Search (60 results, page 1 of 3)

0.010578708 = product of:
  0.037025474 = sum of:
    0.021198487 = weight(_text_:with in 3837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021198487 = score(doc=3837,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.22591603 = fieldWeight in 3837, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3837)
    0.015826989 = product of:
      0.031653978 = sum of:
        0.031653978 = weight(_text_:22 in 3837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031653978 = score(doc=3837,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13635688 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3837, 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=3837)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

Library of Congress Subject Headings (LSCH), which celebrated its 100th birthday in 1998, is the largest cataloging and indexing language in the world for the indication of the topics and formats of books and similar publications. It consists of a controlled list of main headings, many with subdivisions, with a rich system of cross references. It is supported by the U.S. government, and undergoes systematic revision. In recent decades its managers have begun to confront challenges such as biased terminology, complicated syntax (how terms are put together to form headings), and effective displays in electronic media. Many suggestions have been made for its improvement, including moving to a fully faceted system.

Date

27. 8.2011 14:22:13

0.008804738 = product of:
  0.030816581 = sum of:
    0.014989593 = weight(_text_:with in 5920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014989593 = score(doc=5920,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.15974675 = fieldWeight in 5920, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5920)
    0.015826989 = product of:
      0.031653978 = sum of:
        0.031653978 = weight(_text_:22 in 5920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031653978 = score(doc=5920,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13635688 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5920, 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=5920)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Date

27. 5.2001 16:22:21

Source

The LCSH century: one hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system. Ed.: A.T.Stone

0.004327123 = product of:
  0.03028986 = sum of:
    0.03028986 = weight(_text_:with in 2249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03028986 = score(doc=2249,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.32280442 = fieldWeight in 2249, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2249)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Contribution to the ongoing debate on the French subject headings list RAMEAU, which has been much criticised as time consuming and inflexible. Proposed technical solutions to recurring problems with complex syntax, strucutre of hierarchical and associative links, and rigity of language are discussed, in the context of computerised cataloguing and retrieval using OPACs. As a universal indexing language RAMEAU is more appropriate for medium sized specialised libraries and specialist researchers. However the 2 possible subject indexing techniques, linguistic treatment of whole text and thesaurus, are now beginning to be viewed as complementary approaches

Footnote

Übers. des Titels: What to do with Rameau? Or how to work with Rameau?

0.004282741 = product of:
  0.029979186 = sum of:
    0.029979186 = weight(_text_:with in 2457) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029979186 = score(doc=2457,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.3194935 = fieldWeight in 2457, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2457)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

0.0039902087 = product of:
  0.02793146 = sum of:
    0.02793146 = weight(_text_:with in 96) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02793146 = score(doc=96,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.2976705 = fieldWeight in 96, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=96)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

The paper looks at ways in which traditional classification and indexing tools have dealt with the relationships between constituent terms; variations in these are examined and compared with the methods used in machine searching, particularly of the Internet and World Wide Web. Apparent correspondences with features of index languages are identified, and further methods of applying classification and indexing theory to machine retrieval are proposed. There are various ways in which indexing and retrieval systems, both conventional and electronic, deal with the problem of searching for documents on a subject basis, and various approaches to the analysis and processing of a query. There appear to be three basic models; the taxonomic or structural system, in which the user is offered a map of the `universe of knowledge'; the language based system, which offers a vocabulary of the subject and a grammar for dealing with compound statements; and the mathematical model using the language of symbolic logic or the algebra of set theory

0.0037089628 = product of:
  0.025962738 = sum of:
    0.025962738 = weight(_text_:with in 1202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025962738 = score(doc=1202,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.2766895 = fieldWeight in 1202, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1202)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

This article reports on a comparison of the postcoordinate retrieval effectiveness of two indexing languages: LCSH and PRECIS. The effect of augmenting each with title words was also studies. The database for the study was over 15.000 UK MARC records. Users returned 5.326 relevant judgements for citations retrieved for 61 SDI profiles, representing a wide variety of subjects. Results are reported in terms of precision and relative recall. Pure/applied sciences data and social science data were analyzed separately. Cochran's significance tests for ratios were used to interpret the findings. Recall emerged as the more important measure discriminating the behavior of the two languages. Addition of title words was found to improve recall of both indexing languages significantly. A direct relationship was observed between recall and exhaustivity. For the social sciences searches, recalls from PRECIS alone and from PRECIS with title words were significantly higher than those from LCSH alone and from LCSH with title words, respectively. Corresponding comparisons for the pure/applied sciences searches revealed no significant differences

