Search (141 results, page 1 of 8)

  • × theme_ss:"Social tagging"
  1. Müller-Prove, M.: Modell und Anwendungsperspektive des Social Tagging (2008) 0.04 
    0.041994385 = product of:
  0.062991574 = sum of:
    0.0047171186 = weight(_text_:a in 2882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0047171186 = score(doc=2882,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 2882, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2882)
    0.058274455 = product of:
      0.08741168 = sum of:
        0.04390331 = weight(_text_:29 in 2882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04390331 = score(doc=2882,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14120336 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 2882, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2882)
        0.04350837 = weight(_text_:22 in 2882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04350837 = score(doc=2882,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14056681 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2882, 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=2882)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Date
    21. 6.2009 9:55:29
    Pages
    S.15-22
    Type
    a
  2. Niemann, C.: Tag-Science : Ein Analysemodell zur Nutzbarkeit von Tagging-Daten (2011) 0.04 
    0.037557572 = product of:
  0.05633636 = sum of:
    0.0035378393 = weight(_text_:a in 164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0035378393 = score(doc=164,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 164, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=164)
    0.05279852 = product of:
      0.07919778 = sum of:
        0.046566498 = weight(_text_:29 in 164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046566498 = score(doc=164,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14120336 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.3297832 = fieldWeight in 164, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=164)
        0.032631278 = weight(_text_:22 in 164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032631278 = score(doc=164,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14056681 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 164, 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=164)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Date
    29. 5.2012 13:58:08
    29. 5.2012 14:15:36
    Source
    ¬Die Kraft der digitalen Unordnung: 32. Arbeits- und Fortbildungstagung der ASpB e. V., Sektion 5 im Deutschen Bibliotheksverband, 22.-25. September 2009 in der Universität Karlsruhe. Hrsg: Jadwiga Warmbrunn u.a
    Type
    a
  3. Chen, M.; Liu, X.; Qin, J.: Semantic relation extraction from socially-generated tags : a methodology for metadata generation (2008) 0.03 
    0.028675942 = product of:
  0.04301391 = sum of:
    0.0065923743 = weight(_text_:a in 2648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0065923743 = score(doc=2648,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 2648, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2648)
    0.036421537 = product of:
      0.054632302 = sum of:
        0.02743957 = weight(_text_:29 in 2648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02743957 = score(doc=2648,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14120336 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 2648, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2648)
        0.027192732 = weight(_text_:22 in 2648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027192732 = score(doc=2648,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14056681 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2648, 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=2648)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    The growing predominance of social semantics in the form of tagging presents the metadata community with both opportunities and challenges as for leveraging this new form of information content representation and for retrieval. One key challenge is the absence of contextual information associated with these tags. This paper presents an experiment working with Flickr tags as an example of utilizing social semantics sources for enriching subject metadata. The procedure included four steps: 1) Collecting a sample of Flickr tags, 2) Calculating cooccurrences between tags through mutual information, 3) Tracing contextual information of tag pairs via Google search results, 4) Applying natural language processing and machine learning techniques to extract semantic relations between tags. The experiment helped us to build a context sentence collection from the Google search results, which was then processed by natural language processing and machine learning algorithms. This new approach achieved a reasonably good rate of accuracy in assigning semantic relations to tag pairs. This paper also explores the implications of this approach for using social semantics to enrich subject metadata.
