Search (24 results, page 1 of 2)

0.018671993 = product of:
  0.056015976 = sum of:
    0.056015976 = product of:
      0.11203195 = sum of:
        0.11203195 = weight(_text_:group in 3124) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11203195 = score(doc=3124,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.5114056 = fieldWeight in 3124, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3124)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Automated methods for the analysis, modeling, and visualization of large-scale scientometric data provide measures that enable the depiction of the state of world scientific development. We aimed to integrate minimum span clustering (MSC) and minimum spanning tree methods to cluster and visualize the global pattern of scientific publications (PSP) by analyzing aggregated Science Citation Index (SCI) data from 1994 to 2011. We hypothesized that PSP clustering is mainly affected by countries' geographic location, ethnicity, and level of economic development, as indicated in previous studies. Our results showed that the 100 countries with the highest rates of publications were decomposed into 12 PSP groups and that countries within a group tended to be geographically proximal, ethnically similar, or comparable in terms of economic status. Hubs and bridging nodes in each knowledge production group were identified. The performance of each group was evaluated across 16 knowledge domains based on their specialization, volume of publications, and relative impact. Awareness of the strengths and weaknesses of each group in various knowledge domains may have useful applications for examining scientific policies, adjusting the allocation of resources, and promoting international collaboration for future developments.

0.013070395 = product of:
  0.039211184 = sum of:
    0.039211184 = product of:
      0.07842237 = sum of:
        0.07842237 = weight(_text_:group in 1313) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07842237 = score(doc=1313,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.35798392 = fieldWeight in 1313, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1313)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.011203195 = product of:
  0.033609584 = sum of:
    0.033609584 = product of:
      0.06721917 = sum of:
        0.06721917 = weight(_text_:group in 1056) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06721917 = score(doc=1056,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.30684334 = fieldWeight in 1056, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1056)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The authors introduce an information visualization model, WebStar, for hyperlink-based information systems. Hyperlinks within a hyperlink-based document can be visualized in a two-dimensional visual space. All links are projected within a display sphere in the visual space. The relationship between a specified central document and its hyperlinked documents is visually presented in the visual space. In addition, users are able to define a group of subjects and to observe relevance between each subject and all hyperlinked documents via movement of that subject around the display sphere center. WebStar allows users to dynamically change an interest center during navigation. A retrieval mechanism is developed to control retrieved results in the visual space. Impact of movement of a subject on the visual document distribution is analyzed. An ambiguity problem caused by projection is discussed. Potential applications of this visualization model in information retrieval are included. Future research directions on the topic are addressed.

0.010687098 = product of:
  0.032061294 = sum of:
    0.032061294 = product of:
      0.06412259 = sum of:
        0.06412259 = weight(_text_:22 in 3406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06412259 = score(doc=3406,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3406, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3406)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

30. 5.2010 16:22:35

0.010687098 = product of:
  0.032061294 = sum of:
    0.032061294 = product of:
      0.06412259 = sum of:
        0.06412259 = weight(_text_:22 in 2755) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06412259 = score(doc=2755,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2755, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2755)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

1. 2.2016 18:25:22

0.010562475 = product of:
  0.031687424 = sum of:
    0.031687424 = product of:
      0.06337485 = sum of:
        0.06337485 = weight(_text_:group in 5215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06337485 = score(doc=5215,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.2892947 = fieldWeight in 5215, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5215)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The reader of a hypertext document in a web environment, if maximum use of the document is to be obtained, must visualize the overall structure of the paths through the document as well as the document space. Graphic visualization displays of this space, produced to assist in navigation, are classified into four groups, and Heo and Hirtle compare three of these classes as to their effectiveness. Distortion displays expand regions of interest while relatively diminishing the detail of the remaining regions. This technique will show both local detail and global structure. Zoom techniques use a series of increasingly focused displays of smaller and smaller areas, and can reduce cogitative overload, but do not provide an easy movement to other parts of the total space. Expanding outline displays use a tree structure to allow movement through a hierarchy of documents, but if the organization has a wide horizontal structure, or is not particularly hierarchical in nature such display can break down. Three dimensional layouts, which are not evaluated here, place objects by location in three space, providing more information and freedom. However, the space must be represented in two dimensions resulting in difficulty in visually judging depth, size and positioning. Ten students were assigned to each of eight groups composed of viewers of the three techniques and an unassisted control group using either a large (583 selected pages) or a small (50 selected pages) web space. Sets of 10 questions, which were designed to elicit the use of a visualization tool, were provided for each space. Accuracy and time spent were extracted from a log file. Users views were also surveyed after completion. ANOVA shows significant differences in accuracy and time based upon the visualization tool in use. A Tukey test shows zoom accuracy to be significantly less than expanding outline and zoom time to be significantly greater than both the outline and control groups. Size significantly affected accuracy and time, but had no interaction with tool type. While the expanding tool class out performed zoom and distortion, its performance was not significantly different from the control group.

0.009335997 = product of:
  0.028007988 = sum of:
    0.028007988 = product of:
      0.056015976 = sum of:
        0.056015976 = weight(_text_:group in 1725) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056015976 = score(doc=1725,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.2557028 = fieldWeight in 1725, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1725)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

We sought to understand how users interpret meanings of symbols commonly used in information systems, especially how icons are processed by the brain. We investigated Chinese and English speakers' processing of 4 types of visual stimuli: icons, pictures, Chinese characters, and English words. The goal was to examine, via functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data, the hypothesis that people cognitively process icons as logographic words and to provide neurological evidence related to human-computer interaction (HCI), which has been rare in traditional information system studies. According to the neuroimaging data of 19 participants, we conclude that icons are not cognitively processed as logographical words like Chinese characters, although they both stimulate the semantic system in the brain that is needed for language processing. Instead, more similar to images and pictures, icons are not as efficient as words in conveying meanings, and brains (people) make more effort to process icons than words. We use this study to demonstrate that it is practicable to test information system constructs such as elements of graphical user interfaces (GUIs) with neuroscience data and that, with such data, we can better understand individual or group differences related to system usage and user-computer interactions.

0.009068305 = product of:
  0.027204912 = sum of:
    0.027204912 = product of:
      0.054409824 = sum of:
        0.054409824 = weight(_text_:22 in 3355) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054409824 = score(doc=3355,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 3355, 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=3355)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 1.2017 16:54:03
22. 1.2017 17:10:56

0.0074809687 = product of:
  0.022442905 = sum of:
    0.022442905 = product of:
      0.04488581 = sum of:
        0.04488581 = weight(_text_:22 in 2500) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04488581 = score(doc=2500,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2500, 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=2500)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

30. 1.2007 18:22:41

0.0064122584 = product of:
  0.019236775 = sum of:
    0.019236775 = product of:
      0.03847355 = sum of:
        0.03847355 = weight(_text_:22 in 1289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03847355 = score(doc=1289,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1289, 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=1289)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".

0.0064122584 = product of:
  0.019236775 = sum of:
    0.019236775 = product of:
      0.03847355 = sum of:
        0.03847355 = weight(_text_:22 in 1781) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03847355 = score(doc=1781,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1781, 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=1781)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 3.2008 14:35:21

0.0064122584 = product of:
  0.019236775 = sum of:
    0.019236775 = product of:
      0.03847355 = sum of:
        0.03847355 = weight(_text_:22 in 3693) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03847355 = score(doc=3693,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3693, 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=3693)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 7.2010 19:36:46

0.0064122584 = product of:
  0.019236775 = sum of:
    0.019236775 = product of:
      0.03847355 = sum of:
        0.03847355 = weight(_text_:22 in 1709) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03847355 = score(doc=1709,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1709, 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=1709)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

4. 2.2015 9:22:39

0.0056015975 = product of:
  0.016804792 = sum of:
    0.016804792 = product of:
      0.033609584 = sum of:
        0.033609584 = weight(_text_:group in 1197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033609584 = score(doc=1197,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.15342167 = fieldWeight in 1197, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1197)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

When our experience of information discovery is mediated by a computer, we neither move ourselves nor the monitor. We have only the computer's monitor to view, and the keyboard and/or mouse to manipulate what is displayed there. Computer interfaces often reduce our ability to get a sense of the contents of a library: we don't perceive the scope of the library: its breadth, (the quantity of materials/information), its density (how full the shelves are, how thorough the collection is for individual topics), or the general audience for the materials (e.g., whether the materials are appropriate for middle school students, college professors, etc.). Additionally, many computer interfaces for information discovery require users to scroll through long lists, to click numerous navigational links and to read a lot of text to find the exact text they want to read. Text features of resources are almost always presented alphabetically, and the number of items in these alphabetical lists sometimes can be very long. Alphabetical ordering is certainly an improvement over no ordering, but it generally has no bearing on features with an inherent non-alphabetical ordering (e.g., dates of historical events), nor does it necessarily group similar items together. Alphabetical ordering of resources is analogous to one of the most familiar complaints about dictionaries: sometimes you need to know how to spell a word in order to look up its correct spelling in the dictionary. Some have used technology to replicate the appearance of physical libraries, presenting rooms of bookcases and shelves of book spines in virtual 3D environments. This approach presents a problem, as few book spines can be displayed legibly on a monitor screen. This article examines the role of book spines, call numbers, and other traditional organizational and information discovery concepts, and integrates this knowledge with information visualization techniques to show how computers and monitors can meet or exceed similar information discovery methods. The goal is to tap the unique potentials of current information visualization approaches in order to improve information discovery, offer new services, and most important of all, improve user satisfaction. We need to capitalize on what computers do well while bearing in mind their limitations. The intent is to design GUIs to optimize utility and provide a positive experience for the user.

0.0056015975 = product of:
  0.016804792 = sum of:
    0.016804792 = product of:
      0.033609584 = sum of:
        0.033609584 = weight(_text_:group in 1202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033609584 = score(doc=1202,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.15342167 = fieldWeight in 1202, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1202)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The concept of c-space is proposed as a visualization schema relating containers of content to cataloging surrogates and classification structures. Possible applications of keyword vector clusters within c-space could include improved retrieval rates through the use of captioning within visual hierarchies, tracings of semantic bleeding among subclasses, and access to buried knowledge within subject-neutral publication containers. The Scholastica Project is described as one example, following a tradition of research dating back to the 1980's. Preliminary focus group assessment indicates that this type of classification rendering may offer digital library searchers enriched entry strategies and an expanded range of re-entry vocabularies. Those of us who work in traditional libraries typically assume that our systems of classification: Library of Congress Classification (LCC) and Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), are descriptive rather than prescriptive. In other words, LCC classes and subclasses approximate natural groupings of texts that reflect an underlying order of knowledge, rather than arbitrary categories prescribed by librarians to facilitate efficient shelving. Philosophical support for this assumption has traditionally been found in a number of places, from the archetypal tree of knowledge, to Aristotelian categories, to the concept of discursive formations proposed by Michel Foucault. Gary P. Radford has elegantly described an encounter with Foucault's discursive formations in the traditional library setting: "Just by looking at the titles on the spines, you can see how the books cluster together...You can identify those books that seem to form the heart of the discursive formation and those books that reside on the margins. Moving along the shelves, you see those books that tend to bleed over into other classifications and that straddle multiple discursive formations. You can physically and sensually experience...those points that feel like state borders or national boundaries, those points where one subject ends and another begins, or those magical places where one subject has morphed into another..."

0.005343549 = product of:
  0.016030647 = sum of:
    0.016030647 = product of:
      0.032061294 = sum of:
        0.032061294 = weight(_text_:22 in 1397) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032061294 = score(doc=1397,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1397, 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=1397)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 3.2008 14:29:25

0.005343549 = product of:
  0.016030647 = sum of:
    0.016030647 = product of:
      0.032061294 = sum of:
        0.032061294 = weight(_text_:22 in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032061294 = score(doc=5272,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5272, 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=5272)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 7.2006 16:11:05

0.005343549 = product of:
  0.016030647 = sum of:
    0.016030647 = product of:
      0.032061294 = sum of:
        0.032061294 = weight(_text_:22 in 3070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032061294 = score(doc=3070,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.005343549 = product of:
  0.016030647 = sum of:
    0.016030647 = product of:
      0.032061294 = sum of:
        0.032061294 = weight(_text_:22 in 4573) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032061294 = score(doc=4573,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4573, 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=4573)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

9.12.2018 16:22:25

0.005343549 = product of:
  0.016030647 = sum of:
    0.016030647 = product of:
      0.032061294 = sum of:
        0.032061294 = weight(_text_:22 in 4641) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032061294 = score(doc=4641,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4641, 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=4641)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

21.12.2018 17:22:13