Search (106 results, page 1 of 6)

  • × theme_ss:"Theorie verbaler Dokumentationssprachen"
  1. Degez, D.: Compatibilité des langages d'indexation mariage, cohabitation ou fusion? : Quelques examples concrèts (1998) 0.03 
    0.031710427 = product of:
  0.063420855 = sum of:
    0.063420855 = sum of:
      0.027030803 = weight(_text_:j in 2245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.027030803 = score(doc=2245,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.24574696 = fieldWeight in 2245, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2245)
      0.003559449 = weight(_text_:a in 2245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.003559449 = score(doc=2245,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 2245, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2245)
      0.0328306 = weight(_text_:22 in 2245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0328306 = score(doc=2245,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2245, 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=2245)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    To illustrate the theoretical analysis presented by J. Maniez published in Documentaliste 34(1997) nos.4/5 presents some concrete examples drawn for experience of the difficulties increasingly faced in trying to make different indexing languages compatible. Various types of problems may be considered: comparing semantic terms and relationships that compose indexing languages, setting standards for writing and vocabulary, and opposing pre and post coordinated descriptors. Proposes several solutions and discusses the need for further applied research in this area
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
    Type
    a
  2. Boteram, F.: Semantische Relationen in Dokumentationssprachen : vom Thesaurus zum semantischen Netz (2010) 0.03 
    0.031710427 = product of:
  0.063420855 = sum of:
    0.063420855 = sum of:
      0.027030803 = weight(_text_:j in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.027030803 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.24574696 = fieldWeight in 4792, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4792)
      0.003559449 = weight(_text_:a in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.003559449 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 4792, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4792)
      0.0328306 = weight(_text_:22 in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0328306 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4792, 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=4792)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Wissensspeicher in digitalen Räumen: Nachhaltigkeit - Verfügbarkeit - semantische Interoperabilität. Proceedings der 11. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Konstanz, 20. bis 22. Februar 2008. Hrsg.: J. Sieglerschmidt u. H.P.Ohly
    Type
    a
  3. Maniez, J.: Fusion de banques de donnees documentaires at compatibilite des languages d'indexation (1997) 0.03 
    0.028705843 = product of:
  0.057411686 = sum of:
    0.057411686 = sum of:
      0.02316926 = weight(_text_:j in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02316926 = score(doc=2246,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.21064025 = fieldWeight in 2246, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2246)
      0.006101913 = weight(_text_:a in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.006101913 = score(doc=2246,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 2246, 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=2246)
      0.028140513 = weight(_text_:22 in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.028140513 = score(doc=2246,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2246, 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=2246)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Discusses the apparently unattainable goal of compatibility of information languages. While controlled languages can improve retrieval performance within a single system, they make cooperation across different systems more difficult. The Internet and downloading accentuate this adverse outcome and the acceleration of data exchange aggravates the problem of compatibility. Defines this familiar concept and demonstrates that coherence is just as necessary as it was for indexing languages, the proliferation of which has created confusion in grouped data banks. Describes 2 types of potential solutions, similar to those applied to automatic translation of natural languages: - harmonizing the information languages themselves, both difficult and expensive, or, the more flexible solution involving automatic harmonization of indexing formulae based on pre established concordance tables. However, structural incompatibilities between post coordinated languages and classifications may lead any harmonization tools up a blind alley, while the paths of a universal concordance model are rare and narrow
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
    Type
    a
  4. Ruge, G.: ¬A spreading activation network for automatic generation of thesaurus relationships (1991) 0.03 
    0.025997166 = product of:
  0.05199433 = sum of:
    0.05199433 = product of:
      0.07799149 = sum of:
        0.012330294 = weight(_text_:a in 4506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012330294 = score(doc=4506,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.3089162 = fieldWeight in 4506, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4506)
        0.0656612 = weight(_text_:22 in 4506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0656612 = score(doc=4506,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4506, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4506)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    8.10.2000 11:52:22
    Source
    Library science with a slant to documentation. 28(1991) no.4, S.125-130
    Type
    a
  5. Jia, J.: From data to knowledge : the relationships between vocabularies, linked data and knowledge graphs (2021) 0.02 
    0.023921534 = product of:
  0.04784307 = sum of:
    0.04784307 = sum of:
      0.019307716 = weight(_text_:j in 106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.019307716 = score(doc=106,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.17553353 = fieldWeight in 106, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=106)
      0.0050849267 = weight(_text_:a in 106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0050849267 = score(doc=106,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 106, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=106)