    Date
    20. 2.2009 10:29:07
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
    Type
    a
  4. Evedove Tartarotti, R. Dal'; Lopes Fujita, M.: ¬The perspective of social indexing in online bibliographic catalogs : between the individual and the collaborative (2016) 0.02 
    0.015203151 = product of:
  0.022804726 = sum of:
    0.00817029 = weight(_text_:a in 4917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00817029 = score(doc=4917,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 4917, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4917)
    0.014634437 = product of:
      0.04390331 = sum of:
        0.04390331 = weight(_text_:29 in 4917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04390331 = score(doc=4917,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14120336 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 4917, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4917)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Source
    Knowledge organization for a sustainable world: challenges and perspectives for cultural, scientific, and technological sharing in a connected society : proceedings of the Fourteenth International ISKO Conference 27-29 September 2016, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil / organized by International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO-Brazil, São Paulo State University ; edited by José Augusto Chaves Guimarães, Suellen Oliveira Milani, Vera Dodebei
    Type
    a
  5. Oudenaar, H.; Bullard, J.: NOT A BOOK : goodreads and the risks of social cataloging with insufficient direction (2024) 0.01 
    0.014689637 = product of:
  0.022034455 = sum of:
    0.009229324 = weight(_text_:a in 1156) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009229324 = score(doc=1156,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 1156, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1156)
    0.012805132 = product of:
      0.038415395 = sum of:
        0.038415395 = weight(_text_:29 in 1156) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038415395 = score(doc=1156,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14120336 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 1156, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1156)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Social cataloging websites, such as Goodreads, LibraryThing, and StoryGraph are widely popular with individuals who want to track their reading and read reviews. Goodreads is one of the most popular sites with 90 million registered users as of 2019. This paper studies a Goodreads cataloging rule, NOT A BOOK (NAB), through which users designate items as invalid to the site's scope while preserving some of their metadata. By reviewing NAB, we identify thirteen types of invalid items. We go on to discuss how these item types unevenly reflect the rule itself and the emergence of a "non-book" sense through social cataloging.
    Date
    22.11.2023 18:29:56
    Type
    a
  6. Marchitelli, A.; Piazzini, T.: OPAC, SOPAC e social networking : cataloghi di biblioteca 2.0? (2008) 0.01 
    0.01404006 = product of:
  0.02106009 = sum of:
    0.008254958 = weight(_text_:a in 3862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008254958 = score(doc=3862,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 3862, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3862)
    0.012805132 = product of:
      0.038415395 = sum of:
        0.038415395 = weight(_text_:29 in 3862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038415395 = score(doc=3862,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14120336 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 3862, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3862)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    In this article are compared traditional OPAC systems, enriched OPAC, social OPAC and social cataloguing systems.the aim is to underline new theoretical trends and to offer a taxonomic outline of such tools, according to the interaction level granted to users and to the chance to manage user's generated contents in the point of view of the application of web 2.0 tendecies to libraries, in the library 2.0. At the end, a brief review of softwares, both open source and not, that seem promising for this future application.
    Date
    29. 1.1996 17:18:10
    Type
    a
  7. Santini, M.: Zero, single, or multi? : genre of web pages through the users' perspective (2008) 0.01 
    0.0139595475 = product of:
  0.02093932 = sum of:
    0.011792797 = weight(_text_:a in 2059) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011792797 = score(doc=2059,freq=32.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.25478977 = fieldWeight in 2059, product of:
          5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
            32.0 = termFreq=32.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2059)
    0.009146524 = product of:
      0.02743957 = sum of:
        0.02743957 = weight(_text_:29 in 2059) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02743957 = score(doc=2059,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14120336 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 2059, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2059)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    The goal of the study presented in this article is to investigate to what extent the classification of a web page by a single genre matches the users' perspective. The extent of agreement on a single genre label for a web page can help understand whether there is a need for a different classification scheme that overrides the single-genre labelling. My hypothesis is that a single genre label does not account for the users' perspective. In order to test this hypothesis, I submitted a restricted number of web pages (25 web pages) to a large number of web users (135 subjects) asking them to assign only a single genre label to each of the web pages. Users could choose from a list of 21 genre labels, or select one of the two 'escape' options, i.e. 'Add a label' and 'I don't know'. The rationale was to observe the level of agreement on a single genre label per web page, and draw some conclusions about the appropriateness of limiting the assignment to only a single label when doing genre classification of web pages. Results show that users largely disagree on the label to be assigned to a web page.
