Search (2085 results, page 104 of 105)

0.0038529225 = product of:
  0.007705845 = sum of:
    0.007705845 = product of:
      0.01541169 = sum of:
        0.01541169 = weight(_text_:22 in 1672) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01541169 = score(doc=1672,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 1672, 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=1672)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: 1. Die Grundlagen der Wissensorganisation Ingetraut Dahlberg: Zur Begriffskultur in den Sozialwissenschaften. Evaluation einer Herausforderung S.2 Gerhard Budin: Begriffliche Wissensorganisation in den Sozialwissenschaften: Theorien und Methodenvielfalt S.12 Gerd Bauer: Die vielseitigen Anwendungsmöglichkeiten des Kategorienprinzips bei der Wissensorganisation S.22 Robert Fugmann: Die Nützlichkeit von semantischen Kategorien auf dern Gebiet der Informationsbereitstellung S.34 Gerhard Rahmtorf: Wege zur Ontologie S.37 2. Wissensordnung und Gesellschaft Raphael Beer: Ungleiches Wissen und demokratische Legitimation S.50 Elisabeth Wallnöfer Köstlin: Zum Charakter chiasmatischen Wissens S.66 Maik Adomßent: Konstitutive Elemente nachhaltiger Wissensgenerierung und -organisation S.70 Walther Umstätter: Knowledge Economy und die Privatisierung von Bibliotheken S.85 Peter Ohly: Bibliometrie in der Postmoderne S.103 Marthinus S. van der Walt: Ethics in Indexing and Classification S.115 Heike Winschiers, Jens Felder & Barbara Paterson: Nachhaltige Wissensorganisation durch kulturelle Synthese S122 3. Pädagogische Wissensorganisation Henry Milder: Knowledge related policy and civic literacy S.130 Christian Swertz: Globalisierung und Individualisierung als Bildungsziele S.140 Wolfgang David: Der Einfluss epistemologischer Überzeugungen auf Wissenserwerb S.147 Monika Witsch: Cyberlaw für den Jugendschutz - Eine pädagogische Bewertung von Internetzensur vor dem Hintergrund rechtsextremer Homepages S.152 Nicole Zillien: "Nächste Folie, bitte!" - Der Einsatz von Präsentationsprogrammen zur Wissensvermittlung und Wissensbewahrung S.159 Wolfgang Semar: Kollaborative Leistungsevaluation beim Einsatz von Wissensmanagementsystemen in der Ausbildung S.169

0.0038529225 = product of:
  0.007705845 = sum of:
    0.007705845 = product of:
      0.01541169 = sum of:
        0.01541169 = weight(_text_:22 in 1691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01541169 = score(doc=1691,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 1691, 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=1691)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Das Projekt gewann erst an Konturen, als Le Breton drei weitere Pariser Verleger für das Geschäft interessieren konnte. Als Herausgeber engagierten die vier Verleger 1746 Abbé Jean-Paul Gua de Malves, als Übersetzter Denis Diderot (1713-1784) und Jean Le Rond D'Alembert (1717-1783), einen glänzenden Astronomen und Mathematiker. Bevor die Arbeiten anfingen, zerstritten sich die Verleger mit Gua de Malves. Nun sollten Diderot und D'Alembert Herausgeber und Übersetzer werden. Das scheiterte zunächst daran, dass Diderot am 22. Juli 1749 nach einem berüchtigten Geheimbefehl ("lettre de cachet") verhaftet und in Vincennes inhaftiert wurde. Man hielt ihn - zu Recht, aber unbeweisbar - für den Verfasser der 1745 in Amsterdam anonym gedruckten Philosophischen Gedanken und traute ihm auch die schlüpfrigen Geschichten unter dem Titel Die indiskreten Kleinode (1748) zu. Während der Haft intervenierten die Verleger beim Kanzler d'Aguesseau. Dieser wie auch der Justizminister d'Argenson sahen in der Encyclopédie der philosophes" ein Projekt zum Ruhme Frankreichs und zur Schande Englands". Nach 103 Tagen kam Diderot wieder frei. Teile des Hofes und der Klerus beobachteten das Unternehmen Encyclopédie von Anfang an mit Misstrauen. Die Jesuiten vom Journal de Trévoux entdeckten im ersten Band ein Defizit: Es fehlten die Namen von Königen, Gelehrten, Heiligen", während viele heidnische Gottheiten" vorkamen. Sie machten die philosophes" unter dem erfundenen Wort eacouacs" zum Gespött. Noch 1952 charakterisierte die katholische Zeitschrift Études die Encyclopédie als die fürchterlichste Maschine, die jemals gegen die Religion in Stellung gebracht" wurde. Nachdem Abbé Jean-Martin de Prades - Autor des Artikels Gewissheit - in seiner Dissertation die These vertreten hatte, die Heilungen durch Jesus Christus glichen methodisch jenen des griechischen Arztes Äskulap, brach ein Sturm der Entrüstung aus. De Prades musste fliehen. Klerikale Einflüsterungen erreichten, dass der Staatsrat am 7. Februar 1752 gegen die ersten beiden Bände der Encyclopédie eine "scharfe Missbilligung" aussprach. Das war ein faktisches Verkaufsverbot, aber keine Rücknahme des Druckprivilegs. Man konnte nicht nur weiterarbeiten, sondern die Regierung bat die Herausgeber direkt weiterzumachen auch zum Schutz der Eigentumstitel der Subskribenten. Allerdings sollten künftig drei theologisch gebildete Zensoren jeden Artikel abzeichnen. Eingefädelt hatte das alles, wie Arthur M. Wilson, der beste Diderot-Kenner, gezeigt hat, Chrétien Guillaume de Malesherbes. Malesherbes war der Chef des Buchwesens und der Zensurbehörde - zugleich Freund und Förder der Encyclopédie.

0.0038529225 = product of:
  0.007705845 = sum of:
    0.007705845 = product of:
      0.01541169 = sum of:
        0.01541169 = weight(_text_:22 in 1847) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01541169 = score(doc=1847,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 1847, 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=1847)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 9.2007 10:36:23

0.0038529225 = product of:
  0.007705845 = sum of:
    0.007705845 = product of:
      0.01541169 = sum of:
        0.01541169 = weight(_text_:22 in 1919) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01541169 = score(doc=1919,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 1919, 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=1919)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

12. 6.2008 20:18:22

0.0038529225 = product of:
  0.007705845 = sum of:
    0.007705845 = product of:
      0.01541169 = sum of:
        0.01541169 = weight(_text_:22 in 2058) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01541169 = score(doc=2058,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 2058, 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=2058)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

17. 7.1996 9:33:22

0.0038529225 = product of:
  0.007705845 = sum of:
    0.007705845 = product of:
      0.01541169 = sum of:
        0.01541169 = weight(_text_:22 in 2178) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01541169 = score(doc=2178,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 2178, 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=2178)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Frankfurter Rundschau. Nr.189 vom 14.8.2008, S.22

0.0038529225 = product of:
  0.007705845 = sum of:
    0.007705845 = product of:
      0.01541169 = sum of:
        0.01541169 = weight(_text_:22 in 2217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01541169 = score(doc=2217,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 2217, 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=2217)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 2.2008 13:51:27

0.0038529225 = product of:
  0.007705845 = sum of:
    0.007705845 = product of:
      0.01541169 = sum of:
        0.01541169 = weight(_text_:22 in 2331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01541169 = score(doc=2331,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 2331, 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=2331)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Neben Anwendungen und Beispielen aus verschiedenen Ländern belegt der Autor anhand beeindruckender Beispiele, wie wenig sinnstiftend Wort-/Wortsstammfilter sind (Seite 84 bis 91). Ein Hauptproblem in der Informations- und Wissensgesellschaft sieht er darin: »Die Bequemlichkeit der Nutzer« führe zu einer selbst auferlegten »Informationsbeschränkung« bei der Nutzung von Suchmaschinen (Seite 18 bis 21). Dementsprechend sieht Strzolka in der »fehlenden Informationskompetenz und Zensur« eine »unheilvolle Allianz« (Seite 24). »Sich auf Suchmaschinen als objektive Instanz zu verlassen«, heißt es später (Seite 56), »ist so naiv, wie die Bibel als einzige Informationsquelle für das Leben in der modernen Welt zu nutzen«. Denn: »Suchmaschinen zensieren nicht - Ihre Betreiber organisieren Zensur.« Internetzensur Auf 25 Seiten (Seite 74 bis 99) dokumentiert Strzolka mit bemerkenswerten Beispielen, wie das in der Praxis geschieht. Nach Strzolka beteiligen sich Bibliothekare auch an der (Internet-)Zensur (Seite 22 f, mit Beispielen auf Seite 34). Hier wäre eine tiefergehende Auseinsandersetzung angebracht gewesen. Beeindruckend dabei, wie Strzolka über »Zensur und Idiotenfallen« (Seite 84 bis 90) berichtet. »Das Internet ist eine ausgesprochen heterogene Datensammlung und >keineswegs die größte Bibliothek der Welt>, wie immer zu hören ist.« (Seite 25) Denn: »Informationsportale verengen den Weg in die Wissensgesellschaft [...], weil sie die Fokussierung auf gewünschte Quellen [fördern]« (Seite 25). Vor diesem Hintergrund müsse deshalb eher von »Informationsbeschränkung« als von »Informationsvielfalt« die Rede sein.

0.0038529225 = product of:
  0.007705845 = sum of:
    0.007705845 = product of:
      0.01541169 = sum of:
        0.01541169 = weight(_text_:22 in 2670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01541169 = score(doc=2670,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 2670, 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=2670)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 2.2009 19:08:56

0.0038529225 = product of:
  0.007705845 = sum of:
    0.007705845 = product of:
      0.01541169 = sum of:
        0.01541169 = weight(_text_:22 in 2869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01541169 = score(doc=2869,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 2869, 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=2869)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

20. 6.2009 15:13:22

0.0038529225 = product of:
  0.007705845 = sum of:
    0.007705845 = product of:
      0.01541169 = sum of:
        0.01541169 = weight(_text_:22 in 3042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01541169 = score(doc=3042,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 3042, 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=3042)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 8.2009 10:44:16

0.003249465 = product of:
  0.00649893 = sum of:
    0.00649893 = product of:
      0.01299786 = sum of:
        0.01299786 = weight(_text_:p in 2099) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01299786 = score(doc=2099,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.079450354 = fieldWeight in 2099, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2099)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

The book does achieve its aim of being a starting point for someone interested in the state of some areas of AI research at the beginning of the new millennium. The book's most irritating feature is the different writing styles of the authors. The book is organized as a collection of papers similar to a typical graduate survey course packet, and as a result the book does not possess a narrative flow. Also the book contains a number of other major weaknesses such as a lack of an introductory or concluding chapter. The book could greatly benefit from an introductory chapter that would introduce readers to the areas of AI, explain why such a book is needed, and explain why each author's research is important. The manner in which the book currently handles these issues is a preface that talks about some of the above issues in a superficial manner. Also such an introductory chapter could be used to expound an what level of AI mathematical and statistical knowledge is expected from readers in order to gain maximum benefit from this book. A concluding chapter would be useful to readers interested in the other areas of AI not covered by the book, as well as open issues common to all of the research presented. In addition, most of the contributors come exclusively from the computer science field, which heavily slants the work toward the computer science community. A great deal of the research presented is being used by a number of research communities outside of computer science, such as biotechnology and information technology. A wider audience for this book could have been achieved by including a more diverse range of authors showing the interdisciplinary nature of many of these fields. Also the book's editors state, "The reader is expected to have basic knowledge of AI at the level of an introductory course to the field" (p vii), which is not the case for this book. Readers need at least a strong familiarity with many of the core concepts within AI, because a number of the chapters are shallow and terse in their historical overviews. Overall, this book would be a useful tool for a professor putting together a survey course an AI research. Most importantly the book would be useful for eager graduate students in need of a starting point for their research for their thesis. This book is best suited as a reference guide to be used by individuals with a strong familiarity with AI."