0.0037089628 = product of:
  0.025962738 = sum of:
    0.025962738 = weight(_text_:with in 2215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025962738 = score(doc=2215,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.2766895 = fieldWeight in 2215, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2215)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Content

Enthält u.a. die Beiträge: CHAN, L.M.: Functions of a subject authority file; ROOD, J.: Practical considerations in dealing with LCSH-mr; GARRISON, W.A.: Practical considerations in using the machine-readable LCSH; BISHOFF, L.: Public access to to the Library of Congress Subject Headings online; MANDEL, C.A.: Multiple vocabularies in subject authority control

Footnote

Rez. in: Canadian library journal 49(1992) S.166 (P. Nicholls): "Basically a collection of the proceedings of a program given at the ALA's 1987 annual conference, the original impetus for the session was to familarize bibliographic utilities, library systems staff, and integrated library system vendors with the recently-released machine-readable LCSH-mr so that they could "integrate this new tool into online bibliographic systems to provide the cataloging, thesaurus maintenance, file maintenance, and retrieval functions associated with subject authority work." These papers were writeen in 1986 and are all about LCSH on magnetic tape. Gads!

0.0037089628 = product of:
  0.025962738 = sum of:
    0.025962738 = weight(_text_:with in 3351) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025962738 = score(doc=3351,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.2766895 = fieldWeight in 3351, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3351)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Investigates the extent to which title keywords convey subject content and compares the relative effectiveness of searching title keywords using 2 search strategies to examine whether adjacency operators in title keyword searches are effective in improving recall and precision of online searching. Title keywords from a random sample of titles in the field of economics were searched on FirstSearch, using the WorldCat database, which is equivalent in coverage to the OCLC OLUC, with and without adjacency of the keywords specified. The LCSH of the items retrieved were compared with the sample title subject headings to determine the degree of match or relevance and the values for precision and recall were calculated. Results indicated that, when keywords were discipline specific, adjacency operators improved precision with little degradation of recall. Systems that allow positional operators or rank output by proximity of terms may increase search success

0.0037089628 = product of:
  0.025962738 = sum of:
    0.025962738 = weight(_text_:with in 5609) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025962738 = score(doc=5609,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.2766895 = fieldWeight in 5609, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5609)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

In 1986 Libraries Unlimited published Cochrane's book, Improving LCSH for Use in Online Catalogs; Exercises for Self-Help with a Selection of Background Readings. This was preceded in 1981 by an ERIC publication (ED 208 900) by Cochrane, with Monika Kirtland Bibliographic and Bibliometric Essay which documented critical views of LCSH and an analysis of vocabulary control in LCSH (parts of which were published in Cataloging & Classification Quarterly' 1(2/3) (1982), 71-94). Three features of LCSH will be re-examined to check on progress since the time of these earlier publications: notes, structure of relationships between headings in the list, and links between Library of Congress classification numbers and LCSH or other vocabularies

Source

The LCSH century: one hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system. Ed.: A.T. Stone

0.0037089628 = product of:
  0.025962738 = sum of:
    0.025962738 = weight(_text_:with in 5674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025962738 = score(doc=5674,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.2766895 = fieldWeight in 5674, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5674)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

The project of the renewal of the Subject Headings for Italian Library Catalogues (Soggettario), financed by the National Central Library in Florence, proposes a pre-coordinated language, both analytic and synthetic, complying with international rules on vocabulary control and structure, based on category analysis of semantic relationships. It envisages a strict distinction between semantic relationships and syntactic ones, and bases its citation order of subject strings on the analysis model for logical relationships. Thanks to its features, the new Soggettario agrees both with the logic of Guidelines for Subject Authority and Reference Entries and of UNIMARC. Authorities, and with FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records). The rigorous structure of the thesaurus will facilitate the transfer of controlled terminology to lists or authority files and archives. The Italian National Bibliography (BNI) will have to play a leading role on the control of coherence of semantic access points. It will validate the strings created by other libraries and control their coherence according to the syntax rules envisaged in the new method.

0.0037089628 = product of:
  0.025962738 = sum of:
    0.025962738 = weight(_text_:with in 791) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025962738 = score(doc=791,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.2766895 = fieldWeight in 791, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=791)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

The Subject Analysis Committee Subcommittee on FAST of the Association for Library Collections & Technical Services (ALCTS) was established in the fall of 2004 to explore issues related to the implementation of the Faceted Application of Subject Terminology (FAST) subject heading schema. FAST is being developed at the Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) and is derived from the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) with a simplified syntax. This paper is based on comments by the Subject Analysis Committee Subcommittee on FAST, which reviewed a sample of 5,000 bibliographic records with both LCSH and FAST headings. It provides the library community with some understanding of FAST, a new system of subject cataloging and metadata.

0.003568951 = product of:
  0.024982655 = sum of:
    0.024982655 = weight(_text_:with in 2703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024982655 = score(doc=2703,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.2662446 = fieldWeight in 2703, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2703)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

This paper discusses two inter-related themes: the retrieval potential of faceted thesauri and XML representations of fundamental facets. Initial findings are discussed from the ongoing 'FACET' project, in collaboration with the National Museum of Science and Industry. The work discussed seeks to take advantage of the structure afforded by faceted systems for multi-term queries and flexible matching, focusing in this paper an the Art and Architecture Thesaurus. A multi-term matching function yields ranked results with partial matches via semantic term expansion, based an a measure of distance over the semantic index space formed by thesaurus relationships. Our intention is to drive the system from general representations and a common query structure and interface. To this end, we are developing an XML representation based an work by the Classification Research Group an fundamental facets or categories. The XML representation maps categories to particular thesauri and hierarchies. The system interface, which is configured by the mapping, incorporates a thesaurus browser with navigation history together with a term search facility and drag and drop query builder.

0.003568951 = product of:
  0.024982655 = sum of:
    0.024982655 = weight(_text_:with in 5148) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024982655 = score(doc=5148,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.2662446 = fieldWeight in 5148, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5148)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Documents in digital and paper libraries may be arranged, based on their topics, in order to facilitate browsing. It may seem intuitively obvious that ordering documents by their subject should improve browsing performance; the results presented in this article suggest that ordering library materials by their Gray code values and through using links consistent with the small world model of document relationships is consistent with improving browsing performance. Below, library circulation data, including ordering with Library of Congress Classification numbers and Library of Congress Subject Headings, are used to provide information useful in generating user-centered document arrangements, as well as user-independent arrangements. Documents may be linearly arranged so they can be placed in a line by topic, such as on a library shelf, or in a list on a computer display. Crossover links, jumps between a document and another document to which it is not adjacent, can be used in library databases to allow additional paths that one might take when browsing. The improvement that is obtained with different combinations of document orderings and different crossovers is examined and applications suggested.

0.0035330812 = product of:
  0.024731567 = sum of:
    0.024731567 = weight(_text_:with in 828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024731567 = score(doc=828,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.2635687 = fieldWeight in 828, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=828)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Designing research on the retrieval effectiveness of computer searches on PRECIS compared with retrieval effectiveness of searches on other types of subject analysis used in computer-based information sources is a complex process. This paper explores the complexity of measuring comparative retrieval effectiveness through a comparison of the subject analysis provided by the PRECIS system for fifty articles with the subject analysis provided for the same articles by three computer-based information sources: ERIC/CIJE, LLBA/Online and PsycINFO. Objectives are: (1) to discover factors that should be taken into account when designing this type of research; and (2) to identify extraneous variables that work against internal validity in research design .

0.0035330812 = product of:
  0.024731567 = sum of:
    0.024731567 = weight(_text_:with in 6941) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024731567 = score(doc=6941,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.2635687 = fieldWeight in 6941, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6941)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Explores the question of whether academic libraries keep up with the changes in the LCSH system. Analysis of the handling of 15 subject headings in 50 academic library catalogues available via the Internet found that libraries are not consistently maintaining subject authority control, or making syndetic references and scope notes in their catalogues. Discusses the results from the perspective of the libraries' performance, performance on the headings overall, performance on references, performance on the type of change made to the headings,a nd performance within 3 widely used onlien catalogue systems (DRA, INNOPAC and NOTIS). Discusses the implications of the findings in relationship to expressions of dissatisfaction with the effectiveness of subject cataloguing expressed by discussion groups on the Internet

0.0035330812 = product of:
  0.024731567 = sum of:
    0.024731567 = weight(_text_:with in 1395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024731567 = score(doc=1395,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.2635687 = fieldWeight in 1395, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1395)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

This article deals with the meaningful processing of information in relation to two systems of Information processing: pre-coordination and post-coordination. The different approaches are discussed, with emphasis an the need for a controlled vocabulary in information retrieval. Assigned indexing, which employs a controlled vocabulary, is described in detail. Types of indexing language can be divided into two broad groups - those using pre-coordinated terms and those depending an post-coordination. They represent two different basic approaches in processing and Information retrieval. The historical development of these two approaches is described, as well as the two tools that apply to these approaches: thesauri and subject headings.

0.0030908023 = product of:
  0.021635616 = sum of:
    0.021635616 = weight(_text_:with in 2703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021635616 = score(doc=2703,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.2305746 = fieldWeight in 2703, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2703)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

When consumers search for health information, a major obstacle is their unfamiliarity with the medical terminology. Even though medical thesauri such as the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and related tools (e.g., the MeSH Browser) were created to help consumers find medical term definitions, the lack of direct and explicit integration of these help tools into a health retrieval system prevented them from effectively achieving their objectives. To explore this issue, we conducted an empirical study with two systems: One is a simple interface system supporting query-based searching; the other is an augmented system with two new components supporting MeSH term searching and MeSH tree browsing. A total of 45 subjects were recruited to participate in the study. The results indicated that the augmented system is more effective than the simple system in terms of improving user-perceived topic familiarity and question-answer performance, even though we did not find users spend more time on the augmented system. The two new MeSH help components played a critical role in participants' health information retrieval and were found to allow them to develop new search strategies. The findings of the study enhanced our understanding of consumers' search behaviors and shed light on the design of future health information retrieval systems.

0.0030283553 = product of:
  0.021198487 = sum of:
    0.021198487 = weight(_text_:with in 2230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021198487 = score(doc=2230,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.22591603 = fieldWeight in 2230, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2230)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Experimental evidence suggests that enhancing the subject content of OPAC records can improve retrieval performance. This is based on the use of natural language index terms derived from the table of contents and back-of-the-book index of documents. The research reported here investigates the alternative approach of translating these natural language terms into controlled vocabulary. Subject queries were collected by interview at the catalogue, and indexing of the queries demonstrated the impressive ability of PRECIS, and to a lesser extent LCSH, to represent users' information needs. DDC performed poorly in this respect. The assumption was made that an index language adequately specific to represent users' queries should be adequate to represent document contents. Searches were carried out on three test databases, and both natural language and PRECIS enhancement of MARC records increased the number of relevant documents found, with PRECIS showing the better performance. However, with weak stemming the advantage of PRECIS was lost. Consideration must also be given to the potential advantages of controlled vocabulary, over and above basic retrieval performance measures

0.0030283553 = product of:
  0.021198487 = sum of:
    0.021198487 = weight(_text_:with in 2322) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021198487 = score(doc=2322,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.22591603 = fieldWeight in 2322, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2322)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

The introduction of computerized post-coordination has solved many of the problems of pre-coordinated subject access. However, the adoption of computerized post-coordination results in the loss of some pre-coordination benefits. Specifically, the effect of hiding terms within the context of others is lost in post-coodination which give lead status to every document term. This results in spurious matches of terms out of context. Library patrons and Internet searchers are increasingly dissatisfied with subject access performance, in part because of unmanageably large retrieval sets. The need to enhance precision and limit the size of retrieval sets motivates this work which proposes partial coordination, an approach which incorporates the advantages of computer search with the ability of pre-coordination to limit spurious partial matches and thereby enhance precision

0.0030283553 = product of:
  0.021198487 = sum of:
    0.021198487 = weight(_text_:with in 2323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021198487 = score(doc=2323,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038938753 = queryNorm
        0.22591603 = fieldWeight in 2323, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2323)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Partial coordination is a new method for cataloging documents for subject access. It is especially designed to enhance the precision of document searches in online environments. This article reports a preliminary evaluation of partial coordination that shows promising results compared with full-text retrieval. We also report the difficulties in empirically evaluating the effectiveness of automatic full-text retrieval in contrast to mixed methods such as partial coordination which combine human cataloging with computerized retrieval. Based on our study, we propose research in this area will substantially benefit from a common framework for failure analysis and a common data set. This will allow information retrieval researchers adapting 'library style'cataloging to large electronic document collections, as well as those developing automated or mixed methods, to directly compare their proposals for indexing and retrieval. This article concludes by suggesting guidelines for constructing such as testbed