    Date
    30. 7.2008 10:29:54
    Type
    a
  8. Catarino, M.E.; Baptista, A.A.: Relating folksonomies with Dublin Core (2008) 0.01 
    0.012940767 = product of:
  0.01941115 = sum of:
    0.0065923743 = weight(_text_:a in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0065923743 = score(doc=2652,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 2652, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2652)
    0.012818776 = product of:
      0.03845633 = sum of:
        0.03845633 = weight(_text_:22 in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03845633 = score(doc=2652,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14056681 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2652, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2652)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Folksonomy is the result of describing Web resources with tags created by Web users. Although it has become a popular application for the description of resources, in general terms Folksonomies are not being conveniently integrated in metadata. However, if the appropriate metadata elements are identified, then further work may be conducted to automatically assign tags to these elements (RDF properties) and use them in Semantic Web applications. This article presents research carried out to continue the project Kinds of Tags, which intends to identify elements required for metadata originating from folksonomies and to propose an application profile for DC Social Tagging. The work provides information that may be used by software applications to assign tags to metadata elements and, therefore, means for tags to be conveniently gathered by metadata interoperability tools. Despite the unquestionably high value of DC and the significance of the already existing properties in DC Terms, the pilot study show revealed a significant number of tags for which no corresponding properties yet existed. A need for new properties, such as Action, Depth, Rate, and Utility was determined. Those potential new properties will have to be validated in a later stage by the DC Social Tagging Community.
    Pages
    S.14-22
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
    Type
    a
  9. Peters, I.: Folksonomies und kollaborative Informationsdienste : eine Alternative zur Websuche? (2011) 0.01 
    0.012901037 = product of:
  0.019351555 = sum of:
    0.0047171186 = weight(_text_:a in 343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0047171186 = score(doc=343,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 343, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=343)
    0.014634437 = product of:
      0.04390331 = sum of:
        0.04390331 = weight(_text_:29 in 343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04390331 = score(doc=343,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14120336 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 343, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=343)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Pages
    S.29-53
    Type
    a
  10. Harrer, A.; Lohmann, S.: Potenziale von Tagging als partizipative Methode für Lehrportale und E-Learning-Kurse (2008) 0.01 
    0.012351385 = product of:
  0.018527078 = sum of:
    0.005837137 = weight(_text_:a in 2889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005837137 = score(doc=2889,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 2889, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2889)
    0.012689941 = product of:
      0.038069822 = sum of:
        0.038069822 = weight(_text_:22 in 2889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038069822 = score(doc=2889,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14056681 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2889, 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=2889)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Date
    21. 6.2009 12:22:44
    Type
    a
  11. Rolla, P.J.: User tags versus Subject headings : can user-supplied data improve subject access to library collections? (2009) 0.01 
    0.011968515 = product of:
  0.017952772 = sum of:
    0.0070756786 = weight(_text_:a in 3601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0070756786 = score(doc=3601,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 3601, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3601)
    0.010877093 = product of:
      0.032631278 = sum of:
        0.032631278 = weight(_text_:22 in 3601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032631278 = score(doc=3601,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14056681 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3601, 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=3601)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Some members of the library community, including the Library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control, have suggested that libraries should open up their catalogs to allow users to add descriptive tags to the bibliographic data in catalog records. The web site LibraryThing currently permits its members to add such user tags to its records for books and therefore provides a useful resource to contrast with library bibliographic records. A comparison between the LibraryThing tags for a group of books and the library-supplied subject headings for the same books shows that users and catalogers approach these descriptors very differently. Because of these differences, user tags can enhance subject access to library materials, but they cannot entirely replace controlled vocabularies such as the Library of Congress subject headings.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Type
    a
  12. Yi, K.: Harnessing collective intelligence in social tagging using Delicious (2012) 0.01 
    0.011602007 = product of:
  0.01740301 = sum of:
    0.008338767 = weight(_text_:a in 515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008338767 = score(doc=515,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.18016359 = fieldWeight in 515, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=515)
    0.009064244 = product of:
      0.027192732 = sum of:
        0.027192732 = weight(_text_:22 in 515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027192732 = score(doc=515,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14056681 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 515, 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=515)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    A new collaborative approach in information organization and sharing has recently arisen, known as collaborative tagging or social indexing. A key element of collaborative tagging is the concept of collective intelligence (CI), which is a shared intelligence among all participants. This research investigates the phenomenon of social tagging in the context of CI with the aim to serve as a stepping-stone towards the mining of truly valuable social tags for web resources. This study focuses on assessing and evaluating the degree of CI embedded in social tagging over time in terms of two-parameter values, number of participants, and top frequency ranking window. Five different metrics were adopted and utilized for assessing the similarity between ranking lists: overlapList, overlapRank, Footrule, Fagin's measure, and the Inverse Rank measure. The result of this study demonstrates that a substantial degree of CI is most likely to be achieved when somewhere between the first 200 and 400 people have participated in tagging, and that a target degree of CI can be projected by controlling the two factors along with the selection of a similarity metric. The study also tests some experimental conditions for detecting social tags with high CI degree. The results of this study can be applicable to the study of filtering social tags based on CI; filtered social tags may be utilized for the metadata creation of tagged resources and possibly for the retrieval of tagged resources.