      0.023450429 = weight(_text_:22 in 106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.023450429 = score(doc=106,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 106, 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=106)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify the concepts, component parts and relationships between vocabularies, linked data and knowledge graphs (KGs) from the perspectives of data and knowledge transitions. Design/methodology/approach This paper uses conceptual analysis methods. This study focuses on distinguishing concepts and analyzing composition and intercorrelations to explore data and knowledge transitions. Findings Vocabularies are the cornerstone for accurately building understanding of the meaning of data. Vocabularies provide for a data-sharing model and play an important role in supporting the semantic expression of linked data and defining the schema layer; they are also used for entity recognition, alignment and linkage for KGs. KGs, which consist of a schema layer and a data layer, are presented as cubes that organically combine vocabularies, linked data and big data. Originality/value This paper first describes the composition of vocabularies, linked data and KGs. More importantly, this paper innovatively analyzes and summarizes the interrelatedness of these factors, which comes from frequent interactions between data and knowledge. The three factors empower each other and can ultimately empower the Semantic Web.
    Date
    22. 1.2021 14:24:32
    Type
    a
  6. Dietze, J.: ¬Die semantische Struktur der Thesauruslexik (1988) 0.02 
    0.020393502 = product of:
  0.040787004 = sum of:
    0.040787004 = product of:
      0.061180506 = sum of:
        0.054061607 = weight(_text_:j in 6051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054061607 = score(doc=6051,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.4914939 = fieldWeight in 6051, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6051)
        0.007118898 = weight(_text_:a in 6051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007118898 = score(doc=6051,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 6051, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6051)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  7. Farradane, J.: Concept organization for information retrieval (1967) 0.02 
    0.020393502 = product of:
  0.040787004 = sum of:
    0.040787004 = product of:
      0.061180506 = sum of:
        0.054061607 = weight(_text_:j in 35) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054061607 = score(doc=35,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.4914939 = fieldWeight in 35, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=35)
        0.007118898 = weight(_text_:a in 35) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007118898 = score(doc=35,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 35, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=35)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  8. Mikacic, M.: Statistical system for subject designation (SSSD) for libraries in Croatia (1996) 0.02 
    0.02003605 = product of:
  0.0400721 = sum of:
    0.0400721 = product of:
      0.060108148 = sum of:
        0.0070458823 = weight(_text_:a in 2943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0070458823 = score(doc=2943,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 2943, 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=2943)
        0.053062264 = weight(_text_:22 in 2943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053062264 = score(doc=2943,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2943, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2943)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Describes the developments of the Statistical System for Subject Designation (SSSD): a syntactical system for subject designation for libraries in Croatia, based on the construction of subject headings in agreement with the theory of the sentence nature of subject headings. The discussion is preceded by a brief summary of theories underlying basic principles and fundamental rules of the alphabetical subject catalogue
    Date
    31. 7.2006 14:22:21
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) no.1, S.77-93
    Type
    a
  9. Schmitz-Esser, W.: Language of general communication and concept compatibility (1996) 0.02 
    0.017328596 = product of:
  0.03465719 = sum of:
    0.03465719 = product of:
      0.051985785 = sum of:
        0.0050849267 = weight(_text_:a in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0050849267 = score(doc=6089,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 6089, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6089)
        0.046900857 = weight(_text_:22 in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046900857 = score(doc=6089,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 6089, 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=6089)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Pages
    S.11-22
    Type
    a
  10. Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Thesaural relationships (2001) 0.01 
    0.0133165 = product of:
  0.026633 = sum of:
    0.026633 = product of:
      0.0399495 = sum of:
        0.007118898 = weight(_text_:a in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007118898 = score(doc=1149,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 1149, 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=1149)
        0.0328306 = weight(_text_:22 in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0328306 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1149, 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=1149)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    A thesaurus in the controlled vocabulary environment is a tool designed to support effective infonnation retrieval (IR) by guiding indexers and searchers consistently to choose the same terms for expressing a given concept or combination of concepts. Terms in the thesaurus are linked by relationships of three well-known types: equivalence, hierarchical, and associative. The functions and properties of these three basic types and some subcategories are described, as well as some additional relationship types conunonly found in thesauri. Progressive automation of IR processes and the capability for simultaneous searching of vast networked resources are creating some pressures for change in the categorization and consistency of relationships.
    Date
    22. 9.2007 15:45:57
    Type
    a
  11. ¬The LCSH century : One hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system (2000) 0.01 
    0.008797429 = product of:
  0.017594857 = sum of:
    0.017594857 = product of:
      0.026392285 = sum of:
        0.021844188 = weight(_text_:j in 1224) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021844188 = score(doc=1224,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.19859353 = fieldWeight in 1224, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1224)
        0.0045480975 = weight(_text_:a in 1224) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0045480975 = score(doc=1224,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.11394546 = fieldWeight in 1224, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1224)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Enthält die Beiträge: BACKGROUND: Alva T STONE: The LCSH Century: A Brief History of the Library of Congress Subject Headings, and Introduction to the Centennial Essays - THEORY AND PRINCIPLES: Elaine SVENONIUS: LCSH: Semantics, Syntax and Specificity; Heidi Lee HOERMAN u. Kevin A. FURNISS: Turning Practice into Principles: A Comparison of the IFLA: Principles Underlying Subject Heading Languages (SHLs) and the Principles Underlying the Library of Congress Subject Headings System; Hope A. OLSON: Difference, Culture and Change:The Untapped Potential of LCSH - ONLINE ENVIRONMENT: Pauline Atherton COCHRANE: Improving LCSH for Use in Online Catalogs Revisited-What Progress Has Been Made? What Issues Still Remain?; Gregory WOOL: Filing and Precoordination: How Subject Headings Are Displayed in Online Catalogs and Why It Matters; Stephen HEARN: Machine-Assisted Validation of LC Subject Headings: Implications for Authority File Structure - SPECIFIC PERSPECTIVES: Thomas MANN: Teaching Library of Congress Subject Headings; Louisa J. KREIDER: LCSH Works! Subject Searching Effectiveness at the Cleveland Public Library and the Growth of Library of Congress Subject Headings Through Cooperation; Harriette HEMMASI u J. Bradford YOUNG: LCSH for Music: Historical and Empirical Perspectives; Joseph MILLER u. Patricia KUHR: LCSH and Periodical Indexing: Adoption vs. Adaptation; David P MILLER: Out from Under: Form/Genre Access in LCSH - WORLD VIEW: Magda HEINER-FREILING: Survey on Subject Heading Languages Used in National Libraries and Bibliographies; Andrew MacEWAN: Crossing Language Barriers in Europe: Linking LCSH to Other Subject Heading Languages; Alvaro QUIJANO-SOLIS u.a.: Automated Authority Files of Spanish-Language Subject Headings - FUTURE PROSPECTS: Lois Mai CHAN u. Theodora HODGES: Entering the Millennium: a new century for LCSH
  12. ¬The LCSH century : One hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system (2000) 0.01 
    0.008797429 = product of:
  0.017594857 = sum of:
    0.017594857 = product of:
      0.026392285 = sum of:
        0.021844188 = weight(_text_:j in 5366) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021844188 = score(doc=5366,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.19859353 = fieldWeight in 5366, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5366)
        0.0045480975 = weight(_text_:a in 5366) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0045480975 = score(doc=5366,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.11394546 = fieldWeight in 5366, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5366)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Enthält die Beiträge: BACKGROUND: Alva T STONE: The LCSH Century: A Brief History of the Library of Congress Subject Headings, and Introduction to the Centennial Essays - THEORY AND PRINCIPLES: Elaine SVENONIUS: LCSH: Semantics, Syntax and Specificity; Heidi Lee HOERMAN u. Kevin A. FURNISS: Turning Practice into Principles: A Comparison of the IFLA: Principles Underlying Subject Heading Languages (SHLs) and the Principles Underlying the Library of Congress Subject Headings System; Hope A. OLSON: Difference, Culture and Change:The Untapped Potential of LCSH - ONLINE ENVIRONMENT: Pauline Atherton COCHRANE: Improving LCSH for Use in Online Catalogs Revisited-What Progress Has Been Made? What Issues Still Remain?; Gregory WOOL: Filing and Precoordination: How Subject Headings Are Displayed in Online Catalogs and Why It Matters; Stephen HEARN: Machine-Assisted Validation of LC Subject Headings: Implications for Authority File Structure - SPECIFIC PERSPECTIVES: Thomas MANN: Teaching Library of Congress Subject Headings; Louisa J. KREIDER: LCSH Works! Subject Searching Effectiveness at the Cleveland Public Library and the Growth of Library of Congress Subject Headings Through Cooperation; Harriette HEMMASI u J. Bradford YOUNG: LCSH for Music: Historical and Empirical Perspectives; Joseph MILLER u. Patricia KUHR: LCSH and Periodical Indexing: Adoption vs. Adaptation; David P MILLER: Out from Under: Form/Genre Access in LCSH - WORLD VIEW: Magda HEINER-FREILING: Survey on Subject Heading Languages Used in National Libraries and Bibliographies; Andrew MacEWAN: Crossing Language Barriers in Europe: Linking LCSH to Other Subject Heading Languages; Alvaro QUIJANO-SOLIS u.a.: Automated Authority Files of Spanish-Language Subject Headings - FUTURE PROSPECTS: Lois Mai CHAN u. Theodora HODGES: Entering the Millennium: a new century for LCSH
