Search (325 results, page 1 of 17)

  • × type_ss:"el"
  1. Systematik für Bibliotheken : SfB (1997) 0.14 
    0.13840926 = product of:
  0.41522777 = sum of:
    0.41522777 = weight(_text_:systematik in 893) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.41522777 = score(doc=893,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.355158 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
          0.057548698 = queryNorm
        1.1691353 = fieldWeight in 893, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=893)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Die SfB ist eine Aufstellungssystematik, die aus 31 Fachgebieten und mehreren Formal- und Sachschlüsseln besteht. Gerade wegen der differenzierten Gliederung von Bibliotheksbeständen sowie dem Bestreben der Bibliotheken, Klassen zu reduzieren, ist die SfB für die sachliche Aufstellung von kleinen bis sehr großen Bibliotheksbeständen geeignet. Die SfB wurde ursprünglich auf der Grundlage der hannoverschen Systematik (SSH) erarbeitet und zwischen 1978 und 1987 vom K.G.Saur-Verlag erstmals publiziert. Neben der ASB findet die SfB Anwendung in 40 öffentlichen und wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken. Die jetzt vorliegende Überarbeitung berücksichtigt fachlich neue Entwicklungen und richtet sich terminologisch soweit wie möglich nach dem Vokabular der Schlagwortnormdatei. Der Buchausgabe der SfB liegt eine maschinenlesbare Version auf 3,5"-Diskette bei. Eine regelmäßige Aktualisierung ist vorgesehen
    LCSH
    Systematik für Bibliotheken ; Diskette
    RSWK
    Systematik für Bibliotheken
    Subject
    Systematik für Bibliotheken
    Systematik für Bibliotheken ; Diskette
  2. GHB-Systematik (1996-) 0.14 
    0.13698965 = product of:
  0.41096893 = sum of:
    0.41096893 = weight(_text_:systematik in 6232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.41096893 = score(doc=6232,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.355158 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
          0.057548698 = queryNorm
        1.157144 = fieldWeight in 6232, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6232)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Object
    GHB-Systematik
  3. Kleineberg, M.: Context analysis and context indexing : formal pragmatics in knowledge organization (2014) 0.13 
    0.13261355 = product of:
  0.19892032 = sum of:
    0.15233766 = product of:
      0.45701295 = sum of:
        0.45701295 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.45701295 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4878985 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.04658267 = product of:
      0.09316534 = sum of:
        0.09316534 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09316534 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.42292362 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Source
    http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja
  4. Überarbeitete KAB als Wiki : Version 2017 - jetzt online (2017) 0.08 
    0.08072192 = product of:
  0.24216576 = sum of:
    0.24216576 = weight(_text_:systematik in 3578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.24216576 = score(doc=3578,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.355158 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
          0.057548698 = queryNorm
        0.6818536 = fieldWeight in 3578, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3578)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    In sieben arbeitsintensiven Sitzungen entwickelte die Expertinnen-Gruppe der Systematik-Kooperation ASB-KAB-Überarbeitung die Online-Version der KAB in Wiki-Form.
  5. Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001) 0.07 
    0.067810774 = product of:
  0.20343232 = sum of:
    0.20343232 = sum of:
      0.09316534 = weight(_text_:indexing in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09316534 = score(doc=3925,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.057548698 = queryNorm
          0.42292362 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
      0.11026699 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11026699 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.20152573 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.057548698 = 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)
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:22:28
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  6. WissKI - SPARQL endpoints for authority files : an experimental service provided by the WissKI project (2011) 0.06 
    0.064577535 = product of:
  0.1937326 = sum of:
    0.1937326 = weight(_text_:systematik in 4433) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1937326 = score(doc=4433,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.355158 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
          0.057548698 = queryNorm
        0.5454829 = fieldWeight in 4433, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4433)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Content
    We provide the following authority files of the German National Library as SPARQL endpoints: - Personennamendatei - Gemeinsame Körperschaftsdatei - Schlagwortnormdatei We provide the following authority files of museumsvokabular.de as SPARQL endpoints: - Oberbegriffsdatei - Grobsystematik - Hessische Systematik
  7. Leonhardt, H.A.: Systematik "Ästhetische Kulturwissenschaft" an der Universitätsbibliothek Hildesheim : ein Innovationsbericht (2018) 0.06 
    0.064577535 = product of:
  0.1937326 = sum of:
    0.1937326 = weight(_text_:systematik in 4490) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1937326 = score(doc=4490,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.355158 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
          0.057548698 = queryNorm
        0.5454829 = fieldWeight in 4490, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4490)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  8. Bensman, S.J.: Eugene Garfield, Francis Narin, and PageRank : the theoretical bases of the Google search engine (2013) 0.06 
    0.06382337 = product of:
  0.19147012 = sum of:
    0.19147012 = sum of:
      0.12909368 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.12909368 = score(doc=1149,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.057548698 = queryNorm
          0.5860202 = fieldWeight in 1149, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1149)
      0.062376432 = weight(_text_:22 in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.062376432 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20152573 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.057548698 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1149, 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=1149)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    This paper presents a test of the validity of using Google Scholar to evaluate the publications of researchers by comparing the premises on which its search engine, PageRank, is based, to those of Garfield's theory of citation indexing. It finds that the premises are identical and that PageRank and Garfield's theory of citation indexing validate each other.
    Date
    17.12.2013 11:02:22
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  9. Guidi, F.; Sacerdoti Coen, C.: ¬A survey on retrieval of mathematical knowledge (2015) 0.06 
    0.057045292 = product of:
  0.17113587 = sum of:
    0.17113587 = sum of:
      0.09316534 = weight(_text_:indexing in 5865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09316534 = score(doc=5865,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.057548698 = queryNorm
          0.42292362 = fieldWeight in 5865, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5865)
      0.07797054 = weight(_text_:22 in 5865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07797054 = score(doc=5865,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20152573 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.057548698 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5865, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5865)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    We present a short survey of the literature on indexing and retrieval of mathematical knowledge, with pointers to 72 papers and tentative taxonomies of both retrieval problems and recurring techniques.
    Date
    22. 2.2017 12:51:57
  10. Hafner, R.; Schelling, B.: Automatisierung der Sacherschließung mit Semantic-Web-Technologie (2015) 0.06 
    0.056505345 = product of:
  0.16951603 = sum of:
    0.16951603 = weight(_text_:systematik in 2471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16951603 = score(doc=2471,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.355158 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
          0.057548698 = queryNorm
        0.4772975 = fieldWeight in 2471, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2471)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Der vorliegende Artikel möchte einen Ansatz vorstellen, der aufzeigt, wie die Bibliothek der Universität Konstanz - und andere Bibliotheken mit einer Haussystematik - bei ihrer eigenen Systematik bleiben und trotzdem von der Sacherschließungsarbeit anderer Bibliotheken profitieren können. Vorgestellt wird ein Konzept, das zeigt, wie mithilfe von Semantic-Web-Technologie Ähnlichkeitsrelationen zwischen verbaler Sacherschließung, RVK, DDC und hauseigenen Systematiken erstellt werden können, die das Übersetzen von Sacherschließungsinformationen in andere Ordnungssysteme erlauben und damit Automatisierung in der Sacherschließung möglich machen.
  11. Understanding metadata (2004) 0.05 
    0.052724883 = product of:
  0.079087324 = sum of:
    0.04789911 = product of:
      0.14369732 = sum of:
        0.14369732 = weight(_text_:objects in 2686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14369732 = score(doc=2686,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.30587542 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.46979034 = fieldWeight in 2686, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2686)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.031188216 = product of:
      0.062376432 = sum of:
        0.062376432 = weight(_text_:22 in 2686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.062376432 = score(doc=2686,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20152573 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2686, 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=2686)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Metadata (structured information about an object or collection of objects) is increasingly important to libraries, archives, and museums. And although librarians are familiar with a number of issues that apply to creating and using metadata (e.g., authority control, controlled vocabularies, etc.), the world of metadata is nonetheless different than library cataloging, with its own set of challenges. Therefore, whether you are new to these concepts or quite experienced with classic cataloging, this short (20 pages) introductory paper on metadata can be helpful
    Date
    10. 9.2004 10:22:40
  12. Bastos Vieira, S.; DeBrito, M.; Mustafa El Hadi, W.; Zumer, M.: Developing imaged KOS with the FRSAD Model : a conceptual methodology (2016) 0.05 
    0.048832014 = product of:
  0.07324802 = sum of:
    0.023949554 = product of:
      0.07184866 = sum of:
        0.07184866 = weight(_text_:objects in 3109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07184866 = score(doc=3109,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.30587542 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.23489517 = fieldWeight in 3109, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3109)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.049298465 = product of:
      0.09859693 = sum of:
        0.09859693 = weight(_text_:indexing in 3109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09859693 = score(doc=3109,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.4475803 = fieldWeight in 3109, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3109)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    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.
  13. Priss, U.: Faceted knowledge representation (1999) 0.05 
    0.046134274 = product of:
  0.06920141 = sum of:
    0.041911718 = product of:
      0.12573515 = sum of:
        0.12573515 = weight(_text_:objects in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12573515 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.30587542 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.41106653 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.027289689 = product of:
      0.054579377 = sum of:
        0.054579377 = weight(_text_:22 in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054579377 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20152573 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2654, 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=2654)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Faceted Knowledge Representation provides a formalism for implementing knowledge systems. The basic notions of faceted knowledge representation are "unit", "relation", "facet" and "interpretation". Units are atomic elements and can be abstract elements or refer to external objects in an application. Relations are sequences or matrices of 0 and 1's (binary matrices). Facets are relational structures that combine units and relations. Each facet represents an aspect or viewpoint of a knowledge system. Interpretations are mappings that can be used to translate between different representations. This paper introduces the basic notions of faceted knowledge representation. The formalism is applied here to an abstract modeling of a faceted thesaurus as used in information retrieval.
    Date
    22. 1.2016 17:30:31
  14. Electronic Dewey (1993) 0.05 
    0.045636237 = product of:
  0.13690871 = sum of:
    0.13690871 = sum of:
      0.07453227 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07453227 = score(doc=1088,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.057548698 = queryNorm
          0.3383389 = fieldWeight in 1088, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1088)
      0.062376432 = weight(_text_:22 in 1088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.062376432 = score(doc=1088,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20152573 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.057548698 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1088, 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=1088)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The CD-ROM version of the 20th DDC ed., featuring advanced online search and windowing techniques, full-text indexing, personal notepad, LC subject headings linked to DDC numbers and a database of all DDC changes
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Cataloging and classification quarterly 19(1994) no.1, S.134-137 (M. Carpenter). - Inzwischen existiert auch eine Windows-Version: 'Electronic Dewey for Windows', vgl. Knowledge organization 22(1995) no.1, S.17
  15. Popper, K.R.: Three worlds : the Tanner lecture on human values. Deliverd at the University of Michigan, April 7, 1978 (1978) 0.04 
    0.040623374 = product of:
  0.12187012 = sum of:
    0.12187012 = product of:
      0.36561036 = sum of:
        0.36561036 = weight(_text_:3a in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.36561036 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4878985 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 230, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=230)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    https%3A%2F%2Ftannerlectures.utah.edu%2F_documents%2Fa-to-z%2Fp%2Fpopper80.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3f4QRTEH-OEBmoYr2J_c7H
  16. Tay, A.: ¬The next generation discovery citation indexes : a review of the landscape in 2020 (2020) 0.04 
    0.039931707 = product of:
  0.119795114 = sum of:
    0.119795114 = sum of:
      0.06521574 = weight(_text_:indexing in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06521574 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.057548698 = queryNorm
          0.29604656 = fieldWeight in 40, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=40)
      0.054579377 = weight(_text_:22 in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.054579377 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20152573 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.057548698 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 40, 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=40)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    17.11.2020 12:22:59
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  17. Doerr, M.: Semantic problems of thesaurus mapping (2001) 0.04 
    0.03548552 = product of:
  0.053228278 = sum of:
    0.029936943 = product of:
      0.089810826 = sum of:
        0.089810826 = weight(_text_:objects in 5902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.089810826 = score(doc=5902,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.30587542 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.29361898 = fieldWeight in 5902, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5902)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.023291335 = product of:
      0.04658267 = sum of:
        0.04658267 = weight(_text_:indexing in 5902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04658267 = score(doc=5902,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.21146181 = fieldWeight in 5902, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5902)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    With networked information access to heterogeneous data sources, the problem of terminology provision and interoperability of controlled vocabulary schemes such as thesauri becomes increasingly urgent. Solutions are needed to improve the performance of full-text retrieval systems and to guide the design of controlled terminology schemes for use in structured data, including metadata. Thesauri are created in different languages, with different scope and points of view and at different levels of abstraction and detail, to accomodate access to a specific group of collections. In any wider search accessing distributed collections, the user would like to start with familiar terminology and let the system find out the correspondences to other terminologies in order to retrieve equivalent results from all addressed collections. This paper investigates possible semantic differences that may hinder the unambiguous mapping and transition from one thesaurus to another. It focusses on the differences of meaning of terms and their relations as intended by their creators for indexing and querying a specific collection, in contrast to methods investigating the statistical relevance of terms for objects in a collection. It develops a notion of optimal mapping, paying particular attention to the intellectual quality of mappings between terms from different vocabularies and to problems of polysemy. Proposals are made to limit the vagueness introduced by the transition from one vocabulary to another. The paper shows ways in which thesaurus creators can improve their methodology to meet the challenges of networked access of distributed collections created under varying conditions. For system implementers, the discussion will lead to a better understanding of the complexity of the problem
  18. Bradford, R.B.: Relationship discovery in large text collections using Latent Semantic Indexing (2006) 0.03 
    0.031911686 = product of:
  0.09573506 = sum of:
    0.09573506 = sum of:
      0.06454684 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06454684 = score(doc=1163,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.057548698 = queryNorm
          0.2930101 = fieldWeight in 1163, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1163)
      0.031188216 = weight(_text_:22 in 1163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.031188216 = score(doc=1163,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20152573 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.057548698 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1163, 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=1163)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    This paper addresses the problem of information discovery in large collections of text. For users, one of the key problems in working with such collections is determining where to focus their attention. In selecting documents for examination, users must be able to formulate reasonably precise queries. Queries that are too broad will greatly reduce the efficiency of information discovery efforts by overwhelming the users with peripheral information. In order to formulate efficient queries, a mechanism is needed to automatically alert users regarding potentially interesting information contained within the collection. This paper presents the results of an experiment designed to test one approach to generation of such alerts. The technique of latent semantic indexing (LSI) is used to identify relationships among entities of interest. Entity extraction software is used to pre-process the text of the collection so that the LSI space contains representation vectors for named entities in addition to those for individual terms. In the LSI space, the cosine of the angle between the representation vectors for two entities captures important information regarding the degree of association of those two entities. For appropriate choices of entities, determining the entity pairs with the highest mutual cosine values yields valuable information regarding the contents of the text collection. The test database used for the experiment consists of 150,000 news articles. The proposed approach for alert generation is tested using a counterterrorism analysis example. The approach is shown to have significant potential for aiding users in rapidly focusing on information of potential importance in large text collections. The approach also has value in identifying possible use of aliases.
    Object
    Latent Semantic Indexing
    Source
    Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Link Analysis, Counterterrorism, and Security, SIAM Data Mining Conference, Bethesda, MD, 20-22 April, 2006. [http://www.siam.org/meetings/sdm06/workproceed/Link%20Analysis/15.pdf]
  19. Danowski, P.: Authority files and Web 2.0 : Wikipedia and the PND. An Example (2007) 0.03 
    0.028522646 = product of:
  0.08556794 = sum of:
    0.08556794 = sum of:
      0.04658267 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04658267 = score(doc=1291,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.057548698 = queryNorm
          0.21146181 = fieldWeight in 1291, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1291)
      0.03898527 = weight(_text_:22 in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03898527 = score(doc=1291,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20152573 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.057548698 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1291, 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=1291)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    More and more users index everything on their own in the web 2.0. There are services for links, videos, pictures, books, encyclopaedic articles and scientific articles. All these services are library independent. But must that really be? Can't libraries help with their experience and tools to make user indexing better? On the experience of a project from German language Wikipedia together with the German person authority files (Personen Namen Datei - PND) located at German National Library (Deutsche Nationalbibliothek) I would like to show what is possible. How users can and will use the authority files, if we let them. We will take a look how the project worked and what we can learn for future projects. Conclusions - Authority files can have a role in the web 2.0 - there must be an open interface/ service for retrieval - everything that is indexed on the net with authority files can be easy integrated in a federated search - O'Reilly: You have to found ways that your data get more important that more it will be used
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".
  20. Woods, E.W.; IFLA Section on classification and Indexing and Indexing and Information Technology; Joint Working Group on a Classification Format: Requirements for a format of classification data : Final report, July 1996 (1996) 0.03 
    0.026351137 = product of:
  0.07905341 = sum of:
    0.07905341 = product of:
      0.15810682 = sum of:
        0.15810682 = weight(_text_:indexing in 3008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15810682 = score(doc=3008,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.7177252 = fieldWeight in 3008, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3008)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 220
  • d 95
  • a 3
  • el 2
  • f 1
  • nl 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 160
  • i 10
  • m 6
  • s 6
  • r 5
  • x 3
  • b 2
  • p 2
  • n 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects