-
Bergeron, P.; Hiller, C.A.: Competitive intelligence (2002)
0.03
0.02599572 = product of:
0.05199144 = sum of:
0.05199144 = product of:
0.10398288 = sum of:
0.10398288 = weight(_text_:p in 4290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10398288 = score(doc=4290,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.63560283 = fieldWeight in 4290, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4290)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Enser, P.G.B.: Visual image retrieval (2008)
0.02
0.024658704 = product of:
0.04931741 = sum of:
0.04931741 = product of:
0.09863482 = sum of:
0.09863482 = weight(_text_:22 in 3281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09863482 = score(doc=3281,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 3281, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3281)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 1.2012 13:01:26
-
Morris, S.A.: Mapping research specialties (2008)
0.02
0.024658704 = product of:
0.04931741 = sum of:
0.04931741 = product of:
0.09863482 = sum of:
0.09863482 = weight(_text_:22 in 3962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09863482 = score(doc=3962,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 3962, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3962)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 13. 7.2008 9:30:22
-
Fallis, D.: Social epistemology and information science (2006)
0.02
0.024658704 = product of:
0.04931741 = sum of:
0.04931741 = product of:
0.09863482 = sum of:
0.09863482 = weight(_text_:22 in 4368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09863482 = score(doc=4368,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4368, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4368)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 13. 7.2008 19:22:28
-
Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007)
0.02
0.024658704 = product of:
0.04931741 = sum of:
0.04931741 = product of:
0.09863482 = sum of:
0.09863482 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09863482 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 13. 7.2008 19:53:22
-
Kling, R.: ¬The Internet and unrefereed scholarly publishing (2003)
0.01
0.013786313 = product of:
0.027572626 = sum of:
0.027572626 = product of:
0.055145252 = sum of:
0.055145252 = weight(_text_:p in 4272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055145252 = score(doc=4272,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.33707932 = fieldWeight in 4272, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4272)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In the early 1990s, much of the enthusiasm for the use of electronic media to enhance scholarly communication focused an electronic journals, especially electronic-only, (pure) e journals (see for example, Peek & Newby's [1996] anthology). Much of the systematic research an the use of electronic media to enhance scholarly communication also focused an electronic journals. However, by the late 1990s, numerous scientific publishers had transformed their paper journals (p journals) into paper and electronic journals (p-e journals) and sold them via subscription models that did not provide the significant costs savings, speed of access, or breadth of audience that pure e -journal advocates had expected (Okerson, 1996). In 2001, a group of senior life scientists led a campaign to have publishers make their journals freely available online six months after publication (Russo, 2001). The campaign leaders, using the name "Public Library of Science," asked scientists to boycott journals that did not comply with these demands for open access. Although the proposal was discussed in scientific magazines and conferences, it apparently did not persuade any journal publishers to comply (Young, 2002). Most productive scientists, who work for major universities and research institutes
-
Davenport, E.; Hall, H.: Organizational Knowledge and Communities of Practice (2002)
0.01
0.013786313 = product of:
0.027572626 = sum of:
0.027572626 = product of:
0.055145252 = sum of:
0.055145252 = weight(_text_:p in 4293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055145252 = score(doc=4293,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.33707932 = fieldWeight in 4293, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4293)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- A community of practice has recently been defined as "a flexible group of professionals, informally bound by common interests, who interact through interdependent tasks guided by a common purpose thereby embodying a store of common knowledge" (Jubert, 1999, p. 166). The association of communities of practice with the production of collective knowledge has long been recognized, and they have been objects of study for a number of decades in the context of professional communication, particularly communication in science (Abbott, 1988; Bazerman & Paradis, 1991). Recently, however, they have been invoked in the domain of organization studies as sites where people learn and share insights. If, as Stinchcombe suggests, an organization is "a set of stable social relations, dehberately created, with the explicit intention of continuously accomplishing some specific goals or purposes" (Stinchcombe, 1965, p. 142), where does this "flexible" and "embodied" source of knowledge fit? Can communities of practice be harnessed, engineered, and managed like other organizational groups, or does their strength lie in the fact that they operate outside the stable and persistent social relations that characterize the organization?
-
Benoit, G.: Data mining (2002)
0.01
0.013786313 = product of:
0.027572626 = sum of:
0.027572626 = product of:
0.055145252 = sum of:
0.055145252 = weight(_text_:p in 4296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055145252 = score(doc=4296,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.33707932 = fieldWeight in 4296, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4296)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Data mining (DM) is a multistaged process of extracting previously unanticipated knowledge from large databases, and applying the results to decision making. Data mining tools detect patterns from the data and infer associations and rules from them. The extracted information may then be applied to prediction or classification models by identifying relations within the data records or between databases. Those patterns and rules can then guide decision making and forecast the effects of those decisions. However, this definition may be applied equally to "knowledge discovery in databases" (KDD). Indeed, in the recent literature of DM and KDD, a source of confusion has emerged, making it difficult to determine the exact parameters of both. KDD is sometimes viewed as the broader discipline, of which data mining is merely a component-specifically pattern extraction, evaluation, and cleansing methods (Raghavan, Deogun, & Sever, 1998, p. 397). Thurasingham (1999, p. 2) remarked that "knowledge discovery," "pattern discovery," "data dredging," "information extraction," and "knowledge mining" are all employed as synonyms for DM. Trybula, in his ARIST chapter an text mining, observed that the "existing work [in KDD] is confusing because the terminology is inconsistent and poorly defined.
