Search (18 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Referieren"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Wan, X.; Yang, J.; Xiao, J.: Incorporating cross-document relationships between sentences for single document summarizations (2006) 0.01
    0.009352768 = product of:
      0.018705536 = sum of:
        0.018705536 = product of:
          0.03741107 = sum of:
            0.03741107 = weight(_text_:22 in 2421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03741107 = score(doc=2421,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1611569 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04602077 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2421, 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=2421)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006
  2. Hartley, J.: Do structured abstracts take more space? : And does it matter? (2002) 0.00
    0.0036767495 = product of:
      0.007353499 = sum of:
        0.007353499 = product of:
          0.014706998 = sum of:
            0.014706998 = weight(_text_:e in 582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.014706998 = score(doc=582,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.06614887 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04602077 = queryNorm
                0.2223318 = fieldWeight in 582, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=582)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Language
    e
  3. Cleveland, D.B.; Cleveland, A.D.: Introduction to abstracting and indexing (2001) 0.00
    0.0026262498 = product of:
      0.0052524996 = sum of:
        0.0052524996 = product of:
          0.010504999 = sum of:
            0.010504999 = weight(_text_:e in 316) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.010504999 = score(doc=316,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.06614887 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04602077 = queryNorm
                0.15880844 = fieldWeight in 316, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=316)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Language
    e
  4. Montesi, M.; Mackenzie Owen, J.: Revision of author abstracts : how it is carried out by LISA editors (2007) 0.00
    0.0018570389 = product of:
      0.0037140779 = sum of:
        0.0037140779 = product of:
          0.0074281557 = sum of:
            0.0074281557 = weight(_text_:e in 807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0074281557 = score(doc=807,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.06614887 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04602077 = queryNorm
                0.112294525 = fieldWeight in 807, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=807)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The literature on abstracts recommends the revision of author supplied abstracts before their inclusion in database collections. However, little guidance is given on how to carry out such revision, and few studies exist on this topic. The purpose of this research paper is to first survey 187 bibliographic databases to ascertain how many did revise abstracts, and then study the practical amendments made by one of these, i.e. LISA (Library and Information Science Abstracts). Design/methodology/approach - Database policies were established by e-mail or through alternative sources, with 136 databases out of 187 exhaustively documented. Differences between 100 author-supplied abstracts and the corresponding 100 LISA amended abstracts were classified into sentence-level and beyond sentence-level categories, and then as additions, deletions and rephrasing of text. Findings - Revision of author abstracts was carried out by 66 databases, but in just 32 cases did it imply more than spelling, shortening of length and formula representation. In LISA, amendments were often non-systematic and inconsistent, but still pointed to significant aspects which were discussed. Originality/value - Amendments made by LISA editors are important in multi- and inter-disciplinary research, since they tend to clarify certain aspects such as terminology, and suggest that abstracts should not always be considered as substitutes for the original document. From this point-of-view, the revision of abstracts can be considered as an important factor in enhancing a database's quality.
    Language
    e
  5. Bowman, J.H.: Annotation: a lost art in cataloguing (2007) 0.00
    0.0018383748 = product of:
      0.0036767495 = sum of:
        0.0036767495 = product of:
          0.007353499 = sum of:
            0.007353499 = weight(_text_:e in 255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007353499 = score(doc=255,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.06614887 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04602077 = queryNorm
                0.1111659 = fieldWeight in 255, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=255)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Language
    e
  6. Koltay, T.: Abstracting: information literacy on a professional level (2009) 0.00
    0.0018383748 = product of:
      0.0036767495 = sum of:
        0.0036767495 = product of:
          0.007353499 = sum of:
            0.007353499 = weight(_text_:e in 3610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007353499 = score(doc=3610,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.06614887 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04602077 = queryNorm
                0.1111659 = fieldWeight in 3610, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3610)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Language
    e
  7. Pinto, M.: Abstracting/abstract adaptation to digital environments : research trends (2003) 0.00
    0.0015757497 = product of:
      0.0031514994 = sum of:
        0.0031514994 = product of:
          0.006302999 = sum of:
            0.006302999 = weight(_text_:e in 4446) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.006302999 = score(doc=4446,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.06614887 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04602077 = queryNorm
                0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 4446, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4446)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Language
    e
  8. Montesi, M.; Urdiciain, B.G.: Recent linguistic research into author abstracts : its value for information science (2005) 0.00
    0.0015757497 = product of:
      0.0031514994 = sum of:
        0.0031514994 = product of:
          0.006302999 = sum of:
            0.006302999 = weight(_text_:e in 4823) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.006302999 = score(doc=4823,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.06614887 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04602077 = queryNorm
                0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 4823, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4823)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Language
    e
  9. Lancaster, F.W.: Indexing and abstracting in theory and practice (2003) 0.00
    0.0015757497 = product of:
      0.0031514994 = sum of:
        0.0031514994 = product of:
          0.006302999 = sum of:
            0.006302999 = weight(_text_:e in 4913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.006302999 = score(doc=4913,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.06614887 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04602077 = queryNorm
                0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 4913, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4913)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Language
    e
  10. Parekh, R.L.: Advanced indexing and abstracting practices (2000) 0.00
    0.0015757497 = product of:
      0.0031514994 = sum of:
        0.0031514994 = product of:
          0.006302999 = sum of:
            0.006302999 = weight(_text_:e in 119) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.006302999 = score(doc=119,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.06614887 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04602077 = queryNorm
                0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 119, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=119)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Language
    e
  11. Hartley, J.; Betts, L.: Common weaknesses in traditional abstracts in the social sciences (2009) 0.00
    0.0015757497 = product of:
      0.0031514994 = sum of:
        0.0031514994 = product of:
          0.006302999 = sum of:
            0.006302999 = weight(_text_:e in 3115) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.006302999 = score(doc=3115,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.06614887 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04602077 = queryNorm
                0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 3115, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3115)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Language
    e
  12. Wang, F.L.; Yang, C.C.: ¬The impact analysis of language differences on an automatic multilingual text summarization system (2006) 0.00
    0.0013131249 = product of:
      0.0026262498 = sum of:
        0.0026262498 = product of:
          0.0052524996 = sum of:
            0.0052524996 = weight(_text_:e in 5049) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0052524996 = score(doc=5049,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.06614887 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04602077 = queryNorm
                0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 5049, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5049)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Language
    e
  13. Hartley, J.; Betts, L.: ¬The effects of spacing and titles on judgments of the effectiveness of structured abstracts (2007) 0.00
    0.0013131249 = product of:
      0.0026262498 = sum of:
        0.0026262498 = product of:
          0.0052524996 = sum of:
            0.0052524996 = weight(_text_:e in 1325) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0052524996 = score(doc=1325,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.06614887 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04602077 = queryNorm
                0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 1325, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1325)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Language
    e
  14. Sauperl, A.; Klasinc, J.; Luzar, S.: Components of abstracts : logical structure of scholarly abstracts in pharmacology, sociology, and linguistics and literature (2008) 0.00
    0.0013131249 = product of:
      0.0026262498 = sum of:
        0.0026262498 = product of:
          0.0052524996 = sum of:
            0.0052524996 = weight(_text_:e in 1961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0052524996 = score(doc=1961,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.06614887 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04602077 = queryNorm
                0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 1961, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1961)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Language
    e
  15. Hartley, J.; Betts, L.: Revising and polishing a structured abstract : is it worth the time and effort? (2008) 0.00
    0.0013131249 = product of:
      0.0026262498 = sum of:
        0.0026262498 = product of:
          0.0052524996 = sum of:
            0.0052524996 = weight(_text_:e in 2362) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0052524996 = score(doc=2362,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.06614887 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04602077 = queryNorm
                0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 2362, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2362)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Language
    e
  16. Brintzinger, K.-R.: Abstracts im Verbund : Von der bibliothekarischen zur nutzerorientierten Erschließung. ein Versuch des Juristischen Seminars der Universität Tübingen (2003) 0.00
    0.0010504998 = product of:
      0.0021009997 = sum of:
        0.0021009997 = product of:
          0.0042019994 = sum of:
            0.0042019994 = weight(_text_:e in 1548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0042019994 = score(doc=1548,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.06614887 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04602077 = queryNorm
                0.063523374 = fieldWeight in 1548, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1548)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Content
    "Der etwas provokante Titel soll keineswegs eine Dichotomie zwischen bibliothekarischer und nutzerorientierter Erschließung implizieren, sondern zwei Fragen stellen: Was suchen Nutzer in Bibliotheken? Was wollen Nutzer wissen? Die Antwort darauf wird immer heißen: Nutzer suchen nach Inhalten und wollen Informationen über Inhalte. Formale Aspekte, die unter bibliothekarischen Gesichtspunkten durchaus bedeutend sind, spielen für den Nutzer keine große Rolle, Schlagworte als Instrumente der verbalen Sacherschließung beschreiben Inhalte häufig unzureichend und sind für Nutzer vielfach unverständlich. Die bunten Kataloge der Internet-Buchhändler stellen zunehmend einen Kontrast, aber auch eine Konkurrenz zu unseren OPACs dar. Wer in diesen Katalogen recherchiert, findet zwar meist nur eine rudimentäre und natürlich bibliothekarischen Kriterien nicht entsprechende Titelbeschreibung, dafür jedoch regelmäßig zusätzliche Informationen wie Abstracts oder Verlagsinformationen, Rezensionen, Abbildungen, Textproben. Sollen wir uns nun den Katalog von Amazon.de (und seiner Konkurrenten) zum Vorbild nehmen? Wir meinen ja und erfassen daher Abstracts und andere Inhaltsinformationen, die wir mit unseren Titelaufnahmen im Verbund verlinken. Wir sehen darin eine Fortsetzung unseres seit einigen Jahren verfolgten Zieles, die traditionelle Sach- und Formalerschließung um neue Komponenten zu erweitern. Seit 1997 beteiligen wir uns an der kooperativen Aufsatzerschließung, insbesondere durch die Katalogisierung von Festschriftenaufsätzen. Aufsätze in fortlaufenden Sammelwerken katalogisieren wir nur ausnahmsweise, jedoch weisen wir von den Verlagen im Internet angebotene Inhaltsinformationen über Zeitschriften (Inhaltsverzeichnisse, Abstracts, Volltexte) auf der lokalen Ebene nach. Mit unserem Versuch, Abstracts in eine Datenbank des Verbundes einzustellen, haben wir Ende 2000 begonnen. Von ausgewählten Monographien werden Klappentexte, Verlagsinformationen und Abstracts erfasst und mit der Titelaufnahme verlinkt. Unser bisheriges Verfahren ist handgestrickt - hat aber den Vorteil, dass es ohne zusätzliche Technik auskommt und unmittelbar umsetzbar ist: In einem ersten Schritt werden Klappentexte und Inhaltsinformationen von geeigneten Werken ausgewählt. Die Auswahl berücksichtigt sowohl die Bedeutung des Buches wie Umfang und Qualität der Inhaltsinformationen. Das Erfassen der Texte geschieht durch Einscannen oder - wenn dies bei kurzen Texten effizienter ist - durch Abschreiben. Bei einzelnen Verlagen ist es möglich, die Texte direkt von den Webseiten des Verlages per copy-and-paste zu übernehmen. Die Doktoranden unserer Fakultät bitten wir um die Lieferung des Abstracts als Textdatei. Die durch Einscannen, Abschreiben oder Kopieren erzeugte Textdatei wird im nächsten Schritt in eine vom BSZ entwickelte Muster-HTML-Datei kopiert, konvertiert und mit der SWBIdentnummer versehen. Anschließend senden wir diese Datei per E-Mail an den Verbund. Der Verbund stellt unsere Dateien in den BSZ-Medienserver (http://www.bszbw.de/diglib/medserv/metainfhtml) ein, auf dem z.B. auch die ebenfalls mit den VerbundTiteldaten verlinkten IfB- und ekz-Rezensionen gespeichert werden."
  17. Ou, S.; Khoo, C.; Goh, D.H.; Heng, H.-Y.: Automatic discourse parsing of sociology dissertation abstracts as sentence categorization (2004) 0.00
    0.0010504998 = product of:
      0.0021009997 = sum of:
        0.0021009997 = product of:
          0.0042019994 = sum of:
            0.0042019994 = weight(_text_:e in 2676) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0042019994 = score(doc=2676,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.06614887 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04602077 = queryNorm
                0.063523374 = fieldWeight in 2676, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2676)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Language
    e
  18. Cross, C.; Oppenheim, C.: ¬A genre analysis of scientific abstracts (2006) 0.00
    0.0010504998 = product of:
      0.0021009997 = sum of:
        0.0021009997 = product of:
          0.0042019994 = sum of:
            0.0042019994 = weight(_text_:e in 5603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0042019994 = score(doc=5603,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.06614887 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04602077 = queryNorm
                0.063523374 = fieldWeight in 5603, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5603)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Language
    e