Search (118 results, page 6 of 6)

  • × type_ss:"el"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Taglinger, H.: Ausgevogelt, jetzt wird es ernst (2018) 0.01
    0.007705845 = product of:
      0.01541169 = sum of:
        0.01541169 = product of:
          0.03082338 = sum of:
            0.03082338 = weight(_text_:22 in 4281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03082338 = score(doc=4281,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045500398 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4281, 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=4281)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 1.2018 11:38:55
  2. Seefried, E.: ¬Die Gestaltbarkeit der Zukunft und ihre Grenzen : zur Geschichte der Zukunftsforschung (2015) 0.01
    0.007705845 = product of:
      0.01541169 = sum of:
        0.01541169 = product of:
          0.03082338 = sum of:
            0.03082338 = weight(_text_:22 in 4312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03082338 = score(doc=4312,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045500398 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4312, 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=4312)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 6.2018 13:47:33
  3. Roy, W.; Gray, C.: Preparing existing metadata for repository batch import : a recipe for a fickle food (2018) 0.01
    0.007705845 = product of:
      0.01541169 = sum of:
        0.01541169 = product of:
          0.03082338 = sum of:
            0.03082338 = weight(_text_:22 in 4550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03082338 = score(doc=4550,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045500398 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4550, 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=4550)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    10.11.2018 16:27:22
  4. Baker, T.; Bermès, E.; Coyle, K.; Dunsire, G.; Isaac, A.; Murray, P.; Panzer, M.; Schneider, J.; Singer, R.; Summers, E.; Waites, W.; Young, J.; Zeng, M.: Library Linked Data Incubator Group Final Report (2011) 0.01
    0.00649893 = product of:
      0.01299786 = sum of:
        0.01299786 = product of:
          0.02599572 = sum of:
            0.02599572 = weight(_text_:p in 4796) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02599572 = score(doc=4796,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045500398 = queryNorm
                0.15890071 = fieldWeight in 4796, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4796)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  5. Spitkovsky, V.; Norvig, P.: From words to concepts and back : dictionaries for linking text, entities and ideas (2012) 0.01
    0.00649893 = product of:
      0.01299786 = sum of:
        0.01299786 = product of:
          0.02599572 = sum of:
            0.02599572 = weight(_text_:p in 337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02599572 = score(doc=337,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045500398 = queryNorm
                0.15890071 = fieldWeight in 337, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=337)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  6. DC-2013: International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications : Online Proceedings (2013) 0.01
    0.00649893 = product of:
      0.01299786 = sum of:
        0.01299786 = product of:
          0.02599572 = sum of:
            0.02599572 = weight(_text_:p in 1076) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02599572 = score(doc=1076,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045500398 = queryNorm
                0.15890071 = fieldWeight in 1076, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1076)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Content
    FULL PAPERS Provenance and Annotations for Linked Data - Kai Eckert How Portable Are the Metadata Standards for Scientific Data? A Proposal for a Metadata Infrastructure - Jian Qin, Kai Li Lessons Learned in Implementing the Extended Date/Time Format in a Large Digital Library - Hannah Tarver, Mark Phillips Towards the Representation of Chinese Traditional Music: A State of the Art Review of Music Metadata Standards - Mi Tian, György Fazekas, Dawn Black, Mark Sandler Maps and Gaps: Strategies for Vocabulary Design and Development - Diane Ileana Hillmann, Gordon Dunsire, Jon Phipps A Method for the Development of Dublin Core Application Profiles (Me4DCAP V0.1): Aescription - Mariana Curado Malta, Ana Alice Baptista Find and Combine Vocabularies to Design Metadata Application Profiles using Schema Registries and LOD Resources - Tsunagu Honma, Mitsuharu Nagamori, Shigeo Sugimoto Achieving Interoperability between the CARARE Schema for Monuments and Sites and the Europeana Data Model - Antoine Isaac, Valentine Charles, Kate Fernie, Costis Dallas, Dimitris Gavrilis, Stavros Angelis With a Focused Intent: Evolution of DCMI as a Research Community - Jihee Beak, Richard P. Smiraglia Metadata Capital in a Data Repository - Jane Greenberg, Shea Swauger, Elena Feinstein DC Metadata is Alive and Well - A New Standard for Education - Liddy Nevile Representation of the UNIMARC Bibliographic Data Format in Resource Description Framework - Gordon Dunsire, Mirna Willer, Predrag Perozic