-
Kim, K.-S.: Recent work in cataloging and classification, 2000-2002 (2003)
0.01
0.012329352 = product of:
0.024658704 = sum of:
0.024658704 = product of:
0.04931741 = sum of:
0.04931741 = weight(_text_:22 in 152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04931741 = score(doc=152,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 152, 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=152)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
El-Sherbini, M.A.: Cataloging and classification : review of the literature 2005-06 (2008)
0.01
0.012329352 = product of:
0.024658704 = sum of:
0.024658704 = product of:
0.04931741 = sum of:
0.04931741 = weight(_text_:22 in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04931741 = score(doc=249,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 249, 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=249)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Miksa, S.D.: ¬The challenges of change : a review of cataloging and classification literature, 2003-2004 (2007)
0.01
0.012329352 = product of:
0.024658704 = sum of:
0.024658704 = product of:
0.04931741 = sum of:
0.04931741 = weight(_text_:22 in 266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04931741 = score(doc=266,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 266, 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=266)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Nielsen, M.L.: Thesaurus construction : key issues and selected readings (2004)
0.01
0.010788183 = product of:
0.021576365 = sum of:
0.021576365 = product of:
0.04315273 = sum of:
0.04315273 = weight(_text_:22 in 5006) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04315273 = score(doc=5006,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5006, 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=5006)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 18. 5.2006 20:06:22
-
Weiss, A.K.; Carstens, T.V.: ¬The year's work in cataloging, 1999 (2001)
0.01
0.010788183 = product of:
0.021576365 = sum of:
0.021576365 = product of:
0.04315273 = sum of:
0.04315273 = weight(_text_:22 in 6084) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04315273 = score(doc=6084,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6084, 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=6084)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Lievrouw, A.A.; Farb, S.E.: Information and equity (2002)
0.01
0.009748395 = product of:
0.01949679 = sum of:
0.01949679 = product of:
0.03899358 = sum of:
0.03899358 = weight(_text_:p in 4243) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03899358 = score(doc=4243,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.23835106 = fieldWeight in 4243, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4243)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Inequities in information creation, production, distribution, and use are nothing new. Throughout human history some people have been more educated, better connected, more widely traveled, or more wellinformed than others. Until recently, relatively few have enjoyed the benefits of literacy, and even fewer could afford to own books. In the age of mass media, societies and social groups have varied dramatically in terms of their access to and uses of print, radio, television, film, telephone, and telegraph. What is new, however, is the growing attention being given to informational inequities in an increasingly information-driven global economy. Across disciplinary, national, and cultural boundaries, the widespread agreement is that the use of newer information and communication technologies (ICTs), particularly the Internet, has accelerated the production, circulation, and consumption of information in every form. But also a growing sense has arisen that ICTs have helped to exacerbate existing differences in information access and use, and may even have fostered new types of barriers. As Hess and Ostrom (2001, p. 45) point out, "Distributed digital technologies have the dual capacity to increase as well as restrict access to information."
-
Vakkari, P.: Task-based information searching (2002)
0.01
0.009748395 = product of:
0.01949679 = sum of:
0.01949679 = product of:
0.03899358 = sum of:
0.03899358 = weight(_text_:p in 4288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03899358 = score(doc=4288,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.23835106 = fieldWeight in 4288, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4288)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Chen, A.-P.; Chen, M.-Y.: ¬A review of survey research in knowledge management performance (2005)
0.01
0.009748395 = product of:
0.01949679 = sum of:
0.01949679 = product of:
0.03899358 = sum of:
0.03899358 = weight(_text_:p in 3025) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03899358 = score(doc=3025,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.23835106 = fieldWeight in 3025, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3025)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Genereux, C.: Building connections : a review of the serials literature 2004 through 2005 (2007)
0.01
0.009247013 = product of:
0.018494027 = sum of:
0.018494027 = product of:
0.036988053 = sum of:
0.036988053 = weight(_text_:22 in 2548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036988053 = score(doc=2548,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2548, 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=2548)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Galloway, P.: Preservation of digital objects (2003)
0.01
0.008123662 = product of:
0.016247325 = sum of:
0.016247325 = product of:
0.03249465 = sum of:
0.03249465 = weight(_text_:p in 4275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03249465 = score(doc=4275,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.19862589 = fieldWeight in 4275, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4275)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Rogers, Y.: New theoretical approaches for human-computer interaction (2003)
0.01
0.008042016 = product of:
0.016084032 = sum of:
0.016084032 = product of:
0.032168064 = sum of:
0.032168064 = weight(_text_:p in 4270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032168064 = score(doc=4270,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.1966296 = fieldWeight in 4270, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4270)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- "Theory weary, theory leery, why can't I be theory cheery?" (Erickson, 2002, p. 269). The field of human-computer interaction (HCI) is rapidly expanding. Alongside the extensive technological developments that are taking place, a profusion of new theories, methods, and concerns has been imported into the field from a range of disciplines and contexts. An extensive critique of recent theoretical developments is presented here together with an overview of HCI practice. A consequence of bringing new theories into the field has been much insightful explication of HCI phenomena and also a broadening of the field's discourse. However, these theoretically based approaches have had limited impact an the practice of interaction design. This chapter discusses why this is so and suggests that different kinds of mechanisms are needed that will enable both designers and researchers to better articulate and theoretically ground the challenges facing them today. Human-computer interaction is bursting at the seams. Its mission, goals, and methods, well established in the '80s, have all greatly expanded to the point that "HCI is now effectively a boundless domain" (Barnard, May, Duke, & Duce, 2000, p. 221). Everything is in a state of flux: The theory driving research is changing, a flurry of new concepts is emerging, the domains and type of users being studied are diversifying, many of the ways of doing design are new, and much of what is being designed is significantly different. Although potentially much is to be gained from such rapid growth, the downside is an increasing lack of direction, structure, and coherence in the field. What was originally a bounded problem space with a clear focus and a small set of methods for designing computer systems that were easier and more efficient to use by a single user is now turning into a diffuse problem space with less clarity in terms of its objects of study, design foci, and investigative methods. Instead, aspirations of overcoming the Digital Divide, by providing universal accessibility, have become major concerns (e.g., Shneiderman, 2002a). The move toward greater openness in the field means that many more topics, areas, and approaches are now considered acceptable in the worlds of research and practice.
-
Rasmussen, E.M.: Indexing and retrieval for the Web (2002)
0.01
0.008042016 = product of:
0.016084032 = sum of:
0.016084032 = product of:
0.032168064 = sum of:
0.032168064 = weight(_text_:p in 4285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032168064 = score(doc=4285,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.045500398 = queryNorm
0.1966296 = fieldWeight in 4285, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4285)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The introduction and growth of the World Wide Web (WWW, or Web) have resulted in a profound change in the way individuals and organizations access information. In terms of volume, nature, and accessibility, the characteristics of electronic information are significantly different from those of even five or six years ago. Control of, and access to, this flood of information rely heavily an automated techniques for indexing and retrieval. According to Gudivada, Raghavan, Grosky, and Kasanagottu (1997, p. 58), "The ability to search and retrieve information from the Web efficiently and effectively is an enabling technology for realizing its full potential." Almost 93 percent of those surveyed consider the Web an "indispensable" Internet technology, second only to e-mail (Graphie, Visualization & Usability Center, 1998). Although there are other ways of locating information an the Web (browsing or following directory structures), 85 percent of users identify Web pages by means of a search engine (Graphie, Visualization & Usability Center, 1998). A more recent study conducted by the Stanford Institute for the Quantitative Study of Society confirms the finding that searching for information is second only to e-mail as an Internet activity (Nie & Ebring, 2000, online). In fact, Nie and Ebring conclude, "... the Internet today is a giant public library with a decidedly commercial tilt. The most widespread use of the Internet today is as an information search utility for products, travel, hobbies, and general information. Virtually all users interviewed responded that they engaged in one or more of these information gathering activities."
Techniques for automated indexing and information retrieval (IR) have been developed, tested, and refined over the past 40 years, and are well documented (see, for example, Agosti & Smeaton, 1996; BaezaYates & Ribeiro-Neto, 1999a; Frakes & Baeza-Yates, 1992; Korfhage, 1997; Salton, 1989; Witten, Moffat, & Bell, 1999). With the introduction of the Web, and the capability to index and retrieve via search engines, these techniques have been extended to a new environment. They have been adopted, altered, and in some Gases extended to include new methods. "In short, search engines are indispensable for searching the Web, they employ a variety of relatively advanced IR techniques, and there are some peculiar aspects of search engines that make searching the Web different than more conventional information retrieval" (Gordon & Pathak, 1999, p. 145). The environment for information retrieval an the World Wide Web differs from that of "conventional" information retrieval in a number of fundamental ways. The collection is very large and changes continuously, with pages being added, deleted, and altered. Wide variability between the size, structure, focus, quality, and usefulness of documents makes Web documents much more heterogeneous than a typical electronic document collection. The wide variety of document types includes images, video, audio, and scripts, as well as many different document languages. Duplication of documents and sites is common. Documents are interconnected through networks of hyperlinks. Because of the size and dynamic nature of the Web, preprocessing all documents requires considerable resources and is often not feasible, certainly not an the frequent basis required to ensure currency. Query length is usually much shorter than in other environments-only a few words-and user behavior differs from that in other environments. These differences make the Web a novel environment for information retrieval (Baeza-Yates & Ribeiro-Neto, 1999b; Bharat & Henzinger, 1998; Huang, 2000).
