-
Ballard, R.M.: Indexing and its relevance to technical processing (1993)
0.03
0.02753062 = product of:
0.05506124 = sum of:
0.05506124 = product of:
0.11012248 = sum of:
0.11012248 = weight(_text_:r.m in 554) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11012248 = score(doc=554,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2963294 = queryWeight, product of:
6.727074 = idf(docFreq=143, maxDocs=44218)
0.044050265 = queryNorm
0.37162185 = fieldWeight in 554, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.727074 = idf(docFreq=143, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=554)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Veenema, F.: To index or not to index (1996)
0.01
0.011936406 = product of:
0.023872811 = sum of:
0.023872811 = product of:
0.047745623 = sum of:
0.047745623 = weight(_text_:22 in 7247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047745623 = score(doc=7247,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15425652 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044050265 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7247, 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=7247)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Canadian journal of information and library science. 21(1996) no.2, S.1-22
-
Booth, A.: How consistent is MEDLINE indexing? (1990)
0.01
0.010444355 = product of:
0.02088871 = sum of:
0.02088871 = product of:
0.04177742 = sum of:
0.04177742 = weight(_text_:22 in 3510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04177742 = score(doc=3510,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15425652 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044050265 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3510, 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=3510)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Health libraries review. 7(1990) no.1, S.22-26