    Date
    25.12.2012 15:22:37
    Type
    a
  13. Qin, C.; Liu, Y.; Mou, J.; Chen, J.: User adoption of a hybrid social tagging approach in an online knowledge community (2019) 0.01 
    0.011602007 = product of:
  0.01740301 = sum of:
    0.008338767 = weight(_text_:a in 5492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008338767 = score(doc=5492,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.18016359 = fieldWeight in 5492, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5492)
    0.009064244 = product of:
      0.027192732 = sum of:
        0.027192732 = weight(_text_:22 in 5492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027192732 = score(doc=5492,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14056681 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5492, 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=5492)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Purpose Online knowledge communities make great contributions to global knowledge sharing and innovation. Resource tagging approaches have been widely adopted in such communities to describe, annotate and organize knowledge resources mainly through users' participation. However, it is unclear what causes the adoption of a particular resource tagging approach. The purpose of this paper is to identify factors that drive users to use a hybrid social tagging approach. Design/methodology/approach Technology acceptance model and social cognitive theory are adopted to support an integrated model proposed in this paper. Zhihu, one of the most popular online knowledge communities in China, is taken as the survey context. A survey was conducted with a questionnaire and collected data were analyzed through structural equation model. Findings A new hybrid social resource tagging approach was refined and described. The empirical results revealed that self-efficacy, perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use exert positive effect on users' attitude. Moreover, social influence, PU and attitude impact significantly on users' intention to use a hybrid social resource tagging approach. Originality/value Theoretically, this study enriches the type of resource tagging approaches and recognizes factors influencing user adoption to use it. Regarding the practical parts, the results provide online information system providers and designers with referential strategies to improve the performance of the current tagging approaches and promote them.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Type
    a
  14. Furner, J.: User tagging of library resources : toward a framework for system evaluation (2007) 0.01 
    0.011402364 = product of:
  0.017103545 = sum of:
    0.0061277174 = weight(_text_:a in 703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0061277174 = score(doc=703,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 703, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=703)
    0.010975828 = product of:
      0.032927483 = sum of:
        0.032927483 = weight(_text_:29 in 703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032927483 = score(doc=703,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14120336 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 703, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=703)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Although user tagging of library resources shows substantial promise as a means of improving the quality of users' access to those resources, several important questions about the level and nature of the warrant for basing retrieval tools on user tagging are yet to receive full consideration by library practitioners and researchers. Among these is the simple evaluative question: What, specifically, are the factors that determine whether or not user-tagging services will be successful? If success is to be defined in terms of the effectiveness with which systems perform the particular functions expected of them (rather than simply in terms of popularity), an understanding is needed both of the multifunctional nature of tagging tools, and of the complex nature of users' mental models of that multifunctionality. In this paper, a conceptual framework is developed for the evaluation of systems that integrate user tagging with more traditional methods of library resource description.
