-
Gnoli, C.: Classificazione a facette (2004)
0.06
0.060467124 = product of:
0.12093425 = sum of:
0.12093425 = product of:
0.18140137 = sum of:
0.09878167 = weight(_text_:i in 3746) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09878167 = score(doc=3746,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16931784 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.58340967 = fieldWeight in 3746, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3746)
0.0826197 = weight(_text_:c in 3746) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0826197 = score(doc=3746,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15484828 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.5335526 = fieldWeight in 3746, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3746)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Language
- i
-
Molholt, P.: Qualities of classification schemes for the Information Superhighway (1995)
0.04
0.03894224 = product of:
0.07788448 = sum of:
0.07788448 = product of:
0.11682672 = sum of:
0.08641596 = weight(_text_:i in 5562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08641596 = score(doc=5562,freq=12.0), product of:
0.16931784 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.51037717 = fieldWeight in 5562, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5562)
0.030410757 = weight(_text_:22 in 5562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030410757 = score(doc=5562,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15720168 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5562, 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=5562)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- For my segment of this program I'd like to focus on some basic qualities of classification schemes. These qualities are critical to our ability to truly organize knowledge for access. As I see it, there are at least five qualities of note. The first one of these properties that I want to talk about is "authoritative." By this I mean standardized, but I mean more than standardized with a built in consensus-building process. A classification scheme constructed by a collaborative, consensus-building process carries the approval, and the authority, of the discipline groups that contribute to it and that it affects... The next property of classification systems is "expandable," living, responsive, with a clear locus of responsibility for its continuous upkeep. The worst thing you can do with a thesaurus, or a classification scheme, is to finish it. You can't ever finish it because it reflects ongoing intellectual activity... The third property is "intuitive." That is, the system has to be approachable, it has to be transparent, or at least capable of being transparent. It has to have an underlying logic that supports the classification scheme but doesn't dominate it... The fourth property is "organized and logical." I advocate very strongly, and agree with Lois Chan, that classification must be based on a rule-based structure, on somebody's world-view of the syndetic structure... The fifth property is "universal" by which I mean the classification scheme needs be useable by any specific system or application, and be available as a language for multiple purposes.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 21(1995) no.2, S.19-22
-
Beghtol, C.: Response to Hjoerland and Nicolaisen (2004)
0.03
0.032916233 = product of:
0.065832466 = sum of:
0.065832466 = product of:
0.09874869 = sum of:
0.07809377 = weight(_text_:i in 3536) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07809377 = score(doc=3536,freq=20.0), product of:
0.16931784 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.46122587 = fieldWeight in 3536, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3536)
0.020654924 = weight(_text_:c in 3536) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020654924 = score(doc=3536,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15484828 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.13338815 = fieldWeight in 3536, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3536)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- I am writing to correct some of the misconceptions that Hjoerland and Nicolaisen appear to have about my paper in the previous issue of Knowledge Organization. I would like to address aspects of two of these misapprehensions. The first is the faulty interpretation they have given to my use of the term "naïve classification," and the second is the kinds of classification systems that they appear to believe are discussed in my paper as examples of "naïve classifications." First, the term "naïve classification" is directly analogous to the widely-understood and widelyaccepted term "naïve indexing." It is not analogous to the terms to which Hjorland and Nicolaisen compare it (i.e., "naïve physics", "naïve biology"). The term as I have defined it is not pejorative. It does not imply that the scholars who have developed naïve classifications have not given profoundly serious thought to their own scholarly work. My paper distinguishes between classifications for new knowledge developed by scholars in the various disciplines for the purposes of advancing disciplinary knowledge ("naïve classifications") and classifications for previously existing knowledge developed by information professionals for the purposes of creating access points in information retrieval systems ("professional classifications"). This distinction rests primarily an the purpose of the kind of classification system in question and only secondarily an the knowledge base of the scholars who have created it. Hjoerland and Nicolaisen appear to have misunderstood this point, which is made clearly and adequately in the title, in the abstract and throughout the text of my paper.
Second, the paper posits that these different reasons for creating classification systems strongly influence the content and extent of the two kinds of classifications, but not necessarily their structures. By definition, naïve classifications for new knowledge have been developed for discrete areas of disciplinary inquiry in new areas of knowledge. These classifications do not attempt to classify the whole of that disciplinary area. That is, naïve classifications have a explicit purpose that is significantly different from the purpose of the major disciplinary classifications Hjoer-land and Nicolaisen provide as examples of classifications they think I discuss under the rubric of "naïve classifications" (e.g., classifications for the entire field of archaeology, biology, linguistics, music, psychology, etc.). My paper is not concerned with these important classifications for major disciplinary areas. Instead, it is concerned solely and specifically with scholarly classifications for small areas of new knowledge within these major disciplines (e.g., cloth of aresta, double harpsichords, child-rearing practices, anomalous phenomena, etc.). Thus, I have nowhere suggested or implied that the broad disciplinary classifications mentioned by Hjoerland and Nicolaisen are appropriately categorized as "naïve classifications." For example, I have not associated the Periodic System of the Elements with naïve classifications, as Hjoerland and Nicolaisen state that I have done. Indeed, broad classifications of this type fall well outside the definition of naïve classifications set out in my paper. In this case, too, 1 believe that Hjorland and Nicolaisen have misunderstood an important point in my paper. I agree with a number of points made in Hjorland and Nicolaisen's paper. In particular, I agree that researchers in the knowledge organization field should adhere to the highest standards of scholarly and scientific precision. For that reason, I am glad to have had the opportunity to respond to their paper.
-
Belayche, C.: ¬A propos de la classification de Dewey (1997)
0.03
0.03195616 = product of:
0.06391232 = sum of:
0.06391232 = product of:
0.09586847 = sum of:
0.04721126 = weight(_text_:c in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04721126 = score(doc=1171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15484828 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.3048872 = fieldWeight in 1171, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1171)
0.04865721 = weight(_text_:22 in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04865721 = score(doc=1171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15720168 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1171, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1171)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Bulletin d'informations de l'Association des Bibliothecaires Francais. 1997, no.175, S.22-23
-
Beghtol, C.: Relationships in classificatory structure and meaning (2001)
0.03
0.02591448 = product of:
0.05182896 = sum of:
0.05182896 = product of:
0.07774344 = sum of:
0.042335 = weight(_text_:i in 1138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042335 = score(doc=1138,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16931784 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.25003272 = fieldWeight in 1138, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1138)
0.035408445 = weight(_text_:c in 1138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035408445 = score(doc=1138,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15484828 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.22866541 = fieldWeight in 1138, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1138)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In a changing information environment, we need to reassess each element of bibliographic control, including classification theories and systems. Every classification system is a theoretical construct imposed an "reality." The classificatory relationships that are assumed to be valuable have generally received less attention than the topics included in the systems. Relationships are functions of both the syntactic and semantic axes of classification systems, and both explicit and implicit relationships are discussed. Examples are drawn from a number of different systems, both bibliographic and non-bibliographic, and the cultural warrant (i. e., the sociocultural context) of classification systems is examined. The part-whole relationship is discussed as an example of a universally valid concept that is treated as a component of the cultural warrant of a classification system.
-
Jacob, E.K.: Proposal for a classification of classifications built on Beghtol's distinction between "Naïve Classification" and "Professional Classification" (2010)
0.02
0.023967117 = product of:
0.047934234 = sum of:
0.047934234 = product of:
0.07190135 = sum of:
0.035408445 = weight(_text_:c in 2945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035408445 = score(doc=2945,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15484828 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.22866541 = fieldWeight in 2945, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2945)
0.036492907 = weight(_text_:22 in 2945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036492907 = score(doc=2945,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15720168 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2945, 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=2945)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Argues that Beghtol's (2003) use of the terms "naive classification" and "professional classification" is valid because they are nominal definitions and that the distinction between these two types of classification points up the need for researchers in knowledge organization to broaden their scope beyond traditional classification systems intended for information retrieval. Argues that work by Beghtol (2003), Kwasnik (1999) and Bailey (1994) offer direction for the development of a classification of classifications based on the pragmatic dimensions of extant classification systems. Bezugnahme auf: Beghtol, C.: Naïve classification systems and the global information society. In: Knowledge organization and the global information society: Proceedings of the 8th International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004, London, UK. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine. Würzburg: Ergon Verlag 2004. S.19-22. (Advances in knowledge organization; vol.9)
-
Gnoli, C.: Classifying phenomena : part 4: themes and rhemes (2018)
0.02
0.023967117 = product of:
0.047934234 = sum of:
0.047934234 = product of:
0.07190135 = sum of:
0.035408445 = weight(_text_:c in 4152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035408445 = score(doc=4152,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15484828 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.22866541 = fieldWeight in 4152, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4152)
0.036492907 = weight(_text_:22 in 4152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036492907 = score(doc=4152,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15720168 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4152, 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=4152)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 17. 2.2018 18:22:25
-
Dahlberg, I.: Einteilungsprinzipien von Klassifikationssystemen (1974)
0.02
0.023519445 = product of:
0.04703889 = sum of:
0.04703889 = product of:
0.14111666 = sum of:
0.14111666 = weight(_text_:i in 86) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14111666 = score(doc=86,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16931784 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.83344233 = fieldWeight in 86, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=86)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Beghtol, C.: Naïve classification systems and the global information society (2004)
0.02
0.019972598 = product of:
0.039945196 = sum of:
0.039945196 = product of:
0.059917793 = sum of:
0.029507035 = weight(_text_:c in 3483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029507035 = score(doc=3483,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15484828 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.1905545 = fieldWeight in 3483, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3483)
0.030410757 = weight(_text_:22 in 3483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030410757 = score(doc=3483,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15720168 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3483, 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=3483)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Pages
- S.19-22
-
Austin, D.: Basic concept classes and primitive relations (1982)
0.02
0.019956911 = product of:
0.039913822 = sum of:
0.039913822 = product of:
0.11974146 = sum of:
0.11974146 = weight(_text_:i in 6580) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11974146 = score(doc=6580,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16931784 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.70719934 = fieldWeight in 6580, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6580)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Universal classification I: subject analysis and ordering systems. Proc. of the 4th Int. Study Conf. on Classification research, Augsburg, 28.6.-2.7.1982. Ed.: I. Dahlberg
-
Foskett, D.J.; Bury, S.: Concept organisation and universal classification schemes (1982)
0.02
0.019956911 = product of:
0.039913822 = sum of:
0.039913822 = product of:
0.11974146 = sum of:
0.11974146 = weight(_text_:i in 17) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11974146 = score(doc=17,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16931784 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.70719934 = fieldWeight in 17, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=17)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Universal classification I: subject analysis and ordering systems. Proc. of the 4th Int. Study Conf. on Classification research, Augsburg, 28.6.-2.7.1982. Ed.: I. Dahlberg
-
Kumar, K.: Theoretical bases for universal classification systems (1982)
0.02
0.019956911 = product of:
0.039913822 = sum of:
0.039913822 = product of:
0.11974146 = sum of:
0.11974146 = weight(_text_:i in 34) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11974146 = score(doc=34,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16931784 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.70719934 = fieldWeight in 34, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=34)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Universal classification I: subject analysis and ordering systems. Proc. of the 4th Int. Study Conf. on Classification research, Augsburg, 28.6.-2.7.1982. Ed.: I. Dahlberg
-
Classification research for knowledge representation and organization : Proc. of the 5th Int. Study Conf. on Classification Research, Toronto, Canada, 24.-28.6.1991 (1992)
0.02
0.017277371 = product of:
0.034554742 = sum of:
0.034554742 = product of:
0.051832113 = sum of:
0.0211675 = weight(_text_:i in 2072) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0211675 = score(doc=2072,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16931784 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.12501636 = fieldWeight in 2072, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2072)
0.030664613 = weight(_text_:c in 2072) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030664613 = score(doc=2072,freq=6.0), product of:
0.15484828 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.19803005 = fieldWeight in 2072, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2072)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- Enthält die Beiträge: SVENONIUS, E.: Classification: prospects, problems, and possibilities; BEALL, J.: Editing the Dewey Decimal Classification online: the evolution of the DDC database; BEGHTOL, C.: Toward a theory of fiction analysis for information storage and retrieval; CRAVEN, T.C.: Concept relation structures and their graphic display; FUGMANN, R.: Illusory goals in information science research; GILCHRIST, A.: UDC: the 1990's and beyond; GREEN, R.: The expression of syntagmatic relationships in indexing: are frame-based index languages the answer?; HUMPHREY, S.M.: Use and management of classification systems for knowledge-based indexing; MIKSA, F.L.: The concept of the universe of knowledge and the purpose of LIS classification; SCOTT, M. u. A.F. FONSECA: Methodology for functional appraisal of records and creation of a functional thesaurus; ALBRECHTSEN, H.: PRESS: a thesaurus-based information system for software reuse; AMAESHI, B.: A preliminary AAT compatible African art thesaurus; CHATTERJEE, A.: Structures of Indian classification systems of the pre-Ranganathan era and their impact on the Colon Classification; COCHRANE, P.A.: Indexing and searching thesauri, the Janus or Proteus of information retrieval; CRAVEN, T.C.: A general versus a special algorithm in the graphic display of thesauri; DAHLBERG, I.: The basis of a new universal classification system seen from a philosophy of science point of view: DRABENSTOTT, K.M., RIESTER, L.C. u. B.A.DEDE: Shelflisting using expert systems; FIDEL, R.: Thesaurus requirements for an intermediary expert system; GREEN, R.: Insights into classification from the cognitive sciences: ramifications for index languages; GROLIER, E. de: Towards a syndetic information retrieval system; GUENTHER, R.: The USMARC format for classification data: development and implementation; HOWARTH, L.C.: Factors influencing policies for the adoption and integration of revisions to classification schedules; HUDON, M.: Term definitions in subject thesauri: the Canadian literacy thesaurus experience; HUSAIN, S.: Notational techniques for the accomodation of subjects in Colon Classification 7th edition: theoretical possibility vis-à-vis practical need; KWASNIK, B.H. u. C. JORGERSEN: The exploration by means of repertory grids of semantic differences among names of official documents; MICCO, M.: Suggestions for automating the Library of Congress Classification schedules; PERREAULT, J.M.: An essay on the prehistory of general categories (II): G.W. Leibniz, Conrad Gesner; REES-POTTER, L.K.: How well do thesauri serve the social sciences?; REVIE, C.W. u. G. SMART: The construction and the use of faceted classification schema in technical domains; ROCKMORE, M.: Structuring a flexible faceted thsaurus record for corporate information retrieval; ROULIN, C.: Sub-thesauri as part of a metathesaurus; SMITH, L.C.: UNISIST revisited: compatibility in the context of collaboratories; STILES, W.G.: Notes concerning the use chain indexing as a possible means of simulating the inductive leap within artificial intelligence; SVENONIUS, E., LIU, S. u. B. SUBRAHMANYAM: Automation in chain indexing; TURNER, J.: Structure in data in the Stockshot database at the National Film Board of Canada; VIZINE-GOETZ, D.: The Dewey Decimal Classification as an online classification tool; WILLIAMSON, N.J.: Restructuring UDC: problems and possibilies; WILSON, A.: The hierarchy of belief: ideological tendentiousness in universal classification; WILSON, B.F.: An evaluation of the systematic botany schedule of the Universal Decimal Classification (English full edition, 1979); ZENG, L.: Research and development of classification and thesauri in China; CONFERENCE SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
-
Ereshefsky, M.: ¬The poverty of the Linnaean hierarchy : a philosophical study of biological taxonomy (2007)
0.02
0.01727632 = product of:
0.03455264 = sum of:
0.03455264 = product of:
0.05182896 = sum of:
0.028223332 = weight(_text_:i in 2493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028223332 = score(doc=2493,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16931784 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.16668847 = fieldWeight in 2493, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2493)
0.02360563 = weight(_text_:c in 2493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02360563 = score(doc=2493,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15484828 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.1524436 = fieldWeight in 2493, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2493)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Biographed
- Linné, C.
- Content
- Part I: The historical turn 1. The philosophy of classification 2. A primer of biological taxonomy 3. History and classification Part II: The multiplicity of nature 4. Species pluralism 5. How to be a discerning pluralist Part III: Hierarchies and nomenclature 6. The evolution of the Linnaean hierarchy 7. Post-Linnaean taxonomy 8. The future of biological nomenclature
-
Henrichs, N.: Gegenstandstheoretische Grundlagen der Bibliotheksklassifikation? (1979)
0.01
0.014111667 = product of:
0.028223334 = sum of:
0.028223334 = product of:
0.08467 = sum of:
0.08467 = weight(_text_:i in 1423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08467 = score(doc=1423,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16931784 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.50006545 = fieldWeight in 1423, 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=1423)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Klassifikation und Erkenntnis I. Proc. der Plenarvorträge und der Sektion 1 "Klassifikation und Wissensgewinnung" der 3. Fachtagung der Gesellschaft für Klassifikation, Königstein/Ts., 5.-6.4.1979
-
DIN 32705: Klassifikationssysteme: Erstellung und Weiterentwicklung von Klassifikationssystemen (1987)
0.01
0.014111667 = product of:
0.028223334 = sum of:
0.028223334 = product of:
0.08467 = sum of:
0.08467 = weight(_text_:i in 1653) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08467 = score(doc=1653,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16931784 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.50006545 = fieldWeight in 1653, 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=1653)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Footnote
- Vgl. zur Einführung in die Norm auch die Beiträge von W. Gödert: Bibliothekarische Klassifikationssysteme ... in: Bibliothek: Forschung und Praxis 11(1987) und I. Dahlberg: DIN 32705: ... in: International classification 19(1992)
-
Zackland, M.; Fontaine, D.: Systematic building of conceptual classification systems with C-KAT (1996)
0.01
0.01376995 = product of:
0.0275399 = sum of:
0.0275399 = product of:
0.0826197 = sum of:
0.0826197 = weight(_text_:c in 5145) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0826197 = score(doc=5145,freq=8.0), product of:
0.15484828 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.5335526 = fieldWeight in 5145, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5145)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- C-KAT is a method and a tool which supports the design of feature oriented classification systems for knowlegde based systems. It uses a specialized Heuristic Classification conceptual model named 'classification by structural shift' which sees the classification process as the matching of different classifications of the same set of objects or situations organized around different structural principles. To manage the complexity induced by the cross-product, C-KAT supports the use of a leastcommittment strategy which applies in a context of constraint-directed reasoning. Presents this method using an example from the field of industrial fire insurance
- Object
- C-KAT
-
Buchanan, B.: Theory of library classification (1979)
0.01
0.013304608 = product of:
0.026609216 = sum of:
0.026609216 = product of:
0.079827644 = sum of:
0.079827644 = weight(_text_:i in 641) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.079827644 = score(doc=641,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16931784 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.4714662 = fieldWeight in 641, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=641)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- Inhalt: Classification: definition and uses - The relationships between classes - Enumerative and faceted schemes - Decisions - The construction of a faceted scheme: I - The construction of a faceted scheme: II - Notation: I - Notation: II - Notation: III - The alphabetical subject index - General classification schemes - Objections to systematic order - Automatic classification
-
Maniez, J.: ¬Des classifications aux thesaurus : du bon usage des facettes (1999)
0.01
0.012164302 = product of:
0.024328604 = sum of:
0.024328604 = product of:
0.07298581 = sum of:
0.07298581 = weight(_text_:22 in 6404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07298581 = score(doc=6404,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15720168 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6404, 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=6404)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
-
Maniez, J.: ¬Du bon usage des facettes : des classifications aux thésaurus (1999)
0.01
0.012164302 = product of:
0.024328604 = sum of:
0.024328604 = product of:
0.07298581 = sum of:
0.07298581 = weight(_text_:22 in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07298581 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15720168 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044891298 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3773, 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=3773)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