0.003249465 = product of:
  0.00649893 = sum of:
    0.00649893 = product of:
      0.01299786 = sum of:
        0.01299786 = weight(_text_:p in 3400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01299786 = score(doc=3400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.079450354 = fieldWeight in 3400, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3400)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.003249465 = product of:
  0.00649893 = sum of:
    0.00649893 = product of:
      0.01299786 = sum of:
        0.01299786 = weight(_text_:p in 3993) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01299786 = score(doc=3993,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.079450354 = fieldWeight in 3993, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3993)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 56(2005) no.11, S.1237-1238 (E. Yakel): "This book provides the profession with a cogent, thorough, and thoughtful introduction to digital reference. Janes not only provides the breadth of coverage expected in an introduction, but also depth into this important topic. Janes' approach is managerial or administrative, providing guidelines for reference work that can be applied in different settings. Janes creates a decision-making framework to help reference librarians make decisions concerning how, to what extent, and in what cases digital reference services will be delivered. In this way, Janes avoids dictating a "one-size-fits-all" model. This approach is the major strength of the book. Library administrators and heads of reference services will find the administrative approach welcome by helping them think through which digital reference policies and methods will best target core constituencies and their institutional environments. However, the book deserves a broader audience as professors will find that the book fits nicely in a general reference course. For all readers, the book is readable and engaging and also challenging and questioning. The book begins with a history of reference work, nicely positioning digital reference in this tradition and noting the changes wrought by the digital age. By doing this, the author establishes both continuity and change in reference work as well as the values surrounding this activity. These values are largely those from the library community and Support people's access to information as well as activities that support the use of information. Janes closes this chapter by noting that the continuing changes in demographics, technology, and connectivity will impact reference work in ways that are not yet imaginable. This introduction sets the tone for the rest of the book. Janes defines digital reference service as "the use of digital technologies and resources to provide direct, professional assistance to people who are seeking information, wherever and whenever they need it" (p. 29). This definition covers a lot of ground. Examples include everything from a public library answering email queries to commercial ask-an-expert services. While the primary audience is librarians, Janes continually reminds readers that many others perform reference activities an the World Wide Web. Furthermore, he cautions readers that there are larger forces shaping this activity in the world that need to acknowledged. In building a framework for decision-making, Janes outlines the types of digital reference service. This discussion covers the communieations modes, such as e-mail, chat, Web forms, etc. It also analyzes the modalities by which reference service is delivered: synchronous/ asynchronous. Using these two dimensions (communication method and synchronous/asynchronous), Janes presents the variety of contexts in which digital reference can take place and then outlines the strengths and weaknesses of each of these. This translates into a decision-making framework by which readers analyze their particular setting and then select the modes and modalities that world be most effective. This is a powerful device and demonstrates the many options (and perhaps also the obstacles) for providing digital reference service.

0.003249465 = product of:
  0.00649893 = sum of:
    0.00649893 = product of:
      0.01299786 = sum of:
        0.01299786 = weight(_text_:p in 5965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01299786 = score(doc=5965,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.079450354 = fieldWeight in 5965, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=5965)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

da nun nach fast 200 Seiten der Hauptteil der Dissertation folgt - die Vorstellung und Bewertung des bereits erwähnten COSIMIR Modells. Das COSIMIR Modell "berechnet die Ähnlichkeit zwischen den zwei anliegenden Input-Vektoren" (P.194). Der Output des Netzwerks wird an einem einzigen Knoten abgegriffen, an dem sich ein sogenannten Relevanzwert einstellt, wenn die Berechnungen der Gewichtungen interner Knoten zum Abschluss kommen. Diese Gewichtungen hängen von den angelegten Inputvektoren, aus denen die Gewichte der ersten Knotenschicht ermittelt werden, und den im Netzwerk vorgegebenen Kantengewichten ab. Die Gewichtung von Kanten ist der Kernpunkt des neuronalen Ansatzes: In Analogie zum biologischen Urbild (Dendrit mit Synapsen) wächst das Gewicht der Kante mit jeder Aktivierung während einer Trainingsphase. Legt man in dieser Phase zwei Inputvektoren, z.B. Dokumentvektor und Ouery gleichzeitig mit dem Relevanzurteil als Wert des Outputknoten an, verteilen sich durch den BackpropagationProzess die Gewichte entlang der Pfade, die zwischen den beteiligten Knoten bestehen. Da alle Knoten miteinander verbunden sind, entstehen nach mehreren Trainingsbeispielen bereits deutlich unterschiedliche Kantengewichte, weil die aktiv beteiligten Kanten die Änderungen akkumulativ speichern. Eine Variation des Verfahrens benutzt das NN als "Transformationsnetzwerk", wobei die beiden Inputvektoren mit einer Dokumentrepräsentation und einem dazugehörigen Indexat (von einem Experten bereitgestellt) belegt werden. Neben der schon aufgezeigten Trainingsnotwendigkeit weisen die Neuronalen Netze eine weitere intrinsische Problematik auf: Je mehr äußere Knoten benötigt werden, desto mehr interne Kanten (und bei der Verwendung von Zwischenschichten auch Knoten) sind zu verwalten, deren Anzahl nicht linear wächst. Dieser algorithmische Befund setzt naiven Einsätzen der NN-Modelle in der Praxis schnell Grenzen, deshalb ist es umso verdienstvoller, dass der Autor einen innovativen Weg zur Lösung des Problems mit den Mitteln des IR vorschlagen kann. Er verwendet das Latent Semantic Indexing, welches Dokumentrepräsentationen aus einem hochdimensionalen Vektorraum in einen niederdimensionalen abbildet, um die Anzahl der Knoten deutlich zu reduzieren. Damit ist eine sehr schöne Synthese gelungen, welche die eingangs angedeuteten formalen Übereinstimmungen zwischen Vektorraummodellen im IR und den NN aufzeigt und ausnutzt.

0.003249465 = product of:
  0.00649893 = sum of:
    0.00649893 = product of:
      0.01299786 = sum of:
        0.01299786 = weight(_text_:p in 339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01299786 = score(doc=339,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.079450354 = fieldWeight in 339, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=339)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Chapter 8 discusses issues of archiving and preserving digital materials. The chapter reiterates, "What is the point of all of this if the resources identified and catalogued are not preserved?" (Gorman, 2003, p. 16). Discussion about preservation and related issues is organized in five sections that successively ask why, what, who, how, and how much of the plethora of digital materials should be archived and preserved. These are not easy questions because of media instability and technological obsolescence. Stakeholders in communities with diverse interests compete in terms of which community or representative of a community has an authoritative say in what and how much get archived and preserved. In discussing the above-mentioned questions, the authors once again provide valuable information and lessons from a number of initiatives in Europe, Australia, and from other global initiatives. The Draft Charter on the Preservation of the Digital Heritage and the Guidelines for the Preservation of Digital Heritage, both published by UNESCO, are discussed and some of the preservation principles from the Guidelines are listed. The existing diversity in administrative arrangements for these new projects and resources notwithstanding, the impact on content produced for online reserves through work done in digital projects and from the use of metadata and the impact on levels of reference services and the ensuing need for different models to train users and staff is undeniable. In terms of education and training, formal coursework, continuing education, and informal and on-the-job training are just some of the available options. The intensity in resources required for cataloguing digital materials, the questions over the quality of digital resources, and the threat of the new digital environment to the survival of the traditional library are all issues quoted by critics and others, however, who are concerned about a balance for planning and resources allocated for traditional or print-based resources and newer digital resources. A number of questions are asked as part of the book's conclusions in Chapter 10. Of these questions, one that touches on all of the rest and upon much of the book's content is the question: What does the future hold for metadata in libraries? Metadata standards are alive and well in many communities of practice, as Chapters 2-6 have demonstrated. The usefulness of metadata continues to be high and innovation in various elements should keep information professionals engaged for decades to come. There is no doubt that metadata have had a tremendous impact in how we organize information for access and in terms of who, how, when, and where contact is made with library services and collections online. Planning and commitment to a diversity of metadata to serve the plethora of needs in communities of practice are paramount for the continued success of many digital projects and for online preservation of our digital heritage."

0.003249465 = product of:
  0.00649893 = sum of:
    0.00649893 = product of:
      0.01299786 = sum of:
        0.01299786 = weight(_text_:p in 442) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01299786 = score(doc=442,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.079450354 = fieldWeight in 442, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=442)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 58(2007) no.4, S.608-609 (K.D. Desouza): "Richard Rogers explores the distinctiveness of the World Wide Web as a politically contested space where information searchers may encounter multiple explanations of reality. Sources of information on the Web are in constant competition with each other for attention. The attention a source receives will determine its prominence, the ability to be a provider of leading information, and its inclusion in authoritative spaces. Rogers explores the politics behind evaluating sources that are collected and housed on authoritative spaces. Information politics on the Web can be looked at in terms of frontend or back-end politics. Front-end politics is concerned with whether sources on the Web pay attention to principles of inclusivity, fairness, and scope of representation in how information is presented, while back-end politics examines the logic behind how search engines or portals select and index information. Concerning front-end politics, Rogers questions the various versions of reality one can derive from examining information on the Web, especially when issues of information inclusivity and scope of representation are toiled with. In addition, Rogers is concerned with how back-end politics are being controlled by dominant forces of the market (i.e., the more an organization is willing to pay, the greater will be the site's visibility and prominence in authoritative spaces), regardless of whether the information presented on the site justifies such a placement. In the book, Rogers illustrates the issues involved in back-end and front-end politics (though heavily slanted on front-end politics) using vivid cases, all of which are derived from his own research. The main thrust is the exploration of how various "information instruments," defined as "a digital and analytical means of recording (capturing) and subsequently reading indications of states of defined information streams (p. 19)," help capture the politics of the Web. Rogers employs four specific instruments (Lay Decision Support System, Issue Barometer, Web Issue Index of Civil Society, and Election Issue Tracker), which are covered in detail in core chapters of the book (Chapter 2-Chapter 5). The book is comprised of six chapters, with Chapter 1 being the traditional introduction and Chapter 6 being a summary of the major concepts discussed.

0.003249465 = product of:
  0.00649893 = sum of:
    0.00649893 = product of:
      0.01299786 = sum of:
        0.01299786 = weight(_text_:p in 1804) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01299786 = score(doc=1804,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.079450354 = fieldWeight in 1804, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1804)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.003249465 = product of:
  0.00649893 = sum of:
    0.00649893 = product of:
      0.01299786 = sum of:
        0.01299786 = weight(_text_:p in 312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01299786 = score(doc=312,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.079450354 = fieldWeight in 312, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=312)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.003082338 = product of:
  0.006164676 = sum of:
    0.006164676 = product of:
      0.012329352 = sum of:
        0.012329352 = weight(_text_:22 in 1733) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012329352 = score(doc=1733,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 1733, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1733)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 6.2003 12:13:13