-
Tay, A.: ¬The next generation discovery citation indexes : a review of the landscape in 2020 (2020)
0.05
0.04654435 = product of:
0.0930887 = sum of:
0.0930887 = sum of:
0.049993843 = weight(_text_:i in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049993843 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.29170483 = fieldWeight in 40, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=40)
0.043094855 = weight(_text_:22 in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043094855 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 40, 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=40)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Conclusion There is a reason why Google Scholar and Web of Science/Scopus are kings of the hills in their various arenas. They have strong brand recogniton, a head start in development and a mass of eyeballs and users that leads to an almost virtious cycle of improvement. Competing against such well established competitors is not easy even when one has deep pockets (Microsoft) or a killer idea (scite). It will be interesting to see how the landscape will look like in 2030. Stay tuned for part II where I review each particular index.
- Date
- 17.11.2020 12:22:59
-
Jörs, B.: ¬Ein kleines Fach zwischen "Daten" und "Wissen" II : Anmerkungen zum (virtuellen) "16th International Symposium of Information Science" (ISI 2021", Regensburg) (2021)
0.03
0.033245962 = product of:
0.066491924 = sum of:
0.066491924 = sum of:
0.035709884 = weight(_text_:i in 330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035709884 = score(doc=330,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.20836058 = fieldWeight in 330, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=330)
0.03078204 = weight(_text_:22 in 330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03078204 = score(doc=330,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 330, 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=330)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Nur noch Informationsethik, Informationskompetenz und Information Assessment? Doch gerade die Abschottung von anderen Disziplinen verstärkt die Isolation des "kleinen Faches" Informationswissenschaft in der Scientific Community. So bleiben ihr als letzte "eigenständige" Forschungsrandgebiete nur die, die Wolf Rauch als Keynote Speaker bereits in seinem einführenden, historisch-genetischen Vortrag zur Lage der Informationswissenschaft auf der ISI 2021 benannt hat: "Wenn die universitäre Informationswissenschaft (zumindest in Europa) wohl kaum eine Chance hat, im Bereich der Entwicklung von Systemen und Anwendungen wieder an die Spitze der Entwicklung vorzustoßen, bleiben ihr doch Gebiete, in denen ihr Beitrag in der kommenden Entwicklungsphase dringend erforderlich sein wird: Informationsethik, Informationskompetenz, Information Assessment" (Wolf Rauch: Was aus der Informationswissenschaft geworden ist; in: Thomas Schmidt; Christian Wolff (Eds): Information between Data and Knowledge. Schriften zur Informationswissenschaft 74, Regensburg, 2021, Seiten 20-22 - siehe auch die Rezeption des Beitrages von Rauch durch Johannes Elia Panskus, Was aus der Informationswissenschaft geworden ist. Sie ist in der Realität angekommen, in: Open Password, 17. März 2021). Das ist alles? Ernüchternd.
- Content
- Vgl. auch Teil I: Open Password. 2021, Nr.946 vom 12. Juli 2021 [https://www.password-online.de/?mailpoet_router&endpoint=view_in_browser&action=view&data=WzMxNSwiM2MwMDJhZWIwZDQ0IiwwLDAsMjg1LDFd].
-
Barth, T.: Inverse Panopticon : Digitalisierung & Transhumanismus [Transhumanismus II] (2020)
0.03
0.025250703 = product of:
0.050501406 = sum of:
0.050501406 = product of:
0.10100281 = sum of:
0.10100281 = weight(_text_:i in 5592) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10100281 = score(doc=5592,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.58933276 = fieldWeight in 5592, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5592)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- Vgl.: Barth, T.: Digitalisierung und Lobby: Transhumanismus I. [12. Januar 2020]. Unter: https://www.heise.de/tp/features/Digitalisierung-und-Lobby-Transhumanismus-I-4633314.html?view=print.
-
Dietz, K.: en.wikipedia.org > 6 Mio. Artikel (2020)
0.02
0.022553055 = product of:
0.04510611 = sum of:
0.04510611 = product of:
0.18042444 = sum of:
0.18042444 = weight(_text_:3a in 5669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.18042444 = score(doc=5669,freq=2.0), product of:
0.38523552 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 5669, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5669)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- "Die Englischsprachige Wikipedia verfügt jetzt über mehr als 6 Millionen Artikel. An zweiter Stelle kommt die deutschsprachige Wikipedia mit 2.3 Millionen Artikeln, an dritter Stelle steht die französischsprachige Wikipedia mit 2.1 Millionen Artikeln (via Researchbuzz: Firehose <https://rbfirehose.com/2020/01/24/techcrunch-wikipedia-now-has-more-than-6-million-articles-in-english/> und Techcrunch <https://techcrunch.com/2020/01/23/wikipedia-english-six-million-articles/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Techcrunch+%28TechCrunch%29&guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9yYmZpcmVob3NlLmNvbS8yMDIwLzAxLzI0L3RlY2hjcnVuY2gtd2lraXBlZGlhLW5vdy1oYXMtbW9yZS10aGFuLTYtbWlsbGlvbi1hcnRpY2xlcy1pbi1lbmdsaXNoLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAK0zHfjdDZ_spFZBF_z-zDjtL5iWvuKDumFTzm4HvQzkUfE2pLXQzGS6FGB_y-VISdMEsUSvkNsg2U_NWQ4lwWSvOo3jvXo1I3GtgHpP8exukVxYAnn5mJspqX50VHIWFADHhs5AerkRn3hMRtf_R3F1qmEbo8EROZXp328HMC-o>). 250120 via digithek ch = #fineBlog s.a.: Angesichts der Veröffentlichung des 6-millionsten Artikels vergangene Woche in der englischsprachigen Wikipedia hat die Community-Zeitungsseite "Wikipedia Signpost" ein Moratorium bei der Veröffentlichung von Unternehmensartikeln gefordert. Das sei kein Vorwurf gegen die Wikimedia Foundation, aber die derzeitigen Maßnahmen, um die Enzyklopädie gegen missbräuchliches undeklariertes Paid Editing zu schützen, funktionierten ganz klar nicht. *"Da die ehrenamtlichen Autoren derzeit von Werbung in Gestalt von Wikipedia-Artikeln überwältigt werden, und da die WMF nicht in der Lage zu sein scheint, dem irgendetwas entgegenzusetzen, wäre der einzige gangbare Weg für die Autoren, fürs erste die Neuanlage von Artikeln über Unternehmen zu untersagen"*, schreibt der Benutzer Smallbones in seinem Editorial <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-01-27/From_the_editor> zur heutigen Ausgabe."
-
Chessum, K.; Haiming, L.; Frommholz, I.: ¬A study of search user interface design based on Hofstede's six cultural dimensions (2022)
0.02
0.021425933 = product of:
0.042851865 = sum of:
0.042851865 = product of:
0.08570373 = sum of:
0.08570373 = weight(_text_:i in 856) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08570373 = score(doc=856,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.50006545 = fieldWeight in 856, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=856)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Jaeger, L.: Wissenschaftler versus Wissenschaft (2020)
0.02
0.018469224 = product of:
0.036938448 = sum of:
0.036938448 = product of:
0.073876895 = sum of:
0.073876895 = weight(_text_:22 in 4156) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.073876895 = score(doc=4156,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4156, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4156)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 2. 3.2020 14:08:22
-
Madisch, I.; Blumenthal, U.: Wie das Coronavirus die Wissenschaftswelt dynamisiert : [12.05.2020]. (2020)
0.02
0.017854942 = product of:
0.035709884 = sum of:
0.035709884 = product of:
0.07141977 = sum of:
0.07141977 = weight(_text_:i in 5848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07141977 = score(doc=5848,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.41672117 = fieldWeight in 5848, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5848)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Barth, T.: Digitalisierung und Lobby : Transhumanismus I (2020)
0.02
0.017675493 = product of:
0.035350986 = sum of:
0.035350986 = product of:
0.07070197 = sum of:
0.07070197 = weight(_text_:i in 5665) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07070197 = score(doc=5665,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.41253293 = fieldWeight in 5665, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5665)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- https://www.heise.de/tp/features/Digitalisierung-und-Lobby-Transhumanismus-I-4633314.html?view=print
-
Wagner, E.: Über Impfstoffe zur digitalen Identität? (2020)
0.02
0.01539102 = product of:
0.03078204 = sum of:
0.03078204 = product of:
0.06156408 = sum of:
0.06156408 = weight(_text_:22 in 5846) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06156408 = score(doc=5846,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5846, 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=5846)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 4. 5.2020 17:22:40
-
Engel, B.: Corona-Gesundheitszertifikat als Exitstrategie (2020)
0.02
0.01539102 = product of:
0.03078204 = sum of:
0.03078204 = product of:
0.06156408 = sum of:
0.06156408 = weight(_text_:22 in 5906) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06156408 = score(doc=5906,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5906, 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=5906)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 4. 5.2020 17:22:28
-
Arndt, O.: Totale Telematik (2020)
0.02
0.01539102 = product of:
0.03078204 = sum of:
0.03078204 = product of:
0.06156408 = sum of:
0.06156408 = weight(_text_:22 in 5907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06156408 = score(doc=5907,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5907, 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=5907)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 6.2020 19:11:24
-
Arndt, O.: Erosion der bürgerlichen Freiheiten (2020)
0.02
0.01539102 = product of:
0.03078204 = sum of:
0.03078204 = product of:
0.06156408 = sum of:
0.06156408 = weight(_text_:22 in 82) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06156408 = score(doc=82,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 82, 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=82)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 6.2020 19:16:24
-
Baecker, D.: ¬Der Frosch, die Fliege und der Mensch : zum Tod von Humberto Maturana (2021)
0.02
0.01539102 = product of:
0.03078204 = sum of:
0.03078204 = product of:
0.06156408 = sum of:
0.06156408 = weight(_text_:22 in 236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06156408 = score(doc=236,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 236, 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=236)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 7. 5.2021 22:10:24
-
Eyert, F.: Mathematische Wissenschaftskommunikation in der digitalen Gesellschaft (2023)
0.02
0.01539102 = product of:
0.03078204 = sum of:
0.03078204 = product of:
0.06156408 = sum of:
0.06156408 = weight(_text_:22 in 1001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06156408 = score(doc=1001,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1001, 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=1001)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Mitteilungen der Deutschen Mathematiker-Vereinigung. 2023, H.1, S.22-25
-
Koster, L.: Persistent identifiers for heritage objects (2020)
0.01
0.012625352 = product of:
0.025250703 = sum of:
0.025250703 = product of:
0.050501406 = sum of:
0.050501406 = weight(_text_:i in 5718) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050501406 = score(doc=5718,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.29466638 = fieldWeight in 5718, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5718)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Persistent identifiers (PID's) are essential for getting access and referring to library, archive and museum (LAM) collection objects in a sustainable and unambiguous way, both internally and externally. Heritage institutions need a universal policy for the use of PID's in order to have an efficient digital infrastructure at their disposal and to achieve optimal interoperability, leading to open data, open collections and efficient resource management. Here the discussion is limited to PID's that institutions can assign to objects they own or administer themselves. PID's for people, subjects etc. can be used by heritage institutions, but are generally managed by other parties. The first part of this article consists of a general theoretical description of persistent identifiers. First of all, I discuss the questions of what persistent identifiers are and what they are not, and what is needed to administer and use them. The most commonly used existing PID systems are briefly characterized. Then I discuss the types of objects PID's can be assigned to. This section concludes with an overview of the requirements that apply if PIDs should also be used for linked data. The second part examines current infrastructural practices, and existing PID systems and their advantages and shortcomings. Based on these practical issues and the pros and cons of existing PID systems a list of requirements for PID systems is presented which is used to address a number of practical considerations. This section concludes with a number of recommendations.
-
Patriarca, S.: Information literacy gives us the tools to check sources and to verify factual statements : What does Popper`s "Es gibt keine Autoritäten" mean? (2021)
0.01
0.012625352 = product of:
0.025250703 = sum of:
0.025250703 = product of:
0.050501406 = sum of:
0.050501406 = weight(_text_:i in 331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050501406 = score(doc=331,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.29466638 = fieldWeight in 331, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=331)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- I wonder if you would consider an English perspective on the exchange between Bernd Jörs and Hermann Huemer. In my career in the independent education sector I can recall many discussions and Government reports about cross-curricular issues such as logical reasoning and critical thinking, In the IB system this led to the inclusion in the Diploma of "Theory of Knowledge." In the UK we had "key skills" and "critical thinking." One such key skill is what we now call "information literacy." "In his parody of Information literacy, Dr Jörs seems to have confused a necessary condition for a sufficient condition. The fact that information competence may be necessary for serious academic study does not of course make it sufficient. When that is understood the joke about the megalomaniac rather loses its force. (We had better pass over the rant which follows, the sneer at "earth sciences" and the German prejudice towards Austrians)."
-
Prokop, M.: Hans Jonas and the phenomenological continuity of life and mind (2022)
0.01
0.012625352 = product of:
0.025250703 = sum of:
0.025250703 = product of:
0.050501406 = sum of:
0.050501406 = weight(_text_:i in 1048) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050501406 = score(doc=1048,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.29466638 = fieldWeight in 1048, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1048)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This paper offers a novel interpretation of Hans Jonas' analysis of metabolism, the centrepiece of Jonas' philosophy of organism, in relation to recent controversies regarding the phenomenological dimension of life-mind continuity as understood within 'autopoietic' enactivism (AE). Jonas' philosophy of organism chiefly inspired AE's development of what we might call 'the phenomenological life-mind continuity thesis' (PLMCT), the claim that certain phenomenological features of human experience are central to a proper scientific understanding of both life and mind, and as such central features of all living organisms. After discussing the understanding of PLMCT within AE, and recent criticisms thereof, I develop a reading of Jonas' analysis of metabolism, in light of previous commentators, which emphasizes its systematicity and transcendental flavour. The central thought is that, for Jonas, the attribution of certain phenomenological features is a necessary precondition for our understanding of the possibility of metabolism, rather than being derivable from metabolism itself. I argue that my interpretation strengthens Jonas' contribution to AE's justification for ascribing certain phenomenological features to life across the board. However, it also emphasises the need to complement Jonas' analysis with an explanatory account of organic identity in order to vindicate these phenomenological ascriptions in a scientific context.
-
Tappenbeck, I.; Michel, A.; Wittich, A.; Werr, N.; Gäde, M.; Spree, U.; Gläser, C.; Griesbaum, J.; Mandl, T.; Keller-Loibl, K.; Stang, R.: Framework Informationskompetenz : Ein gemeinsamer Standard für die Qualifikation in den bibliotheks- und informationswissenschaftlichen Studiengängen in Deutschland (2022)
0.01
0.012498461 = product of:
0.024996921 = sum of:
0.024996921 = product of:
0.049993843 = sum of:
0.049993843 = weight(_text_:i in 540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049993843 = score(doc=540,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.29170483 = fieldWeight in 540, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=540)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Matt, A.; Schaber, E.; Violet, B.: Vielfältige Formate und dynamische Umsetzung : Mathematik-Kommunikation zu Künstlicher Intelligenz bei IMAGINARY (2023)
0.01
0.012498461 = product of:
0.024996921 = sum of:
0.024996921 = product of:
0.049993843 = sum of:
0.049993843 = weight(_text_:i in 891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049993843 = score(doc=891,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.29170483 = fieldWeight in 891, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=891)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- IMAGINARY verfügt über eine große Spannbreite und eine Vielzahl an Ressourcen im Bereich der Mathematik- und Wissenschaftskommunikation. In diesem Artikel werden Formate zum Thema Künstliche Intelligenz (KI) für Zielgruppen mit unterschiedlichem Vor- und Fachwissen vorgestellt. Zwei grundlegende Themen, die eine wichtige Rolle im Maschinellen Lernen bilden, stehen dabei im Vordergrund: Neuronale Netze und Reinforcement Learning. IMAGINARY vermittelt diese beiden Schwerpunkte auf vielfältige Weise. Dieser Beitrag stellt einige der verwendeten Formate vor: Von interaktiven Exponaten in der Ausstellung "I AM A.I." zu "Explorables" in digitalen Programmen, über Online-Kurse auf Lernplattformen bis hin zu Workshops für Schüler*innen oder Mathematiklehrkräfte.
-
Jha, A.: Why GPT-4 isn't all it's cracked up to be (2023)
0.01
0.012498461 = product of:
0.024996921 = sum of:
0.024996921 = product of:
0.049993843 = sum of:
0.049993843 = weight(_text_:i in 923) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049993843 = score(doc=923,freq=8.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.29170483 = fieldWeight in 923, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=923)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- "I still don't know what to think about GPT-4, the new large language model (LLM) from OpenAI. On the one hand it is a remarkable product that easily passes the Turing test. If you ask it questions, via the ChatGPT interface, GPT-4 can easily produce fluid sentences largely indistinguishable from those a person might write. But on the other hand, amid the exceptional levels of hype and anticipation, it's hard to know where GPT-4 and other LLMs truly fit in the larger project of making machines intelligent.
They might appear intelligent, but LLMs are nothing of the sort. They don't understand the meanings of the words they are using, nor the concepts expressed within the sentences they create. When asked how to bring a cow back to life, earlier versions of ChatGPT, for example, which ran on a souped-up version of GPT-3, would confidently provide a list of instructions. So-called hallucinations like this happen because language models have no concept of what a "cow" is or that "death" is a non-reversible state of being. LLMs do not have minds that can think about objects in the world and how they relate to each other. All they "know" is how likely it is that some sets of words will follow other sets of words, having calculated those probabilities from their training data. To make sense of all this, I spoke with Gary Marcus, an emeritus professor of psychology and neural science at New York University, for "Babbage", our science and technology podcast. Last year, as the world was transfixed by the sudden appearance of ChatGPT, he made some fascinating predictions about GPT-4.
People use symbols to think about the world: if I say the words "cat", "house" or "aeroplane", you know instantly what I mean. Symbols can also be used to describe the way things are behaving (running, falling, flying) or they can represent how things should behave in relation to each other (a "+" means add the numbers before and after). Symbolic AI is a way to embed this human knowledge and reasoning into computer systems. Though the idea has been around for decades, it fell by the wayside a few years ago as deep learning-buoyed by the sudden easy availability of lots of training data and cheap computing power-became more fashionable. In the near future at least, there's no doubt people will find LLMs useful. But whether they represent a critical step on the path towards AGI, or rather just an intriguing detour, remains to be seen."