  7. Riva, P.; Zumer, M.: Introducing the FRBR library reference model (2015) 0.01
    0.00649893 = product of:
      0.01299786 = sum of:
        0.01299786 = product of:
          0.02599572 = sum of:
            0.02599572 = weight(_text_:p in 2094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02599572 = score(doc=2094,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045500398 = queryNorm
                0.15890071 = fieldWeight in 2094, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2094)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  8. Metrics in research : for better or worse? (2016) 0.01
    0.00649893 = product of:
      0.01299786 = sum of:
        0.01299786 = product of:
          0.02599572 = sum of:
            0.02599572 = weight(_text_:p in 3312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02599572 = score(doc=3312,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045500398 = queryNorm
                0.15890071 = fieldWeight in 3312, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3312)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Editor
    Hünenberger, P. et al.
  9. Edmunds, J.: Zombrary apocalypse!? : RDA, LRM, and the death of cataloging (2017) 0.01
    0.00649893 = product of:
      0.01299786 = sum of:
        0.01299786 = product of:
          0.02599572 = sum of:
            0.02599572 = weight(_text_:p in 3818) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02599572 = score(doc=3818,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045500398 = queryNorm
                0.15890071 = fieldWeight in 3818, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3818)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Equally fallacious is the statement that support for the "clustering bibliographic records to show relationships between works and their creators" is an "important new feature" of RDA. AACR2 bibliographic records and the systems housing them can, did, and do show such relationships. Finally, whether users want or care to be made "more aware of a work's different editions, translations, or physical formats" is debatable. As an aim, it sounds less like what a user wants and more like what a cataloging librarian thinks a user should want. As Amanda Cossham writes in her recently issued doctoral thesis: "The explicit focus on user needs in the FRBR model, the International Cataloguing Principles, and RDA: Resource Description and Access does not align well with the ways that users use, understand, and experience library catalogues nor with the ways that they understand and experience the wider information environment. User tasks, as constituted in the FRBR model and RDA, are insufficient to meet users' needs." (p. 11, emphasis in the original)
  10. Surfing versus Drilling for knowledge in science : When should you use your computer? When should you use your brain? (2018) 0.01
    0.00649893 = product of:
      0.01299786 = sum of:
        0.01299786 = product of:
          0.02599572 = sum of:
            0.02599572 = weight(_text_:p in 4564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02599572 = score(doc=4564,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045500398 = queryNorm
                0.15890071 = fieldWeight in 4564, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4564)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Editor
    Hünenberger, P. u. O. Renn
  11. 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) 0.01
    0.006164676 = product of:
      0.012329352 = sum of:
        0.012329352 = product of:
          0.024658704 = sum of:
            0.024658704 = weight(_text_:22 in 3335) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.024658704 = score(doc=3335,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045500398 = 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(1/2)
    
  12. Gillitzer, B.: Yewno (2017) 0.01
    0.006164676 = product of:
      0.012329352 = sum of:
        0.012329352 = product of:
          0.024658704 = sum of:
            0.024658704 = weight(_text_:22 in 3447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.024658704 = score(doc=3447,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045500398 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3447, 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=3447)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 2.2017 10:16:49
  13. Somers, J.: Torching the modern-day library of Alexandria : somewhere at Google there is a database containing 25 million books and nobody is allowed to read them. (2017) 0.01
    0.006164676 = product of:
      0.012329352 = sum of:
        0.012329352 = product of:
          0.024658704 = sum of:
            0.024658704 = weight(_text_:22 in 3608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.024658704 = score(doc=3608,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045500398 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3608, 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=3608)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    You were going to get one-click access to the full text of nearly every book that's ever been published. Books still in print you'd have to pay for, but everything else-a collection slated to grow larger than the holdings at the Library of Congress, Harvard, the University of Michigan, at any of the great national libraries of Europe-would have been available for free at terminals that were going to be placed in every local library that wanted one. At the terminal you were going to be able to search tens of millions of books and read every page of any book you found. You'd be able to highlight passages and make annotations and share them; for the first time, you'd be able to pinpoint an idea somewhere inside the vastness of the printed record, and send somebody straight to it with a link. Books would become as instantly available, searchable, copy-pasteable-as alive in the digital world-as web pages. It was to be the realization of a long-held dream. "The universal library has been talked about for millennia," Richard Ovenden, the head of Oxford's Bodleian Libraries, has said. "It was possible to think in the Renaissance that you might be able to amass the whole of published knowledge in a single room or a single institution." In the spring of 2011, it seemed we'd amassed it in a terminal small enough to fit on a desk. "This is a watershed event and can serve as a catalyst for the reinvention of education, research, and intellectual life," one eager observer wrote at the time. On March 22 of that year, however, the legal agreement that would have unlocked a century's worth of books and peppered the country with access terminals to a universal library was rejected under Rule 23(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. When the library at Alexandria burned it was said to be an "international catastrophe." When the most significant humanities project of our time was dismantled in court, the scholars, archivists, and librarians who'd had a hand in its undoing breathed a sigh of relief, for they believed, at the time, that they had narrowly averted disaster.
  14. Rötzer, F.: KI-Programm besser als Menschen im Verständnis natürlicher Sprache (2018) 0.01
    0.006164676 = product of:
      0.012329352 = sum of:
        0.012329352 = product of:
          0.024658704 = sum of:
            0.024658704 = weight(_text_:22 in 4217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.024658704 = score(doc=4217,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045500398 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 4217, 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=4217)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 1.2018 11:32:44
  15. Jäger, L.: Von Big Data zu Big Brother (2018) 0.01
    0.006164676 = product of:
      0.012329352 = sum of:
        0.012329352 = product of:
          0.024658704 = sum of:
            0.024658704 = weight(_text_:22 in 5234) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.024658704 = score(doc=5234,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045500398 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5234, 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=5234)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 1.2018 11:33:49
  16. Bundesregierung: Digitale Bildung voranbringen (2016) 0.01
    0.0053940914 = product of:
      0.010788183 = sum of:
        0.010788183 = product of:
          0.021576365 = sum of:
            0.021576365 = weight(_text_:22 in 3451) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.021576365 = score(doc=3451,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045500398 = queryNorm
                0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 3451, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3451)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 2.2017 17:14:47
  17. Graphic details : a scientific study of the importance of diagrams to science (2016) 0.00
    0.0046235067 = product of:
      0.009247013 = sum of:
        0.009247013 = product of:
          0.018494027 = sum of:
            0.018494027 = weight(_text_:22 in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018494027 = score(doc=3035,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045500398 = 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)
      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.
  18. Laaff, M.: Googles genialer Urahn (2011) 0.00
    0.0038529225 = product of:
      0.007705845 = sum of:
        0.007705845 = product of:
          0.01541169 = sum of:
            0.01541169 = weight(_text_:22 in 4610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.01541169 = score(doc=4610,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045500398 = queryNorm
                0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 4610, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4610)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    24.10.2008 14:19:22

Languages

  • d 66
  • e 47
  • a 1
  • f 1
  • i 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 71
  • r 3
  • m 2
  • p 2
  • s 2
  • x 2
  • n 1
  • More… Less…