Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × year_i:[1990 TO 2000}
  • × author_ss:"Broughton, V."
  1. Broughton, V.: Notational expressivity : the case for and against the representation of internal subject structure in notational coding (1999) 0.02 
    0.019402392 = product of:
  0.038804784 = sum of:
    0.038804784 = sum of:
      0.005158836 = weight(_text_:a in 6392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.005158836 = score(doc=6392,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.041389145 = queryNorm
          0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 6392, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6392)
      0.033645947 = weight(_text_:22 in 6392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.033645947 = score(doc=6392,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.041389145 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 6392, 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=6392)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The ways in which notation can be used to express the content of documents to which it relates are various. At the most superficial level notation can correspond to the hierarchical structure of the schedules or link to literal components. The notation of compound concepts can express the structure and composition of the compound, and systems exist in which symbols denote the functional roles of the constituent elements and the relationships between them. At the highest level notation can be used to mirror the actual structure of those entities which it represents, as in the case of mathematical systems or chemical compounds. Methods of displaying these structures are examined, and the practicality in a documentary context is questioned, with particular reference to recent revision work on the chemistry class of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification 2nd edition (BC2)
    Date
    10. 8.2001 13:22:14
    Type
    a
  2. Broughton, V.: ¬The development of a common auxiliary schedule of property : a preliminary survey and proposal for its development (1998) 0.00 
    0.003159129 = product of:
  0.006318258 = sum of:
    0.006318258 = product of:
      0.012636516 = sum of:
        0.012636516 = weight(_text_:a in 6410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012636516 = score(doc=6410,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.26478532 = fieldWeight in 6410, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6410)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  3. Broughton, V.: ¬The revision process in UDC : an examination of the systematic auxiliary of 'Point-of-View' using facet-analytical methods (1998) 0.00 
    0.001823924 = product of:
  0.003647848 = sum of:
    0.003647848 = product of:
      0.007295696 = sum of:
        0.007295696 = weight(_text_:a in 6367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007295696 = score(doc=6367,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 6367, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6367)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a