  13. Dietze, J.: Informationsrecherchesprache und deren Lexik : Bemerkungen zur Terminologiediskussion (1980) 0.01 
    0.008740073 = product of:
  0.017480146 = sum of:
    0.017480146 = product of:
      0.026220217 = sum of:
        0.02316926 = weight(_text_:j in 32) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02316926 = score(doc=32,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.21064025 = fieldWeight in 32, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=32)
        0.0030509564 = weight(_text_:a in 32) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0030509564 = score(doc=32,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 32, 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=32)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  14. Compatibility and integration of order systems : Research Seminar Proceedings of the TIP/ISKO Meeting, Warsaw, 13-15 September 1995 (1996) 0.01 
    0.008511819 = product of:
  0.017023638 = sum of:
    0.017023638 = product of:
      0.025535455 = sum of:
        0.019307716 = weight(_text_:j in 6050) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019307716 = score(doc=6050,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.17553353 = fieldWeight in 6050, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6050)
        0.0062277387 = weight(_text_:a in 6050) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0062277387 = score(doc=6050,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 6050, 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=6050)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Enthält die Beiträge: SCHMITZ-ESSER, W.: Language of general communication and concept compatibility; RIESTHUIS, G.: Theory of compatibility of information languages; DAHLBERG, I.: The compatibility guidelines - a re-evaluation; SOERGEL, D.: Data structure and software support for integrated thesauri; MURASZKIEWICZ, M., H. RYBINSKI u. W. STRUK: Software problems of merging multilingual thesauri; CHMIELEWSKA-GORCZYCA, E.: Compatibility of indexing tools in multidatabase environment; NEGRINI, G.: Towards structural compatibility between concept systems; SCIBOR, E.: Some remarks on the establishment of concordances between a universal classification system and an interdisciplinary thesaurus; HOPPE, S.: The UMLS - a model for knowledge integration in a subject field; DEXTRE-CLARKE, S.: Integrating thesauri in the agricultural sciences; ROULIN, C.: Bringing multilingual thesauri together: a feasibility study; ZIMMERMANN, H.: Conception and application possibilities of classification concordances in an OPAC environment; SOSINSKA-KALATA, B.: The Universal Decimal Classification as an international standard for knowledge organization in bibliographic databases and library catalogues; WOZNIAK, J. u. T. GLOWACKA: KABA Subject Authority File - an example of an integrated Polish-French-English subject headings system; BABIK, W.: Terminology as a level for the compatibility of indexing languages - some remarks; STANCIKOVA, P.: International integrated database systems linked to multilingual thesauri covering the field of environment and agriculture; SAMEK, T.: Indexing languages integration and the EUROVOC Thesaurus in the Czech Republic; SIWEK, K.: Compatibility discrepancies between Polish and foreign databases; GLINSKI, W. u. M. MURASZKIEWICZ: An intelligent front-end processor for accessing information systems
  15. Mai, J.-E.: Actors, domains, and constraints in the design and construction of controlled vocabularies (2008) 0.01 
    0.007903798 = product of:
  0.015807595 = sum of:
    0.015807595 = product of:
      0.023711393 = sum of:
        0.019307716 = weight(_text_:j in 1921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019307716 = score(doc=1921,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.17553353 = fieldWeight in 1921, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1921)
        0.0044036764 = weight(_text_:a in 1921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0044036764 = score(doc=1921,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.11032722 = fieldWeight in 1921, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1921)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Classification schemes, thesauri, taxonomies, and other controlled vocabularies play important roles in the organization and retrieval of information in many different environments. While the design and construction of controlled vocabularies have been prescribed at the technical level in great detail over the past decades, the methodological level has been somewhat neglected. However, classification research has in recent years focused on developing approaches to the analysis of users, domains, and activities that could produce requirements for the design of controlled vocabularies. Researchers have often argued