Search (1516 results, page 1 of 76)

0.1685013 = sum of:
  0.124392994 = product of:
    0.49757197 = sum of:
      0.49757197 = weight(_text_:3a in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.49757197 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.4426655 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          1.1240361 = fieldWeight in 973, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=973)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.044108305 = product of:
    0.08821661 = sum of:
      0.08821661 = weight(_text_:k in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08821661 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18639012 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.47329018 = fieldWeight in 973, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=973)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fcreativechoice.org%2Fdoc%2FHansJonas.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1TM3teaYKgABL5H9yoIifA&opi=89978449.

0.11770231 = sum of:
  0.031148873 = product of:
    0.12459549 = sum of:
      0.12459549 = weight(_text_:authors in 4000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.12459549 = score(doc=4000,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.23803101 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.52344227 = fieldWeight in 4000, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4000)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.08655344 = sum of:
    0.044108305 = weight(_text_:k in 4000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044108305 = score(doc=4000,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18639012 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052213363 = queryNorm
        0.23664509 = fieldWeight in 4000, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4000)
    0.042445138 = weight(_text_:22 in 4000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042445138 = score(doc=4000,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1828423 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052213363 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4000, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4000)

Abstract

Author research impact was examined based on citer analysis (the number of citers as opposed to the number of citations) for 90 highly cited authors grouped into three broad subject areas. Citer-based outcome measures were also compared with more traditional citation-based measures for levels of association. The authors found that there are significant differences in citer-based outcomes among the three broad subject areas examined and that there is a high degree of correlation between citer and citation-based measures for all measures compared, except for two outcomes calculated for the social sciences. Citer-based measures do produce slightly different rankings of authors based on citer counts when compared to more traditional citation counts. Examples are provided. Citation measures may not adequately address the influence, or reach, of an author because citations usually do not address the origin of the citation beyond self-citations.

Date

28. 9.2010 12:54:22

0.117127985 = sum of:
  0.07256258 = product of:
    0.29025033 = sum of:
      0.29025033 = weight(_text_:3a in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.29025033 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.4426655 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 5955, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5955)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.044565402 = product of:
    0.089130804 = sum of:
      0.089130804 = weight(_text_:k in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.089130804 = score(doc=5955,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.18639012 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.4781949 = fieldWeight in 5955, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5955)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Classification

OKH (FH K)

Footnote

Rez. in: Philosophisch-ethische Rezensionen vom 09.11.2019 (Jürgen Czogalla), Unter: https://philosophisch-ethische-rezensionen.de/rezension/Goedert1.html. In: B.I.T. online 23(2020) H.3, S.345-347 (W. Sühl-Strohmenger) [Unter: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.b-i-t-online.de%2Fheft%2F2020-03-rezensionen.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0iY3f_zNcvEjeZ6inHVnOK]. In: Open Password Nr. 805 vom 14.08.2020 (H.-C. Hobohm) [Unter: https://www.password-online.de/?mailpoet_router&endpoint=view_in_browser&action=view&data=WzE0MywiOGI3NjZkZmNkZjQ1IiwwLDAsMTMxLDFd].

GHBS

OKH (FH K)

0.08711438 = sum of:
  0.0149865085 = product of:
    0.059946034 = sum of:
      0.059946034 = weight(_text_:authors in 3070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.059946034 = score(doc=3070,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23803101 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.25184128 = fieldWeight in 3070, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3070)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.07212787 = sum of:
    0.03675692 = weight(_text_:k in 3070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03675692 = score(doc=3070,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18639012 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052213363 = queryNorm
        0.19720423 = fieldWeight in 3070, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3070)
    0.03537095 = weight(_text_:22 in 3070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03537095 = score(doc=3070,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1828423 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052213363 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3070, 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=3070)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to investigate user experiences with a touch-wall interface featuring both clustering and categorization representations of available e-books in a public library to understand human information interactions under work-focused and recreational contexts. Design/methodology/approach - Researchers collected questionnaires from 251 New Taipei City Library visitors who used the touch-wall interface to search for new titles. The authors applied structural equation modelling to examine relationships among hedonic/utilitarian needs, clustering and categorization representations, perceived ease of use (EU) and the extent to which users experienced anxiety and uncertainty (AU) while interacting with the interface. Findings - Utilitarian users who have an explicit idea of what they intend to find tend to prefer the categorization interface. A hedonic-oriented user tends to prefer clustering interfaces. Users reported EU regardless of which interface they engaged with. Results revealed that use of the clustering interface had a negative correlation with AU. Users that seek to satisfy utilitarian needs tended to emphasize the importance of perceived EU, whilst pleasure-seeking users were a little more tolerant of anxiety or uncertainty. Originality/value - The Online Public Access Catalogue (OPAC) encourages library visitors to borrow digital books through the implementation of an information visualization system. This situation poses an opportunity to validate uses and gratification theory. People with hedonic/utilitarian needs displayed different risk-control attitudes and affected uncertainty using the interface. Knowledge about user interaction with such interfaces is vital when launching the development of a new OPAC.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.08655344 = product of:
  0.17310688 = sum of:
    0.17310688 = sum of:
      0.08821661 = weight(_text_:k in 4248) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08821661 = score(doc=4248,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18639012 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.47329018 = fieldWeight in 4248, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4248)
      0.084890276 = weight(_text_:22 in 4248) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.084890276 = score(doc=4248,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1828423 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4248, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4248)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Spektrum der Wissenschaft. 2011, H.2, S.22-29

0.08655344 = product of:
  0.17310688 = sum of:
    0.17310688 = sum of:
      0.08821661 = weight(_text_:k in 4973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08821661 = score(doc=4973,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18639012 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.47329018 = fieldWeight in 4973, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4973)
      0.084890276 = weight(_text_:22 in 4973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.084890276 = score(doc=4973,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1828423 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4973, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4973)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

1. 2.2019 12:50:22

0.060073726 = sum of:
  0.04238825 = product of:
    0.169553 = sum of:
      0.169553 = weight(_text_:authors in 4150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.169553 = score(doc=4150,freq=16.0), product of:
          0.23803101 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.7123147 = fieldWeight in 4150, product of:
            4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
              16.0 = termFreq=16.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4150)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.017685475 = product of:
    0.03537095 = sum of:
      0.03537095 = weight(_text_:22 in 4150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03537095 = score(doc=4150,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1828423 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4150, 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=4150)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The domain of knowledge organization (KO) represents a foundational area of information science. One way to better understand the intellectual structure of the KO domain is to apply bibliometric methods to key contributors to the literature. This study analyzes the most prolific contributing authors to the journal Knowledge Organization, the sources they cite and the citations they receive for the period 1993 to 2016. The analyses were conducted using visualization outcomes of citation, co-citation and author bibliographic coupling analysis to reveal theoretical points of reference among authors and the most prominent research themes that constitute this scientific community. Birger Hjørland was the most cited author, and was situated at or near the middle of each of the maps based on different citation relationships. The proximities between authors resulting from the different citation relationships demonstrate how authors situate themselves intellectually through the citations they give and how other authors situate them through the citations received. There is a consistent core of theoretical references as well among the most productive authors. We observed a close network of scholarly communication between the authors cited in this core, which indicates the actual role of the journal Knowledge Organization as a space for knowledge construction in the area of knowledge organization.

Source

Knowledge organization. 45(2018) no.1, S.13-22

0.059421483 = product of:
  0.11884297 = sum of:
    0.11884297 = sum of:
      0.07639783 = weight(_text_:k in 690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07639783 = score(doc=690,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.18639012 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.40988132 = fieldWeight in 690, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=690)
      0.042445138 = weight(_text_:22 in 690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042445138 = score(doc=690,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1828423 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 690, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=690)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

We describe the latent semantic indexing subspace signature model (LSISSM) for semantic content representation of unstructured text. Grounded on singular value decomposition, the model represents terms and documents by the distribution signatures of their statistical contribution across the top-ranking latent concept dimensions. LSISSM matches term signatures with document signatures according to their mapping coherence between latent semantic indexing (LSI) term subspace and LSI document subspace. LSISSM does feature reduction and finds a low-rank approximation of scalable and sparse term-document matrices. Experiments demonstrate that this approach significantly improves the performance of major clustering algorithms such as standard K-means and self-organizing maps compared with the vector space model and the traditional LSI model. The unique contribution ranking mechanism in LSISSM also improves the initialization of standard K-means compared with random seeding procedure, which sometimes causes low efficiency and effectiveness of clustering. A two-stage initialization strategy based on LSISSM significantly reduces the running time of standard K-means procedures.

Date

23. 3.2013 13:22:36

0.057702295 = product of:
  0.11540459 = sum of:
    0.11540459 = sum of:
      0.058811072 = weight(_text_:k in 4331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.058811072 = score(doc=4331,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18639012 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.31552678 = fieldWeight in 4331, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4331)
      0.05659352 = weight(_text_:22 in 4331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05659352 = score(doc=4331,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1828423 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4331, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4331)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

15. 3.2011 19:21:22

0.057702295 = product of:
  0.11540459 = sum of:
    0.11540459 = sum of:
      0.058811072 = weight(_text_:k in 1715) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.058811072 = score(doc=1715,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18639012 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.31552678 = fieldWeight in 1715, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1715)
      0.05659352 = weight(_text_:22 in 1715) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05659352 = score(doc=1715,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1828423 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1715, 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=1715)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 27(2015) H.1, S.18-22

0.057702295 = product of:
  0.11540459 = sum of:
    0.11540459 = sum of:
      0.058811072 = weight(_text_:k in 4995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.058811072 = score(doc=4995,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18639012 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.31552678 = fieldWeight in 4995, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4995)
      0.05659352 = weight(_text_:22 in 4995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05659352 = score(doc=4995,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1828423 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4995, 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=4995)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

13. 2.2019 9:22:14

0.057368606 = sum of:
  0.02098111 = product of:
    0.08392444 = sum of:
      0.08392444 = weight(_text_:authors in 4966) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08392444 = score(doc=4966,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23803101 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.35257778 = fieldWeight in 4966, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4966)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.036387496 = product of:
    0.07277499 = sum of:
      0.07277499 = weight(_text_:k in 4966) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07277499 = score(doc=4966,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.18639012 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.39044446 = fieldWeight in 4966, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4966)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Landmark textbook taking a whole subject approach to information science as a discipline. The authors' expert narratives guides you through each of the essential components of information science, offering a concise introduction an expertly chosen readings and resources. This is the definitve science textbook for students of this subject, and of information and knowledge management, librarianship, archives and records management worldwide.

Classification

BAHH (FH K)

GHBS

BAHH (FH K)

0.055996563 = sum of:
  0.02098111 = product of:
    0.08392444 = sum of:
      0.08392444 = weight(_text_:authors in 1400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08392444 = score(doc=1400,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23803101 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.35257778 = fieldWeight in 1400, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1400)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.035015453 = product of:
    0.070030905 = sum of:
      0.070030905 = weight(_text_:22 in 1400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.070030905 = score(doc=1400,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.1828423 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 1400, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1400)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper discusses and illustrates through examples how meaningful or deep learning can be supported through well-structured presentation of material, through giving learners schemas they can use to organize knowledge in their minds, and through helping learners to understand knowledge organization principles they can use to construct their own schemas. It is a call to all authors, educators and information designers to pay attention to meaningful presentation that expresses the internal structure of the domain and facilitates the learner's assimilation of concepts and their relationships.

Pages

S.22-32

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.055446193 = sum of:
  0.025432948 = product of:
    0.10173179 = sum of:
      0.10173179 = weight(_text_:authors in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.10173179 = score(doc=1967,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.23803101 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.42738882 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.030013246 = product of:
    0.060026493 = sum of:
      0.060026493 = weight(_text_:22 in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.060026493 = score(doc=1967,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.1828423 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper reports on the second part of an initiative of the authors on researching classification systems with the conceptual model defined by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) final report. In an earlier study, the authors explored whether the FRSAD conceptual model could be extended beyond subject authority data to model classification data. The focus of the current study is to determine if classification data modeled using FRSAD can be used to solve real-world discovery problems in multicultural and multilingual contexts. The paper discusses the relationships between entities (same type or different types) in the context of classification systems that involve multiple translations and /or multicultural implementations. Results of two case studies are presented in detail: (a) two instances of the DDC (DDC 22 in English, and the Swedish-English mixed translation of DDC 22), and (b) Chinese Library Classification. The use cases of conceptual models in practice are also discussed.

0.055401616 = sum of:
  0.029671771 = product of:
    0.118687086 = sum of:
      0.118687086 = weight(_text_:authors in 1933) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.118687086 = score(doc=1933,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.23803101 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.49862027 = fieldWeight in 1933, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1933)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.025729846 = product of:
    0.051459692 = sum of:
      0.051459692 = weight(_text_:k in 1933) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.051459692 = score(doc=1933,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18639012 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.27608594 = fieldWeight in 1933, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1933)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article provides a background for the change of the classification system for Chinese language materials at an academic library. It describes how the decision was made; how choices on partial reclassification or total reclassification were made; and how matters such as project planning, implementation, and vision for the future are being handled. It is hoped that the authors' experience can offer tips for other libraries contemplating reclassification projects. By making use of the Chinese Library Classification (CLC) numbers from various sources in Mainland China, the authors envisage increased cataloging efficiency and cost saving in the long run.

0.054431435 = sum of:
  0.029671771 = product of:
    0.118687086 = sum of:
      0.118687086 = weight(_text_:authors in 2600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.118687086 = score(doc=2600,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.23803101 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.49862027 = fieldWeight in 2600, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2600)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.024759663 = product of:
    0.049519327 = sum of:
      0.049519327 = weight(_text_:22 in 2600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049519327 = score(doc=2600,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1828423 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2600, 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=2600)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Research libraries are using batchloading to provide access to many resources that they would otherwise be unable to catalog given the staff and other resources available. To explore how such libraries are managing their batchloading activities, the authors conducted a survey of the Association for Library Collections and Technical Services Directors of Large Research Libraries Interest Group member libraries. The survey addressed staffing, budgets, scope, workflow, management, quality standards, information technology support, collaborative efforts, and assessment of batchloading activities. The authors provide an analysis of the survey results along with suggestions for process improvements and future research.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.054394774 = sum of:
  0.036709297 = product of:
    0.14683719 = sum of:
      0.14683719 = weight(_text_:authors in 823) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.14683719 = score(doc=823,freq=12.0), product of:
          0.23803101 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.61688256 = fieldWeight in 823, product of:
            3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
              12.0 = termFreq=12.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=823)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.017685475 = product of:
    0.03537095 = sum of:
      0.03537095 = weight(_text_:22 in 823) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03537095 = score(doc=823,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1828423 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 823, 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=823)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Aiming at contributing to the epistemological characterization of the area of knowledge organization, our goal is to analyze the KO journal, since its creation in 1993, as a knowledge domain, from a nuclear community of the most productive and greater impact authors, analyzing the dialogue among citing authors and cited ones, and also the co-citations established by the citing authors. We worked with a corpus of 310 articles published between 1993 and 2011 produced by a total of 360 authors. The relatively more productive authors, a group geographically concentrated in Europe (37%), North America (44%) and Asia (19%), is clearly explained by the historical European origin of the ISKO and by an increasing North American presence along the years. Of the 33 most cited authors, 22 were co-cited in at least 6 works, which suggests that they are the theoretical referential nucleus of the area, in the studied journal. Finally, we observe that the area reveals theme cohesion and coherence in its production, enabling us to clearly visualize its theoretical referential nucleus and to confirm the role performed by the KO magazine as a catalyzing agent of international theoretical construction in the area.

0.053203024 = sum of:
  0.031148873 = product of:
    0.12459549 = sum of:
      0.12459549 = weight(_text_:authors in 234) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.12459549 = score(doc=234,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.23803101 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.52344227 = fieldWeight in 234, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=234)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.022054153 = product of:
    0.044108305 = sum of:
      0.044108305 = weight(_text_:k in 234) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.044108305 = score(doc=234,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18639012 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.23664509 = fieldWeight in 234, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=234)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The authors review five paradigms from the discipline of community sociology (functionalism, evolution, conflict, interactionism, and exchange) to assess their potential utility for understanding everyday life information behavior and technology use. Their analysis considers the ways in which each paradigm defines the concepts of community, information, and technology. It also explores the insights offered by each paradigm regarding relationships between community and both information and technology. Accordingly, the authors highlight the ways in which existing information behavior and informatics scholarship draws from similar conceptual roots. Key insights drawn from this research, as well as remaining gaps and research questions, are examined. Additionally, they consider the limitations of each approach. The authors conclude by arguing for the value of a vigorous research program regarding information behavior and technology use in communities, particularly that which takes the community as the central unit of analysis. They consider key questions that could drive such a research program, as well as potentially fruitful conceptual and methodological approaches for this endeavor.

0.052411847 = product of:
  0.10482369 = sum of:
    0.10482369 = sum of:
      0.06237856 = weight(_text_:k in 987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06237856 = score(doc=987,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.18639012 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.33466667 = fieldWeight in 987, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=987)
      0.042445138 = weight(_text_:22 in 987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042445138 = score(doc=987,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1828423 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 987, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=987)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Classification

BCA (FH K)

Date

23. 7.2017 13:49:22

GHBS

BCA (FH K)

0.052411847 = product of:
  0.10482369 = sum of:
    0.10482369 = sum of:
      0.06237856 = weight(_text_:k in 1029) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06237856 = score(doc=1029,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.18639012 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.33466667 = fieldWeight in 1029, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1029)
      0.042445138 = weight(_text_:22 in 1029) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042445138 = score(doc=1029,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1828423 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052213363 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1029, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1029)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Classification

ANW (FH K)

Date

19.12.2015 11:57:22

GHBS

ANW (FH K)