    Date
    26.12.2011 13:29:31
  15. Strader, C.R.: Author-assigned keywords versus Library of Congress Subject Headings : implications for the cataloging of electronic theses and dissertations (2009) 0.01 
    0.011336541 = product of:
  0.01700481 = sum of:
    0.0061277174 = weight(_text_:a in 3602) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0061277174 = score(doc=3602,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 3602, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3602)
    0.010877093 = product of:
      0.032631278 = sum of:
        0.032631278 = weight(_text_:22 in 3602) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032631278 = score(doc=3602,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14056681 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3602, 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=3602)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    This study is an examination of the overlap between author-assigned keywords and cataloger-assigned Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) for a set of electronic theses and dissertations in Ohio State University's online catalog. The project is intended to contribute to the literature on the issue of keywords versus controlled vocabularies in the use of online catalogs and databases. Findings support previous studies' conclusions that both keywords and controlled vocabularies complement one another. Further, even in the presence of bibliographic record enhancements, such as abstracts or summaries, keywords and subject headings provided a significant number of unique terms that could affect the success of keyword searches. Implications for the maintenance of controlled vocabularies such as LCSH also are discussed in light of the patterns of matches and nonmatches found between the keywords and their corresponding subject headings.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Type
    a
  16. Matthews, B.; Jones, C.; Puzon, B.; Moon, J.; Tudhope, D.; Golub, K.; Nielsen, M.L.: ¬An evaluation of enhancing social tagging with a knowledge organization system (2010) 0.01 
    0.010912072 = product of:
  0.016368108 = sum of:
    0.007221584 = weight(_text_:a in 4171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007221584 = score(doc=4171,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 4171, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4171)
    0.009146524 = product of:
      0.02743957 = sum of:
        0.02743957 = weight(_text_:29 in 4171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02743957 = score(doc=4171,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14120336 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 4171, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4171)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Purpose - Traditional subject indexing and classification are considered infeasible in many digital collections. This paper seeks to investigate ways of enhancing social tagging via knowledge organization systems, with a view to improving the quality of tags for increased information discovery and retrieval performance. Design/methodology/approach - Enhanced tagging interfaces were developed for exemplar online repositories, and trials were undertaken with author and reader groups to evaluate the effectiveness of tagging augmented with control vocabulary for subject indexing of papers in online repositories. Findings - The results showed that using a knowledge organisation system to augment tagging does appear to increase the effectiveness of non-specialist users (that is, without information science training) in subject indexing. Research limitations/implications - While limited by the size and scope of the trials undertaken, these results do point to the usefulness of a mixed approach in supporting the subject indexing of online resources. Originality/value - The value of this work is as a guide to future developments in the practical support for resource indexing in online repositories.
    Date
    29. 8.2010 11:39:20
    Type
    a
  17. Corrado, E.; Moulaison, H.L.: Social tagging and communities of practice : two case studies (2008) 0.01 
    0.0106527265 = product of:
  0.015979089 = sum of:
    0.00500326 = weight(_text_:a in 2271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00500326 = score(doc=2271,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 2271, 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=2271)
    0.010975828 = product of:
      0.032927483 = sum of:
        0.032927483 = weight(_text_:29 in 2271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032927483 = score(doc=2271,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14120336 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 2271, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2271)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Content
    In investigating the use of social tagging for knowledge organization and sharing, this paper reports on two case studies. Each study examines how two disparate communities of practices utilize social tagging to disseminate information to other community members in the online environment. Through the use of these tags, community members may retrieve and view relevant Web sites and online videos. The first study looks at tagging within the Code4Lib community of practice. The second study examines the use of tagging on video sharing sites used by a community of French teenagers. Uses of social tagging to share information within these communities are analyzed and discussed, and recommendations for future study are provided.
    Date
    27.12.2008 11:20:29
    Type
    a
  18. Kim, H.L.; Scerri, S.; Breslin, J.G.; Decker, S.; Kim, H.G.: ¬The state of the art in tag ontologies : a semantic model for tagging and folksonomies (2008) 0.01 
    0.010437746 = product of:
  0.015656618 = sum of:
    0.0065923743 = weight(_text_:a in 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0065923743 = score(doc=2650,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 2650, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2650)
    0.009064244 = product of:
      0.027192732 = sum of:
        0.027192732 = weight(_text_:22 in 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027192732 = score(doc=2650,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14056681 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2650, 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=2650)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    There is a growing interest into how we represent and share tagging data in collaborative tagging systems. Conventional tags, meaning freely created tags that are not associated with a structured ontology, are not naturally suited for collaborative processes, due to linguistic and grammatical variations, as well as human typing errors. Additionally, tags reflect personal views of the world by individual users, and are not normalised for synonymy, morphology or any other mapping. Our view is that the conventional approach provides very limited semantic value for collaboration. Moreover, in cases where there is some semantic value, automatically sharing semantics via computer manipulations is extremely problematic. This paper explores these problems by discussing approaches for collaborative tagging activities at a semantic level, and presenting conceptual models for collaborative tagging activities and folksonomies. We present criteria for the comparison of existing tag ontologies and discuss their strengths and weaknesses in relation to these criteria.
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
    Type
    a
  19. Choi, Y.; Syn, S.Y.: Characteristics of tagging behavior in digitized humanities online collections (2016) 0.01 
    0.010437746 = product of:
  0.015656618 = sum of:
    0.0065923743 = weight(_text_:a in 2891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0065923743 = score(doc=2891,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 2891, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2891)
    0.009064244 = product of:
      0.027192732 = sum of:
        0.027192732 = weight(_text_:22 in 2891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027192732 = score(doc=2891,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14056681 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2891, 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=2891)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    The purpose of this study was to examine user tags that describe digitized archival collections in the field of humanities. A collection of 8,310 tags from a digital portal (Nineteenth-Century Electronic Scholarship, NINES) was analyzed to find out what attributes of primary historical resources users described with tags. Tags were categorized to identify which tags describe the content of the resource, the resource itself, and subjective aspects (e.g., usage or emotion). The study's findings revealed that over half were content-related; tags representing opinion, usage context, or self-reference, however, reflected only a small percentage. The study further found that terms related to genre or physical format of a resource were frequently used in describing primary archival resources. It was also learned that nontextual resources had lower numbers of content-related tags and higher numbers of document-related tags than textual resources and bibliographic materials; moreover, textual resources tended to have more user-context-related tags than other resources. These findings help explain users' tagging behavior and resource interpretation in primary resources in the humanities. Such information provided through tags helps information professionals decide to what extent indexing archival and cultural resources should be done for resource description and discovery, and understand users' terminology.
    Date
    21. 4.2016 11:23:22
    Type
    a
  20. Bentley, C.M.; Labelle, P.R.: ¬A comparison of social tagging designs and user participation (2008) 0.01 
    0.010049235 = product of:
  0.015073852 = sum of:
    0.007822457 = weight(_text_:a in 2657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007822457 = score(doc=2657,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.04628442 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040140964 = queryNorm
        0.16900843 = fieldWeight in 2657, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2657)
    0.007251395 = product of:
      0.021754185 = sum of:
        0.021754185 = weight(_text_:22 in 2657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021754185 = score(doc=2657,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14056681 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040140964 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2657, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2657)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Social tagging empowers users to categorize content in a personally meaningful way while harnessing their potential to contribute to a collaborative construction of knowledge (Vander Wal, 2007). In addition, social tagging systems offer innovative filtering mechanisms that facilitate resource discovery and browsing (Mathes, 2004). As a result, social tags may support online communication, informal or intended learning as well as the development of online communities. The purpose of this mixed methods study is to examine how undergraduate students participate in social tagging activities in order to learn about their motivations, behaviours and practices. A better understanding of their knowledge, habits and interactions with such systems will help practitioners and developers identify important factors when designing enhancements. In the first phase of the study, students enrolled at a Canadian university completed 103 questionnaires. Quantitative results focusing on general familiarity with social tagging, frequently used Web 2.0 sites, and the purpose for engaging in social tagging activities were compiled. Eight questionnaire respondents participated in follow-up semi-structured interviews that further explored tagging practices by situating questionnaire responses within concrete experiences using popular websites such as YouTube, Facebook, Del.icio.us, and Flickr. Preliminary results of this study echo findings found in the growing literature concerning social tagging from the fields of computer science (Sen et al., 2006) and information science (Golder & Huberman, 2006; Macgregor & McCulloch, 2006). Generally, two classes of social taggers emerge: those who focus on tagging for individual purposes, and those who view tagging as a way to share or communicate meaning to others. Heavy del.icio.us users, for example, were often focused on simply organizing their own content, and seemed to be conscientiously maintaining their own personally relevant categorizations while, in many cases, placing little importance on the tags of others. Conversely, users tagging items primarily to share content preferred to use specific terms to optimize retrieval and discovery by others. Our findings should inform practitioners of how interaction design can be tailored for different tagging systems applications, and how these findings are positioned within the current debate surrounding social tagging among the resource discovery community. We also hope to direct future research in the field to place a greater importance on exploring the benefits of tagging as a socially-driven endeavour rather than uniquely as a means of managing information.
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
    Type
    a

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 104
  • d 36
  • i 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 127
  • el 13
  • m 6
  • b 2
  • s 2
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications