Search (271 results, page 14 of 14)

0.0017165683 = product of:
  0.006866273 = sum of:
    0.006866273 = weight(_text_:information in 425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006866273 = score(doc=425,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 425, 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=425)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The degree of structure of Web content is the determining factor for the types of functionality that search engines can provide. The more well structured the Web content is, the easier it is for search engines to understand Web content and provide advanced functionality, such as faceted filtering or the aggregation of content from multiple Web sites, based on this understanding. Today, most Web sites are generated from structured data that is stored in relational databases. Thus, it does not require too much extra effort for Web sites to publish this structured data directly on the Web in addition to HTML pages, and thus help search engines to understand Web content and provide improved functionality. An early approach to realize this idea and help search engines to understand Web content is Microformats, a technique for markingup structured data about specific types on entities-such as tags, blog posts, people, or reviews-within HTML pages. As Microformats are focused on a few entity types, the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) started in 2004 to standardize RDFa as an alternative, more generic language for embedding any type of data into HTML pages. Today, major search engines such as Google, Yahoo, and Bing extract Microformat and RDFa data describing products, reviews, persons, events, and recipes from Web pages and use the extracted data to improve the user's search experience. The search engines have started to aggregate structured data from different Web sites and augment their search results with these aggregated information units in the form of rich snippets which combine, for instance, data This chapter gives an overview of the topology of the Web of Data that has been created by publishing data on the Web using the microformats RDFa, Microdata and Linked Data publishing techniques.

0.0017165683 = product of:
  0.006866273 = sum of:
    0.006866273 = weight(_text_:information in 568) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006866273 = score(doc=568,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 568, 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=568)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Mittlerweile sind mehr als zehn Jahre seit der Gründung der Wikipedia vergangen. Die kollaborativ zusammengestellte Online-Enzyklopädie blickt auf eine beispiellose Erfolgsgeschichte zurück und hat inzwischen sogar viele klassische Lexika das Fürchten gelehrt. Aber: Es gibt gar nicht die eine Wikipedia! Stattdessen handelt es sich bei dem Projekt um hunderte verschiedene, weitgehend voneinander unabhängig agierende Sprachversionen. Sie sind nicht nur unterschiedlich groß, sondern bestehen auch aus differierenden Inhalten. Artikel zu ein und demselben Stichwort können von Wikipedia zu Wikipedia erheblich voneinander abweichen. Von der Gemeinschaft bereits erarbeitetes Wissen steht daher nicht allen Nutzern in der Welt gleichermaßen zur Verfügung. Mit einem forcierten interlingualen Wissensaustausch ließe es sich aber für eine gegenseitige Bereicherung der Wikipedias nutzen. Das Buch gibt zunächst einen allgemeinen Überblick zur Wikipedia, geht auf ihre Entstehung, ihre Funktionsweise und auf die beteiligten Akteure ein. Auch das "Erfolgsgeheimnis" des Nachschlagewerks sowie aktuelle Herausforderungen werden herausgearbeitet. Die anschließende Untersuchung zeigt, wie sehr verschieden große Wikipedias voneinander differieren und wo die Unterschiede im Einzelnen liegen. Danach folgt eine Vorstellung von Ansätzen, Werkzeugen und Schwierigkeiten des interlingualen Wissensaustauschs zwischen den Sprachversionen. Der letzte Teil entwirft schließlich ein detailliertes Konzept für einen neuartigen Wissensaustausch, das aus mehreren ineinandergreifenden Komponenten rund um den Kern einer speziellen Übersetzungsoberfläche besteht. Das Konzept lässt sich auch als Blaupause für Lokalisierungsbemühungen multisprachlicher Wikis nutzen, wie sie international operierende Unternehmungen zunehmend einsetzen. Die Ausarbeitung, auf der dieses Buch basiert, wurde mit dem FHP-Preis 2011 für die beste Abschlussarbeit im Studiengang "Information und Dokumentation" der FH Potsdam ausgezeichnet.

0.0017165683 = product of:
  0.006866273 = sum of:
    0.006866273 = weight(_text_:information in 2049) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006866273 = score(doc=2049,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 2049, 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=2049)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Designed for the digital world and an expanding universe of metadata users, RDA: Resource Description and Access is the new, unified cataloguing standard. Benefits of RDA include: - A structure based on the conceptual models of FRBR (functional requirements for bibliographic data) and FRAD (functional requirements for authority data) to help catalog users find the information they need more easily - A flexible framework for content description of digital resources that also serves the needs of libraries organizing traditional resources - A better fit with emerging technologies, enabling institutions to introduce efficiencies in data capture and storage retrieval. The online RDA Toolkit provides a one-stop resource for evaluating and implementing RDA, and is the most effective way to interact with the new standard. It includes searchable and browseable RDA instructions; two views of RDA content, by table of contents and by element set; user-created and sharable Workflows and Mappings-tools to customize RDA to support your organization's training, internal processes, and local policies; Library of Congress-Program for Cooperative Cataloging Policy Statements (LC-PCC PS) and links to other relevant cataloguing resources; and the full text of AACR2 with links to RDA. This full-text print version of RDA offers a snapshot that serves as an offline access point to help solo and part-time cataloguers evaluate RDA, as well as to support training and classroom use in any size institution. An index is included. The online RDA Toolkit includes PDFs, but purchasing the print version offers a convenient, time-saving option.

0.0017165683 = product of:
  0.006866273 = sum of:
    0.006866273 = weight(_text_:information in 3040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006866273 = score(doc=3040,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 3040, 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=3040)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Mit Norbert Henrichs wird durch diesen Sammelband zweifellos ein Gestalter der Informationswissenschaft geehrt. Mit dem Hintergrund Theologie und Philosophie, seiner Neugierde und seiner ständig angewachsenen Kompetenz bezüglich der durch die Informations- und Kommunikationstechnologie immer mehr geprägten Informationsmethodik war Norbert Henrichs an der Universität Düsseldorf in der Lage, einen Tunnelblick auf Information zu vermeiden und eine Spannbreite an Themen nicht nur abzudecken, sondern überhaupt erst zum Gegenstand der Informationswissenschaft zu machen. Informationswissenschaft existiert (in Deutschland) institutionell seit ca. 50 Jahren. Weitere Sammelbände werden kommen. Es müssen aber nicht nur InformationswissenschaftlerInnen aus dem deutschsprachigen Bereich sein, die mit ihren Arbeiten geehrt werden sollten. Vorschläge dafür sind willkommen. (R. Kuhlen)

0.0017165683 = product of:
  0.006866273 = sum of:
    0.006866273 = weight(_text_:information in 3383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006866273 = score(doc=3383,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 3383, 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=3383)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Theme

Information

0.0017165683 = product of:
  0.006866273 = sum of:
    0.006866273 = weight(_text_:information in 3543) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006866273 = score(doc=3543,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 3543, 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=3543)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Representation in Scientific Practice, published by the MIT Press in 1990, helped coalesce a long-standing interest in scientific visualization among historians, philosophers, and sociologists of science and remains a touchstone for current investigations in science and technology studies. This volume revisits the topic, taking into account both the changing conceptual landscape of STS and the emergence of new imaging technologies in scientific practice. It offers cutting-edge research on a broad array of fields that study information as well as short reflections on the evolution of the field by leading scholars, including some of the contributors to the 1990 volume. The essays consider the ways in which viewing experiences are crafted in the digital era; the embodied nature of work with digital technologies; the constitutive role of materials and technologies -- from chalkboards to brain scans -- in the production of new scientific knowledge; the metaphors and images mobilized by communities of practice; and the status and significance of scientific imagery in professional and popular culture. ContributorsMorana Alac, Michael Barany, Anne Beaulieu, Annamaria Carusi, Catelijne Coopmans, Lorraine Daston, Sarah de Rijcke, Joseph Dumit, Emma Frow, Yann Giraud, Aud Sissel Hoel, Martin Kemp, Bruno Latour, John Law, Michael Lynch, Donald MacKenzie, Cyrus Mody, Natasha Myers, Rachel Prentice, Arie Rip, Martin Ruivenkamp, Lucy Suchman, Janet Vertesi, Steve Woolgar

0.0017165683 = product of:
  0.006866273 = sum of:
    0.006866273 = weight(_text_:information in 3805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006866273 = score(doc=3805,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 3805, 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=3805)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Series

History and foundations of information science

0.0017165683 = product of:
  0.006866273 = sum of:
    0.006866273 = weight(_text_:information in 3973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006866273 = score(doc=3973,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 3973, 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=3973)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Theme

Information

0.0017165683 = product of:
  0.006866273 = sum of:
    0.006866273 = weight(_text_:information in 5667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006866273 = score(doc=5667,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 5667, 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=5667)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Theme

Information

0.0015172462 = product of:
  0.006068985 = sum of:
    0.006068985 = weight(_text_:information in 4531) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006068985 = score(doc=4531,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.068573356 = fieldWeight in 4531, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4531)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Rez. in: Mitt. VÖB 64(2011) H.1, S. 153-155 (K Niedermair): "Vor einigen Wochen war in der Wochenzeitung Die Zeit ein dreiseitiger Beitrag über die gerade 10 Jahre alt gewordene Wikipedia zu lesen, unter dem Titel "Das größte Werk der Menschen": Wie könnte Wikipedia dieses Prädikat verdienen? Wohl schon aufgrund der Quantitäten: Die freie Enzyklopädie Wikipedia ist, seit sie am 15. Jänner 2001 online ging, extrem gewachsen, es gibt Plattformen in den meisten Sprachen, mit sehr viel Content, am meisten natürlich in der englischsprachigen Version, nämlich über drei Millionen Beiträge, auch die deutschsprachige ist beachtlich vertreten mit ca. einer Million. Wikipedia ist zu einer wichtigen Informationsquelle geworden, im Alltag, im Beruf, im Lehr- und Wissenschaftsbetrieb, dies zeigen immer wieder Befragungen von Studierenden und Wissenschaftler/innen. Verdienstvoll ist Wikipedia auch, weil sie nicht auf Gewinn orientiert ist, auf Werbeeinnahmen verzichtet. Wikipedia lebt vom Idealismus unzähliger freiwilliger Mitarbeiter/innen, die nicht um Geld, sondern aus Freude an der Arbeit gemeinsam dem großen Ziel verpflichtet sind, Wissen zu sammeln, zu ordnen und bereitzustellen - und zwar kostenlos für alle zu jeder Zeit und an jedem Ort. Es ist wohltuend, dass dieses Programm einer universalen Enzyklopädia publico in der kommerzialisierten Wirklichkeit des Internet überleben konnte und dass Erfolg und Wachstum im Internet nicht immer mit Geld zu tun haben müssen, wie es Google, Facebook usw. nahelegen, deren Gründer bekanntlich inzwischen Milliardäre sind. Und Wikipedia ist insofern ein starkes Argument gegen die landläufige These, dass Information nur brauchbar ist, wenn sie etwas kostet: Qualitätssicherung von Information hängt nicht zwangsläufig mit ihrer Ökonomisierung zusammen. Tatsächlich ist Wikipedia inzwischen eine massive Konkurrenz für die herkömmlichen, kommerziell orientierten Lexika und Enzyklopädien.

0.001213797 = product of:
  0.004855188 = sum of:
    0.004855188 = weight(_text_:information in 4561) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004855188 = score(doc=4561,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.054858685 = fieldWeight in 4561, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=4561)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

In which I introduce the ancient mind-body problem, explain why I am on a quest to use reason and empirical inquiry to solve it, acquaint you with Francis Crick, explain how he relates to this quest, make a confession, and end on a sad note -- In which I write about the wellsprings of my inner conflict between religion and reason, why I grew up wanting to be a scientist, why I wear a lapel pin of Professor Calculus, and how I acquired a second mentor late in life -- In which I explain why consciousness challenges the scientific view of the world, how consciousness can be investigated empirically with both feet firmly planted on the ground, why animals share consciousness with humans, and why self-consciousness is not as important as many people think it is -- In which you hear tales of scientist-magicians that make you look but not see, how they track the footprints of consciousness by peering into your skull, why you don't see with your eyes, and why attention and consciousness are not the same -- In which you learn from neurologists and neurosurgeons that some neurons care a great deal about celebrities, that cutting the cerebral cortex in two does not reduce consciousness by half, that color is leached from the world by the loss of a small cortical region, and that the destruction of a sugar cube-sized chunk of brain stem or thalamic tissue leaves you undead -- In which I defend two propositions that my younger self found nonsense--you are unaware of most of the things that go on in your head, and zombie agents control much of your life, even though you confidently believe that you are in charge -- In which I throw caution to the wind, bring up free will, Der ring des Nibelungen, and what physics says about determinism, explain the impoverished ability of your mind to choose, show that your will lags behind your brain's decision, and that freedom is just another word for feeling -- In which I argue that consciousness is a fundamental property of complex things, rhapsodize about integrated information theory, how it explains many puzzling facts about consciousness and provides a blueprint for building sentient machines -- In which I outline an electromagnetic gadget to measure consciousness, describe efforts to harness the power of genetic engineering to track consciousness in mice, and find myself building cortical observatories -- In which I muse about final matters considered off-limits to polite scientific discourse: to wit, the relationship between science and religion, the existence of God, whether this God can intervene in the universe, the death of my mentor, and my recent tribulations.

Footnote

Now it might seem that is a fairly well-defined scientific task: just figure out how the brain does it. In the end I think that is the right attitude to have. But our peculiar history makes it difficult to have exactly that attitude-to take consciousness as a biological phenomenon like digestion or photosynthesis, and figure out how exactly it works as a biological phenomenon. Two philosophical obstacles cast a shadow over the whole subject. The first is the tradition of God, the soul, and immortality. Consciousness is not a part of the ordinary biological world of digestion and photosynthesis: it is part of a spiritual world. It is sometimes thought to be a property of the soul and the soul is definitely not a part of the physical world. The other tradition, almost as misleading, is a certain conception of Science with a capital "S." Science is said to be "reductionist" and "materialist," and so construed there is no room for consciousness in Science. If it really exists, consciousness must really be something else. It must be reducible to something else, such as neuron firings, computer programs running in the brain, or dispositions to behavior. There are also a number of purely technical difficulties to neurobiological research. The brain is an extremely complicated mechanism with about a hundred billion neurons in ... (Rest nicht frei). " [https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2013/01/10/can-information-theory-explain-consciousness/].