso, Penny Driscoll, Luciano Floridi, Nir Fresco, Carson Grubaugh, Phyllis Illari, Eric Kerr, Giuseppe Primiero, Federica Russo, Christoph Schulz, Mariarosaria Taddeo, Matteo Turilli, Orlin Vakarelov. (*) The version for 2013 is now available as a pdf. The content of this version will soon be integrated in the redesign of the teaching-section. The beta-version from last year will provisionally remain accessible through the Table of Content on this page."
    Theme
    Information
  10. Knoll, A.: Kompetenzprofil von Information Professionals in Unternehmen (2016) 0.02 
    0.023870774 = product of:
  0.047741547 = sum of:
    0.027249675 = weight(_text_:information in 3069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027249675 = score(doc=3069,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.3078936 = fieldWeight in 3069, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3069)
    0.02049187 = product of:
      0.04098374 = sum of:
        0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 3069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04098374 = score(doc=3069,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3069, 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=3069)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Zielsetzung - Information Professionals sind in Unternehmen für den professionellen und strategischen Umgang mit Informationen verantwortlich. Da es keine allgemeingültige Definition für diese Berufsgruppe gibt, wird in der vorliegenden Arbeit eine Begriffsbestimmung unternommen. Methode - Mit Hilfe dreier Methoden - einer Auswertung von relevanter Fachliteratur, der Untersuchung von einschlägigen Stellenausschreibungen und dem Führen von Experteninterviews - wird ein Kompetenzprofil für Information Professionals erstellt. Ergebnisse - Die 16 wichtigsten Kompetenzen in den Bereichen Fach-, Methoden-, Sozial- und persönliche Kompetenzen sind IT-Kenntnisse, Sprachkenntnisse, Quellenkenntnisse, Recherchekenntnisse, Projektmanagement, Darstellungskompetenz, Problemlösungskompetenz, selbständiges Arbeiten, Kommunikationsfähigkeit, Teamfähigkeit, Servicementalität, Interkulturelle Kompetenz, Analytische Fähigkeiten, Eigenmarketing, Veränderungsbereitschaft und Stressresistenz. Schlussfolgerung - Die Kompetenzen geben eine Orientierung über vorhandene Fähigkeiten dieser Berufsgruppe für Personalfachleute, Vorgesetzte und Information Professionals selbst. Ein Kompetenzrad kann als Visualisierung dienen.
    Content
    Vgl.: https://yis.univie.ac.at/index.php/yis/article/view/1324/1234. Diesem Beitrag liegt folgende Abschlussarbeit zugrunde: Lamparter, Anna: Kompetenzprofil für Information Professionals in Unternehmen. Masterarbeit (M.A.), Hochschule Hannover, 2015. Volltext: https://serwiss.bib.hs-hannover.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/528 Vgl. auch: (geb. Lamparter): Kompetenzprofil von Information Professionals in Unternehmen. In:
    Date
    28. 7.2016 16:22:54
    Source
    Young information scientists. 1(2016), S.1-11
  11. Ruhl, M.: Do we need metadata? : an on-line survey in German archives (2012) 0.02 
    0.023472156 = product of:
  0.093888626 = sum of:
    0.093888626 = weight(_text_:standards in 471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.093888626 = score(doc=471,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.41783947 = fieldWeight in 471, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=471)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    The paper summarizes the results of an on-line survey which was executed 2010 in german archives of all branches. The survey focused on metadata and used metadata standards for the annotation of audiovisual media like pictures, audio and video files (analog and digital). The findings motivate the question whether archives are able to collaborate in projects like europeana if they do not use accepted standards for their orientation. Archives need more resources and archival staff need more training to execute more complex tasks in an digital and semantic surrounding.
  12. British Library / FAST/Dewey Review Group: Consultation on subject indexing and classification standards applied by the British Library (2015) 0.02 
    0.023472156 = product of:
  0.093888626 = sum of:
    0.093888626 = weight(_text_:standards in 2810) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.093888626 = score(doc=2810,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.41783947 = fieldWeight in 2810, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2810)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Content
    The Library is consulting with stakeholders concerning the potential impact of these proposals. No firm decisions have yet been taken regarding either of these standards. FAST 1. The British Library proposes to adopt FAST selectively to extend the scope of subject indexing of current and legacy content. 2. The British Library proposes to implement FAST as a replacement for LCSH in all current cataloguing, subject to mitigation of the risks identified above, in particular the question of sustainability. DDC 3. The British Library proposes to implement Abridged DDC selectively to extend the scope of subject indexing of current and legacy content.
  13. Gödert, W.: Hashtag Erschließung (2015) 0.02 
    0.022129761 = product of:
  0.088519044 = sum of:
    0.088519044 = weight(_text_:standards in 1702) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.088519044 = score(doc=1702,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.39394283 = fieldWeight in 1702, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1702)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Der Beitrag nimmt aktuelle Entwicklungen im Teilbereich Formalerschließung in Deutschland zum Anlass, eine kritische Reflexion über den Zustand und die Weiterentwicklung des Themenfeldes Erschließung insgesamt anzustellen. Es werden einige historische Beispiele gegeben, die die Ausstrahlung bibliothekarischer Ideen und Problemlösungen auf das allgemeine Leben zeigen. Diese Ausstrahlung wird dem Eindruck entgegen gesetzt, dass sich gegenwärtig der bibliothekarische Berufsstand insbesondere im Bereich informationstechnischer Anwendungen die zu beachtenden fachlichen Standards lieber von anderen vorgeben lässt, als sich selbst um deren Weiterentwicklung zu bemühen.
  14. Zhao, Y.; Ma, F.; Xia, X.: Evaluating the coverage of entities in knowledge graphs behind general web search engines : Poster (2017) 0.02 
    0.021993173 = product of:
  0.043986347 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 3854) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=3854,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 3854, 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=3854)
    0.035403505 = product of:
      0.07080701 = sum of:
        0.07080701 = weight(_text_:organization in 3854) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07080701 = score(doc=3854,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.39391994 = fieldWeight in 3854, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3854)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Web search engines, such as Google and Bing, are constantly employing results from knowledge organization and various visualization features to improve their search services. Knowledge graph, a large repository of structured knowledge represented by formal languages such as RDF (Resource Description Framework), is used to support entity search feature of Google and Bing (Demartini, 2016). When a user searchs for an entity, such as a person, an organization, or a place in Google or Bing, it is likely that a knowledge cardwill be presented on the right side bar of the search engine result pages (SERPs). For example, when a user searches the entity Benedict Cumberbatch on Google, the knowledge card will show the basic structured information about this person, including his date of birth, height, spouse, parents, and his movies, etc. The knowledge card, which is used to present the result of entity search, is generated from knowledge graphs. Therefore, the quality of knowledge graphs is essential to the performance of entity search. However, studies on the quality of knowledge graphs from the angle of entity coverage are scant in the literature. This study aims to investigate the coverage of entities of knowledge graphs behind Google and Bing.
    Content
    Beitrag bei: NASKO 2017: Visualizing Knowledge Organization: Bringing Focus to Abstract Realities. The sixth North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization (NASKO 2017), June 15-16, 2017, in Champaign, IL, USA.
  15. Ledl, A.: Demonstration of the BAsel Register of Thesauri, Ontologies & Classifications (BARTOC) (2015) 0.02 
    0.020170141 = product of:
  0.040340282 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 2038) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=2038,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2038, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2038)
    0.030040871 = product of:
      0.060081743 = sum of:
        0.060081743 = weight(_text_:organization in 2038) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060081743 = score(doc=2038,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.33425218 = fieldWeight in 2038, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2038)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The BAsel Register of Thesauri, Ontologies & Classifications (BARTOC, http://bartoc.org) is a bibliographic database aiming to record metadata of as many Knowledge Organization Systems as possible. It has a facetted, responsive web design search interface in 20 EU languages. With more than 1'300 interdisciplinary items in 77 languages, BARTOC is the largest database of its kind, multilingual both by content and features, and it is still growing. This being said, the demonstration of BARTOC would be suitable for topic nr. 10 [Multilingual and Interdisciplinary KOS applications and tools]. BARTOC has been developed by the University Library of Basel, Switzerland. It is rooted in the tradition of library and information science of collecting bibliographic records of controlled and structured vocabularies, yet in a more contemporary manner. BARTOC is based on the open source content management system Drupal 7.
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich: 14th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) Workshop, TPDL 2015 Conference in Poznan, Poland, Friday 18th September 2015. Vgl. auch: http://bartoc.org/.
  16. Freyberg, L.: ¬Die Lesbarkeit der Welt : Rezension zu 'The Concept of Information in Library and Information Science. A Field in Search of Its Boundaries: 8 Short Comments Concerning Information'. In: Cybernetics and Human Knowing. Vol. 22 (2015), 1, 57-80. Kurzartikel von Luciano Floridi, Søren Brier, Torkild Thellefsen, Martin Thellefsen, Bent Sørensen, Birger Hjørland, Brenda Dervin, Ken Herold, Per Hasle und Michael Buckland (2016) 0.02 
    0.019676244 = product of:
  0.039352488 = sum of:
    0.025691241 = weight(_text_:information in 3335) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025691241 = score(doc=3335,freq=28.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.29028487 = fieldWeight in 3335, product of:
          5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
            28.0 = termFreq=28.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3335)
    0.013661247 = product of:
      0.027322493 = sum of:
        0.027322493 = weight(_text_:22 in 3335) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027322493 = score(doc=3335,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3335, 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=3335)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Es ist wieder an der Zeit den Begriff "Information" zu aktualisieren beziehungsweise einen Bericht zum Status Quo zu liefern. Information ist der zentrale Gegenstand der Informationswissenschaft und stellt einen der wichtigsten Forschungsgegenstände der Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft dar. Erstaunlicherweise findet jedoch ein stetiger Diskurs, der mit der kritischen Auseinandersetzung und der damit verbundenen Aktualisierung von Konzepten in den Geisteswissensschaften vergleichbar ist, zumindest im deutschsprachigen Raum1 nicht konstant statt. Im Sinne einer theoretischen Grundlagenforschung und zur Erarbeitung einer gemeinsamen begrifflichen Matrix wäre dies aber sicherlich wünschenswert. Bereits im letzten Jahr erschienen in dem von Søren Brier (Siehe "The foundation of LIS in information science and semiotics"2 sowie "Semiotics in Information Science. An Interview with Søren Brier on the application of semiotic theories and the epistemological problem of a transdisciplinary Information Science"3) herausgegebenen Journal "Cybernetics and Human Knowing" acht lesenswerte Stellungnahmen von namhaften Philosophen beziehungsweise Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaftlern zum Begriff der Information. Unglücklicherweise ist das Journal "Cybernetics & Human Knowing" in Deutschland schwer zugänglich, da es sich nicht um ein Open-Access-Journal handelt und lediglich von acht deutschen Bibliotheken abonniert wird.4 Aufgrund der schlechten Verfügbarkeit scheint es sinnvoll hier eine ausführliche Besprechung dieser acht Kurzartikel anzubieten.
    Das Journal, das sich laut Zusatz zum Hauptsachtitel thematisch mit "second order cybernetics, autopoiesis and cyber-semiotics" beschäftigt, existiert seit 1992/93 als Druckausgabe. Seit 1998 (Jahrgang 5, Heft 1) wird es parallel kostenpflichtig elektronisch im Paket über den Verlag Imprint Academic in Exeter angeboten. Das Konzept Information wird dort aufgrund der Ausrichtung, die man als theoretischen Beitrag zu den Digital Humanities (avant la lettre) ansehen könnte, regelmäßig behandelt. Insbesondere die phänomenologisch und mathematisch fundierte Semiotik von Charles Sanders Peirce taucht in diesem Zusammenhang immer wieder auf. Dabei spielt stets die Verbindung zur Praxis, vor allem im Bereich Library- and Information Science (LIS), eine große Rolle, die man auch bei Brier selbst, der in seinem Hauptwerk "Cybersemiotics" die Peirceschen Zeichenkategorien unter anderem auf die bibliothekarische Tätigkeit des Indexierens anwendet,5 beobachten kann. Die Ausgabe 1/ 2015 der Zeitschrift fragt nun "What underlines Information?" und beinhaltet unter anderem Artikel zum Entwurf einer Philosophie der Information des Chinesen Wu Kun sowie zu Peirce und Spencer Brown. Die acht Kurzartikel zum Informationsbegriff in der Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft wurden von den Thellefsen-Brüdern (Torkild und Martin) sowie Bent Sørensen, die auch selbst gemeinsam einen der Kommentare verfasst haben.
    Theme
    Information
  17. Bastos Vieira, S.; DeBrito, M.; Mustafa El Hadi, W.; Zumer, M.: Developing imaged KOS with the FRSAD Model : a conceptual methodology (2016) 0.02 
    0.018423056 = product of:
  0.036846112 = sum of:
    0.016818866 = weight(_text_:information in 3109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016818866 = score(doc=3109,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.19003606 = fieldWeight in 3109, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3109)
    0.020027246 = product of:
      0.040054493 = sum of:
        0.040054493 = weight(_text_:organization in 3109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040054493 = score(doc=3109,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.22283478 = fieldWeight in 3109, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3109)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    This proposal presents the methodology of indexing with images suggested by De Brito and Caribé (2015). The imagetic model is used as a compatible mechanism with FRSAD for a global information share and use of subject data, both within the library sector and beyond. The conceptual model of imagetic indexing shows how images are related to topics and 'key-images' are interpreted as nomens to implement the FRSAD model. Indexing with images consists of using images instead of key-words or descriptors, to represent and organize information. Implementing the imaged navigation in OPACs denotes multiple advantages derived from this rethinking the OPAC anew, since we are looking forward to sharing concepts within the subject authority data. Images, carrying linguistic objects, permeate inter-social and cultural concepts. In practice it includes translated metadata, symmetrical multilingual thesaurus, or any traditional indexing tools. iOPAC embodies efforts focused on conceptual levels as expected from librarians. Imaged interfaces are more intuitive since users do not need specific training for information retrieval, offering easier comprehension of indexing codes, larger conceptual portability of descriptors (as images), and a better interoperability between discourse codes and indexing competences affecting positively social and cultural interoperability. The imagetic methodology deploys R&D fields for more suitable interfaces taking into consideration users with specific needs such as deafness and illiteracy. This methodology arouse questions about the paradigms of the primacy of orality in information systems and pave the way to a legitimacy of multiple perspectives in document indexing by suggesting a more universal communication system based on images. Interdisciplinarity in neurosciences, linguistics and information sciences would be desirable competencies for further investigations about he nature of cognitive processes in information organization and classification while developing assistive KOS for individuals with communication problems, such autism and deafness.
    Source
    Proceedings of the 15th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems Workshop (NKOS 2016) co-located with the 20th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries 2016 (TPDL 2016), Hannover, Germany, September 9, 2016. Edi. by Philipp Mayr et al. [http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1676/=urn:nbn:de:0074-1676-5]
  18. Rocha, R.; Cobo, A.: Automatización de procesos de categorización jerárquica documental en las organizaciones (2010) 0.02 
    0.018399216 = product of:
  0.036798432 = sum of:
    0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 4838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012015978 = score(doc=4838,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 4838, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4838)
    0.024782453 = product of:
      0.049564905 = sum of:
        0.049564905 = weight(_text_:organization in 4838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049564905 = score(doc=4838,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.27574396 = fieldWeight in 4838, 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=4838)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    In a global context characterized by the massive use of information technology and communications any organization needs to optimize the search and document management processes. In this paper an analysis of modern document management techniques and computational strategies with specialized language resources is presented and a model that can be used in automatic text categorization in the context of organizations is proposed.As a particular case we describe a classification system according to the taxonomy JEL (Journal of Economic Literature) and that makes use of multilingual glossaries for hierarchical classifications of scientific and technical documents related to the business functional areas.
  19. Shen, M.; Liu, D.-R.; Huang, Y.-S.: Extracting semantic relations to enrich domain ontologies (2012) 0.02 
    0.018399216 = product of:
  0.036798432 = sum of:
    0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 267) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012015978 = score(doc=267,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 267, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=267)
    0.024782453 = product of:
      0.049564905 = sum of:
        0.049564905 = weight(_text_:organization in 267) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049564905 = score(doc=267,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.27574396 = fieldWeight in 267, 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=267)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Domain ontologies facilitate the organization, sharing and reuse of domain knowledge, and enable various vertical domain applications to operate successfully. Most methods for automatically constructing ontologies focus on taxonomic relations, such as is-kind-of and is- part-of relations. However, much of the domain-specific semantics is ignored. This work proposes a semi-unsupervised approach for extracting semantic relations from domain-specific text documents. The approach effectively utilizes text mining and existing taxonomic relations in domain ontologies to discover candidate keywords that can represent semantic relations. A preliminary experiment on the natural science domain (Taiwan K9 education) indicates that the proposed method yields valuable recommendations. This work enriches domain ontologies by adding distilled semantics.
    Source
    Journal of Intelligent Information Systems
  20. Schlögl, C.: Zukunft der Informationswissenschaft : Gegenstandsbereich und Perspektiven (2014) 0.02 
    0.01796158 = product of:
  0.03592316 = sum of:
    0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 3677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012015978 = score(doc=3677,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3677, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3677)
    0.023907183 = product of:
      0.047814365 = sum of:
        0.047814365 = weight(_text_:22 in 3677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047814365 = score(doc=3677,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3677, 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=3677)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Bevor ich einige Gedanken über die Zukunft der Informationswissenschaft in den deutschsprachigen Ländern anstelle, möchte ich zunächst versuchen, ihren Gegenstandsbereich zu umreißen. Bei einem schwer greifbaren Begriff wie "Information" ist es nicht überraschend, wenn es keine allgemeine Übereinstimmung über die zentralen Themen der Informationswissenschaft gibt.
    Date
    22. 6.2017 18:04:28

Authors

Languages

  • e 173
  • d 111
  • i 4
  • f 2
  • a 1
  • es 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 184
  • s 12
  • r 10
  • x 8
  • m 7
  • n 3
  • b 1
  • i 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications