Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

0.01198282 = product of:
  0.03594846 = sum of:
    0.012493922 = weight(_text_:in in 4885) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012493922 = score(doc=4885,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.21040362 = fieldWeight in 4885, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4885)
    0.023454536 = weight(_text_:und in 4885) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023454536 = score(doc=4885,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09675359 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.24241515 = fieldWeight in 4885, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4885)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

In einem Benutzertest, der im Rahmen der Projektes GIRT stattfand, wurde die Leistungsfähigkeit zweier Retrievalsprachen für die Datenbankrecherche überprüft. Die Ergebnisse werden in diesem Bericht dargestellt: Das System FULCRUM beruht auf automatischer Indexierung und liefert ein nach statistischer Relevanz sortiertes Suchergebnis. Die Standardfreitextsuche des Systems MESSENGER wurde um die intellektuell vom IZ vergebenen Deskriptoren ergänzt. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass in FULCRUM das Boole'sche Exakt-Match-Retrieval dem Verktos-Space-Modell (Best-Match-Verfahren) von den Versuchspersonen vorgezogen wurde. Die in MESSENGER realisierte Mischform aus intellektueller und automatischer Indexierung erwies sich gegenüber dem quantitativ-statistischen Ansatz beim Recall als überlegen

0.0023797948 = product of:
  0.014278769 = sum of:
    0.014278769 = weight(_text_:in in 1994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014278769 = score(doc=1994,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.24046129 = fieldWeight in 1994, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1994)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

0.0020609628 = product of:
  0.012365777 = sum of:
    0.012365777 = weight(_text_:in in 7311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012365777 = score(doc=7311,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 7311, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7311)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Reports the result of survey of users of the library catalogues in Cambridge University Library carried out in 1992 which aimed to discover the uses of the catalogues and the user's understanding of them. Describes the projects objectives, gives a history of the Cambridge University Library, describes the catalogues and details the conduct of the survey and results

0.0015457221 = product of:
  0.009274333 = sum of:
    0.009274333 = weight(_text_:in in 940) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009274333 = score(doc=940,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.1561842 = fieldWeight in 940, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=940)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Reports results of an investigation, undertaken at Sheffield University, Departmant of Information Studies, UK into the effects of postings information (the display on the screen of the number of references in the retrieved sets) on searching behaviour. Linked online searches were conducted, on the LISA database on CD-ROM, with and without postings information. Performance in terms of the number of relevant references, precision and recall was not significantly different whether postings information was available or not; but searches with postings information took more time and more sets were viewed than in searches without postings. Searchers thought that the lack of postings information had affected 90% of their searches. Proposes that training should place greater emphasis on the value of postings information at different stages of the search and should optimize the searching behaviour of those with different searching styles

0.0015457221 = product of:
  0.009274333 = sum of:
    0.009274333 = weight(_text_:in in 5018) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009274333 = score(doc=5018,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.1561842 = fieldWeight in 5018, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5018)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Summarizes findings of an international study on information-seeking habits and preferences: With extensive input from hundreds of librarians and OCLC staff, the OCLC Market Research team developed a project and commissioned Harris Interactive Inc. to survey a representative sample of information consumers. In June of 2005, we collected over 3,300 responses from information consumers in Australia, Canada, India, Singapore, the United Kingdom and the United States. The Perceptions report provides the findings and responses from the online survey in an effort to learn more about: * Library use * Awareness and use of library electronic resources * Free vs. for-fee information * The "Library" brand The findings indicate that information consumers view libraries as places to borrow print books, but they are unaware of the rich electronic content they can access through libraries. Even though information consumers make limited use of these resources, they continue to trust libraries as reliable sources of information.

0.0010411602 = product of:
  0.006246961 = sum of:
    0.006246961 = weight(_text_:in in 2417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006246961 = score(doc=2417,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 2417, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2417)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

W.S. Cooper's utility theory was used to evaluate end user and mediated searching of online and CD-ROM databases. The searches were conducted by 510 end users, using MEDLINE. The relevance of the references and the usefulness of the documents retrieved were examnied. The study also assessed the perceived value to end users of the information retrieved. Mediated online searching cost 3 times as much as end user CD-ROM searching, but was only about twice as effective in terms of user satisfaction; user convenience should be a high priority for the information provider and mediated CD-ROM searching may be the best compromise currently available as regards cost effectiveness and successful information retrieval for end users

0.0010411602 = product of:
  0.006246961 = sum of:
    0.006246961 = weight(_text_:in in 367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006246961 = score(doc=367,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 367, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=367)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

0.0010411602 = product of:
  0.006246961 = sum of:
    0.006246961 = weight(_text_:in in 59) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006246961 = score(doc=59,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 59, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=59)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Many Semantic Web applications provide access to their resources through text-based search queries, using explicit semantics to improve the search results. This paper provides an analysis of the current state of the art in semantic search, based on 35 existing systems. We identify different types of semantic search features that are used during query construction, the core search process, the presentation of the search results and user feedback on query and results. For each of these, we consider the functionality that the system provides and how this is made available through the user interface.