that the design, construction, and use of controlled vocabularies need to be based on analyses and understandings of the contexts in which these controlled vocabularies function. While one would assume that the growing body of research on human information behavior might help guide the development of controlled vocabularies shed light on these contexts, unfortunately, much of the research in this area is descriptive in nature and of little use for systems design. This paper discusses these trends and outlines a holistic approach that demonstrates how the design of controlled vocabularies can be informed by investigations of people's interactions with information. This approach is based on the Cognitive Work Analysis framework and outlines several dimensions of human-information interactions. Application of this approach will result is a comprehensive understanding of the contexts in which the controlled vocabulary will function and which can be used for the development of for the development of controlled vocabularies.
    Type
    a
  16. Maniez, J.: Actualité des langages documentaires : fondements théoriques de la recherche d'information (2002) 0.01 
    0.007723087 = product of:
  0.015446174 = sum of:
    0.015446174 = product of:
      0.04633852 = sum of:
        0.04633852 = weight(_text_:j in 887) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04633852 = score(doc=887,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.4212805 = fieldWeight in 887, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=887)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  17. Mooers, C.N.: ¬The indexing language of an information retrieval system (1985) 0.01 
    0.007691473 = product of:
  0.015382946 = sum of:
    0.015382946 = product of:
      0.023074418 = sum of:
        0.0066591194 = weight(_text_:a in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0066591194 = score(doc=3644,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.16683382 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
              5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
                28.0 = termFreq=28.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
        0.0164153 = weight(_text_:22 in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0164153 = score(doc=3644,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Calvin Mooers' work toward the resolution of the problem of ambiguity in indexing went unrecognized for years. At the time he introduced the "descriptor" - a term with a very distinct meaning-indexers were, for the most part, taking index terms directly from the document, without either rationalizing them with context or normalizing them with some kind of classification. It is ironic that Mooers' term came to be attached to the popular but unsophisticated indexing methods which he was trying to root out. Simply expressed, what Mooers did was to take the dictionary definitions of terms and redefine them so clearly that they could not be used in any context except that provided by the new definition. He did, at great pains, construct such meanings for over four hundred words; disambiguation and specificity were sought after and found for these words. He proposed that all indexers adopt this method so that when the index supplied a term, it also supplied the exact meaning for that term as used in the indexed document. The same term used differently in another document would be defined differently and possibly renamed to avoid ambiguity. The disambiguation was achieved by using unabridged dictionaries and other sources of defining terminology. In practice, this tends to produce circularity in definition, that is, word A refers to word B which refers to word C which refers to word A. It was necessary, therefore, to break this chain by creating a new, definitive meaning for each word. Eventually, means such as those used by Austin (q.v.) for PRECIS achieved the same purpose, but by much more complex means than just creating a unique definition of each term. Mooers, however, was probably the first to realize how confusing undefined terminology could be. Early automatic indexers dealt with distinct disciplines and, as long as they did not stray beyond disciplinary boundaries, a quick and dirty keyword approach was satisfactory. The trouble came when attempts were made to make a combined index for two or more distinct disciplines. A number of processes have since been developed, mostly involving tagging of some kind or use of strings. Mooers' solution has rarely been considered seriously and probably would be extremely difficult to apply now because of so much interdisciplinarity. But for a specific, weIl defined field, it is still weIl worth considering. Mooers received training in mathematics and physics from the University of Minnesota and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He was the founder of Zator Company, which developed and marketed a coded card information retrieval system, and of Rockford Research, Inc., which engages in research in information science. He is the inventor of the TRAC computer language.
    Footnote
    Original in: Information retrieval today: papers presented at an Institute conducted by the Library School and the Center for Continuation Study, University of Minnesota, Sept. 19-22, 1962. Ed. by Wesley Simonton. Minneapolis, Minn.: The Center, 1963. S.21-36.
    Source
    Theory of subject analysis: a sourcebook. Ed.: L.M. Chan, et al
    Type
    a
  18. Coates, E.J.: Significance and term relationship in compound headings (1985) 0.01 
    0.0072927177 = product of:
  0.014585435 = sum of:
    0.014585435 = product of:
      0.021878153 = sum of:
        0.015446173 = weight(_text_:j in 3634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015446173 = score(doc=3634,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.14042683 = fieldWeight in 3634, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3634)
        0.006431981 = weight(_text_:a in 3634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006431981 = score(doc=3634,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.16114321 = fieldWeight in 3634, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3634)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    In the continuing search for criteria for determining the form of compound headings (i.e., headings containing more than one word), many authors have attempted to deal with the problem of entry element and citation order. Among the proposed criteria are Cutter's concept of "significance," Kaiser's formula of "concrete/process," Prevost's "noun rule," and Farradane's categories of relationships*' (q.v.). One of the problems in applying the criteria has been the difficulty in determining what is "significant," particularly when two or more words in the heading all refer to concrete objects. In the following excerpt from Subject Catalogues: Headings and Structure, a widely cited book an the alphabetical subject catalog, E. J. Coates proposes the concept of "term significance," that is, "the word which evokes the clearest mental image," as the criterion for determining the entry element in a compound heading. Since a concrete object generally evokes a clearer mental image than an action or process, Coates' theory is in line with Kaiser's theory of "concrete/process" (q.v.) which Coates renamed "thing/action." For determining the citation order of component elements in a compound heading where the elements are equally "significant" (i.e., both or all evoking clear mental images), Coates proposes the use of "term relationship" as the determining factor. He has identified twenty different kinds of relationships among terms and set down the citation order for each. Another frequently encountered problem related to citation order is the determination of the entry element for a compound heading which contains a topic and a locality. Entering such headings uniformly under either the topic or the locality has proven to be infeasible in practice. Many headings of this type have the topic as the main heading, subdivided by the locality; others are entered under the locality as the main heading with the topic as the subdivision. No criteria or rules have been proposed that ensure consistency or predictability. In the following selection, Coates attempts to deal with this problem by ranking the "main areas of knowledge according to the extent to which they appear to be significantly conditioned by locality." The theory Coates expounded in his book was put into practice in compiling the British Technology Index for which Coates served as the editor from 1961 to 1977.
    Source
    Theory of subject analysis: a sourcebook. Ed.: L.M. Chan, et al
    Type
    a
  19. Khoo, S.G.; Na, J.-C.: Semantic relations in information science (2006) 0.01 
    0.005623014 = product of:
  0.011246028 = sum of:
    0.011246028 = product of:
      0.016869042 = sum of:
        0.01158463 = weight(_text_:j in 1978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01158463 = score(doc=1978,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.105320126 = fieldWeight in 1978, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1978)
        0.0052844114 = weight(_text_:a in 1978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0052844114 = score(doc=1978,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 1978, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1978)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This chapter examines the nature of semantic relations and their main applications in information science. The nature and types of semantic relations are discussed from the perspectives of linguistics and psychology. An overview of the semantic relations used in knowledge structures such as thesauri and ontologies is provided, as well as the main techniques used in the automatic extraction of semantic relations from text. The chapter then reviews the use of semantic relations in information extraction, information retrieval, question-answering, and automatic text summarization applications. Concepts and relations are the foundation of knowledge and thought. When we look at the world, we perceive not a mass of colors but objects to which we automatically assign category labels. Our perceptual system automatically segments the world into concepts and categories. Concepts are the building blocks of knowledge; relations act as the cement that links concepts into knowledge structures. We spend much of our lives identifying regular associations and relations between objects, events, and processes so that the world has an understandable structure and predictability. Our lives and work depend on the accuracy and richness of this knowledge structure and its web of relations. Relations are needed for reasoning and inferencing. Chaffin and Herrmann (1988b, p. 290) noted that "relations between ideas have long been viewed as basic to thought, language, comprehension, and memory." Aristotle's Metaphysics (Aristotle, 1961; McKeon, expounded on several types of relations. The majority of the 30 entries in a section of the Metaphysics known today as the Philosophical Lexicon referred to relations and attributes, including cause, part-whole, same and opposite, quality (i.e., attribute) and kind-of, and defined different types of each relation. Hume (1955) pointed out that there is a connection between successive ideas in our minds, even in our dreams, and that the introduction of an idea in our mind automatically recalls an associated idea. He argued that all the objects of human reasoning are divided into relations of ideas and matters of fact and that factual reasoning is founded on the cause-effect relation. His Treatise of Human Nature identified seven kinds of relations: resemblance, identity, relations of time and place, proportion in quantity or number, degrees in quality, contrariety, and causation. Mill (1974, pp. 989-1004) discoursed on several types of relations, claiming that all things are either feelings, substances, or attributes, and that attributes can be a quality (which belongs to one object) or a relation to other objects.
    Linguists in the structuralist tradition (e.g., Lyons, 1977; Saussure, 1959) have asserted that concepts cannot be defined on their own but only in relation to other concepts. Semantic relations appear to reflect a logical structure in the fundamental nature of thought (Caplan & Herrmann, 1993). Green, Bean, and Myaeng (2002) noted that semantic relations play a critical role in how we represent knowledge psychologically, linguistically, and computationally, and that many systems of knowledge representation start with a basic distinction between entities and relations. Green (2001, p. 3) said that "relationships are involved as we combine simple entities to form more complex entities, as we compare entities, as we group entities, as one entity performs a process on another entity, and so forth. Indeed, many things that we might initially regard as basic and elemental are revealed upon further examination to involve internal structure, or in other words, internal relationships." Concepts and relations are often expressed in language and text. Language is used not just for communicating concepts and relations, but also for representing, storing, and reasoning with concepts and relations. We shall examine the nature of semantic relations from a linguistic and psychological perspective, with an emphasis on relations expressed in text. The usefulness of semantic relations in information science, especially in ontology construction, information extraction, information retrieval, question-answering, and text summarization is discussed. Research and development in information science have focused on concepts and terms, but the focus will increasingly shift to the identification, processing, and management of relations to achieve greater effectiveness and refinement in information science techniques. Previous chapters in ARIST on natural language processing (Chowdhury, 2003), text mining (Trybula, 1999), information retrieval and the philosophy of language (Blair, 2003), and query expansion (Efthimiadis, 1996) provide a background for this discussion, as semantic relations are an important part of these applications.
    Type
    a
  20. Principles underlying subject heading languages (SHLs) (1999) 0.00 
    0.0038615435 = product of:
  0.007723087 = sum of:
    0.007723087 = product of:
      0.02316926 = sum of:
        0.02316926 = weight(_text_:j in 1659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02316926 = score(doc=1659,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.21064025 = fieldWeight in 1659, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1659)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Editor
    Lopes, M.I. u. J. Beall

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 82
  • d 20
  • f 3
  • ja 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 96
  • m 6
  • s 6
  • el 3
  • r 2
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications