-
Connaway, L.S.; Sievert, M.C.: Comparison of three classification systems for information on health insurance (1996)
0.12
0.11880019 = product of:
0.23760039 = sum of:
0.07516225 = weight(_text_:subject in 7242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07516225 = score(doc=7242,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.4470745 = fieldWeight in 7242, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7242)
0.16243814 = sum of:
0.111489214 = weight(_text_:classification in 7242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.111489214 = score(doc=7242,freq=14.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.7447551 = fieldWeight in 7242, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7242)
0.05094892 = weight(_text_:22 in 7242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05094892 = score(doc=7242,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16460574 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7242, 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=7242)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Reports results of a comparative study of 3 classification schemes: LCC, DDC and NLM Classification to determine their effectiveness in classifying materials on health insurance. Examined 2 hypotheses: that there would be no differences in the scatter of the 3 classification schemes; and that there would be overlap between all 3 schemes but no difference in the classes into which the subject was placed. There was subject scatter in all 3 classification schemes and litlle overlap between the 3 systems
- Date
- 22. 4.1997 21:10:19
- Object
- NLM Classification
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 23(1996) no.2, S.89-104
-
Mills, J.; Broughton, V.: Bliss Bibliographic Classification : Introduction and auxiliary schedules (1992)
0.09
0.088087514 = product of:
0.17617503 = sum of:
0.10629547 = weight(_text_:subject in 821) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10629547 = score(doc=821,freq=8.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.63225883 = fieldWeight in 821, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=821)
0.06987957 = product of:
0.13975914 = sum of:
0.13975914 = weight(_text_:classification in 821) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.13975914 = score(doc=821,freq=22.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.93359995 = fieldWeight in 821, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=821)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- COMPASS
- Documents / Subject classification
- LCSH
- Classification, Bibliographic
Bliss Bibliographic classification
- PRECIS
- Documents / Subject classification schemes: Bliss, Henry Evelyn / Bliss bibliographic classification / Texts
- Subject
- Classification, Bibliographic
Bliss Bibliographic classification
Documents / Subject classification schemes: Bliss, Henry Evelyn / Bliss bibliographic classification / Texts
Documents / Subject classification
-
Winske, E.: ¬The development and structure of an urban, regional, and local documents classification scheme (1996)
0.08
0.08241388 = product of:
0.16482776 = sum of:
0.046504267 = weight(_text_:subject in 7241) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046504267 = score(doc=7241,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.27661324 = fieldWeight in 7241, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7241)
0.11832349 = sum of:
0.07374318 = weight(_text_:classification in 7241) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07374318 = score(doc=7241,freq=8.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.49260917 = fieldWeight in 7241, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7241)
0.044580307 = weight(_text_:22 in 7241) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044580307 = score(doc=7241,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16460574 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7241, 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=7241)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Discusses the reasons for the decision, taken at Florida International University Library to develop an in house classification system for their local documents collections. Reviews the structures of existing classification systems, noting their strengths and weaknesses in relation to the development of an in house system and describes the 5 components of the new system; geography, subject categories, extensions for population group and/or function, extensions for type of publication, and title/series designator
- Footnote
- Paper presented at conference on 'Local documents, a new classification scheme' at the Research Caucus of the Florida Library Association Annual Conference, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 22 Apr 95
-
Zhang, J.; Zeng, M.L.: ¬A new similarity measure for subject hierarchical structures (2014)
0.07
0.06977272 = product of:
0.13954544 = sum of:
0.08136552 = weight(_text_:subject in 1778) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08136552 = score(doc=1778,freq=12.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.48397237 = fieldWeight in 1778, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1778)
0.05817993 = sum of:
0.02633685 = weight(_text_:classification in 1778) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02633685 = score(doc=1778,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 1778, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1778)
0.031843077 = weight(_text_:22 in 1778) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031843077 = score(doc=1778,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16460574 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1778, 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=1778)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to introduce a new similarity method to gauge the differences between two subject hierarchical structures. Design/methodology/approach - In the proposed similarity measure, nodes on two hierarchical structures are projected onto a two-dimensional space, respectively, and both structural similarity and subject similarity of nodes are considered in the similarity between the two hierarchical structures. The extent to which the structural similarity impacts on the similarity can be controlled by adjusting a parameter. An experiment was conducted to evaluate soundness of the measure. Eight experts whose research interests were information retrieval and information organization participated in the study. Results from the new measure were compared with results from the experts. Findings - The evaluation shows strong correlations between the results from the new method and the results from the experts. It suggests that the similarity method achieved satisfactory results. Practical implications - Hierarchical structures that are found in subject directories, taxonomies, classification systems, and other classificatory structures play an extremely important role in information organization and information representation. Measuring the similarity between two subject hierarchical structures allows an accurate overarching understanding of the degree to which the two hierarchical structures are similar. Originality/value - Both structural similarity and subject similarity of nodes were considered in the proposed similarity method, and the extent to which the structural similarity impacts on the similarity can be adjusted. In addition, a new evaluation method for a hierarchical structure similarity was presented.
- Date
- 8. 4.2015 16:22:13
-
Foskett, D.J.; Bury, S.: Concept organisation and universal classification schemes (1982)
0.07
0.06723086 = product of:
0.13446172 = sum of:
0.0797216 = weight(_text_:subject in 17) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0797216 = score(doc=17,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.4741941 = fieldWeight in 17, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=17)
0.05474012 = product of:
0.10948024 = sum of:
0.10948024 = weight(_text_:classification in 17) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10948024 = score(doc=17,freq=6.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.731335 = fieldWeight in 17, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=17)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- 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)
0.07
0.06723086 = product of:
0.13446172 = sum of:
0.0797216 = weight(_text_:subject in 34) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0797216 = score(doc=34,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.4741941 = fieldWeight in 34, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=34)
0.05474012 = product of:
0.10948024 = sum of:
0.10948024 = weight(_text_:classification in 34) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10948024 = score(doc=34,freq=6.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.731335 = fieldWeight in 34, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=34)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- 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
-
Svenonius, E.: Ranganathan and classification science (1992)
0.07
0.06709677 = product of:
0.13419354 = sum of:
0.092054576 = weight(_text_:subject in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.092054576 = score(doc=2654,freq=6.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.5475522 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
0.04213896 = product of:
0.08427792 = sum of:
0.08427792 = weight(_text_:classification in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08427792 = score(doc=2654,freq=8.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.5629819 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- This article discusses some of Ranganathan's contributions to the productive, practical and theoretical aspects of classification science. These include: (1) a set of design criteria to guide the designing of schemes for knowledge / subject classification; (2) a conceptual framework for organizing the universe of subjects; and (3) an understanding of the general principles underlying subject disciplines and classificatory languages. It concludes that Ranganathan has contributed significantly to laying the foundations for a science of subject classification.
-
Foskett, D.J.: ¬The construction of a faceted classification for a special subject (1959)
0.06
0.064940065 = product of:
0.12988013 = sum of:
0.09300853 = weight(_text_:subject in 551) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09300853 = score(doc=551,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.5532265 = fieldWeight in 551, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=551)
0.03687159 = product of:
0.07374318 = sum of:
0.07374318 = weight(_text_:classification in 551) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07374318 = score(doc=551,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.49260917 = fieldWeight in 551, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=551)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
-
Green, R.: Relational aspects of subject authority control : the contributions of classificatory structure (2015)
0.06
0.062218122 = product of:
0.124436244 = sum of:
0.046976402 = weight(_text_:subject in 2282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046976402 = score(doc=2282,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.27942157 = fieldWeight in 2282, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2282)
0.07745984 = sum of:
0.045616765 = weight(_text_:classification in 2282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.045616765 = score(doc=2282,freq=6.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.3047229 = fieldWeight in 2282, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2282)
0.031843077 = weight(_text_:22 in 2282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031843077 = score(doc=2282,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16460574 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2282, 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=2282)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- The structure of a classification system contributes in a variety of ways to representing semantic relationships between its topics in the context of subject authority control. We explore this claim using the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system as a case study. The DDC links its classes into a notational hierarchy, supplemented by a network of relationships between topics, expressed in class descriptions and in the Relative Index (RI). Topics/subjects are expressed both by the natural language text of the caption and notes (including Manual notes) in a class description and by the controlled vocabulary of the RI's alphabetic index, which shows where topics are treated in the classificatory structure. The expression of relationships between topics depends on paradigmatic and syntagmatic relationships between natural language terms in captions, notes, and RI terms; on the meaning of specific note types; and on references recorded between RI terms. The specific means used in the DDC for capturing hierarchical (including disciplinary), equivalence and associative relationships are surveyed.
- Date
- 8.11.2015 21:27:22
- Source
- Classification and authority control: expanding resource discovery: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar 2015, 29-30 October 2015, Lisbon, Portugal. Eds.: Slavic, A. u. M.I. Cordeiro
-
Austin, D.: Basic concept classes and primitive relations (1982)
0.06
0.062208362 = product of:
0.124416724 = sum of:
0.0797216 = weight(_text_:subject in 6580) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0797216 = score(doc=6580,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.4741941 = fieldWeight in 6580, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6580)
0.04469512 = product of:
0.08939024 = sum of:
0.08939024 = weight(_text_:classification in 6580) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08939024 = score(doc=6580,freq=4.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.5971325 = fieldWeight in 6580, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6580)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- 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
-
Vickery, B.C.: Relations between subject fields : problems of constructing a general classification (1957)
0.06
0.062208362 = product of:
0.124416724 = sum of:
0.0797216 = weight(_text_:subject in 566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0797216 = score(doc=566,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.4741941 = fieldWeight in 566, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=566)
0.04469512 = product of:
0.08939024 = sum of:
0.08939024 = weight(_text_:classification in 566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08939024 = score(doc=566,freq=4.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.5971325 = fieldWeight in 566, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=566)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Source
- Proceedings of the International Study Conference on Classification for Information Retrieval, held at Beatrice Webb House, Dorking, England, 13.-17.5.1957
-
Wang, Z.; Chaudhry, A.S.; Khoo, C.S.G.: Using classification schemes and thesauri to build an organizational taxonomy for organizing content and aiding navigation (2008)
0.06
0.059400097 = product of:
0.11880019 = sum of:
0.037581123 = weight(_text_:subject in 2346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037581123 = score(doc=2346,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.22353725 = fieldWeight in 2346, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2346)
0.08121907 = sum of:
0.055744607 = weight(_text_:classification in 2346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055744607 = score(doc=2346,freq=14.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.37237754 = fieldWeight in 2346, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2346)
0.02547446 = weight(_text_:22 in 2346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02547446 = score(doc=2346,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16460574 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2346, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2346)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Purpose - Potential and benefits of classification schemes and thesauri in building organizational taxonomies cannot be fully utilized by organizations. Empirical data of building an organizational taxonomy by the top-down approach of using classification schemes and thesauri appear to be lacking. The paper seeks to make a contribution in this regard. Design/methodology/approach - A case study of building an organizational taxonomy was conducted in the information studies domain for the Division of Information Studies at Nanyang Technology University, Singapore. The taxonomy was built by using the Dewey Decimal Classification, the Information Science Taxonomy, two information systems taxonomies, and three thesauri (ASIS&T, LISA, and ERIC). Findings - Classification schemes and thesauri were found to be helpful in creating the structure and categories related to the subject facet of the taxonomy, but organizational community sources had to be consulted and several methods had to be employed. The organizational activities and stakeholders' needs had to be identified to determine the objectives, facets, and the subject coverage of the taxonomy. Main categories were determined by identifying the stakeholders' interests and consulting organizational community sources and domain taxonomies. Category terms were selected from terminologies of classification schemes, domain taxonomies, and thesauri against the stakeholders' interests. Hierarchical structures of the main categories were constructed in line with the stakeholders' perspectives and the navigational role taking advantage of structures/term relationships from classification schemes and thesauri. Categories were determined in line with the concepts and the hierarchical levels. Format of categories were uniformed according to a commonly used standard. The consistency principle was employed to make the taxonomy structure and categories neater. Validation of the draft taxonomy through consultations with the stakeholders further refined the taxonomy. Originality/value - No similar study could be traced in the literature. The steps and methods used in the taxonomy development, and the information studies taxonomy itself, will be helpful for library and information schools and other similar organizations in their effort to develop taxonomies for organizing content and aiding navigation on organizational sites.
- Date
- 7.11.2008 15:22:04
-
Frické, M.: Faceted classification, analysis and search : some questions on their interrelations (2017)
0.06
0.056868024 = product of:
0.11373605 = sum of:
0.06904093 = weight(_text_:subject in 4121) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06904093 = score(doc=4121,freq=6.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.41066417 = fieldWeight in 4121, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4121)
0.04469512 = product of:
0.08939024 = sum of:
0.08939024 = weight(_text_:classification in 4121) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08939024 = score(doc=4121,freq=16.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.5971325 = fieldWeight in 4121, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4121)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- A description is provided of basic faceted classification, which involves combinations of foci across facets, where the foci within a facet are dependent (i.e., exclusive) and the foci across facets are independent (i.e., orthogonal). This is shown to be suitable for organizing the basic goods that Amazon, the online retailer, sells and for progressive filtering as a mode of search. However, on closer inspection, the Amazon case involves a sorted domain. This is problematic for basic faceted classification. Additionally, books from Amazon would typically carry subject classification, which also is difficult for basic faceted classification. It does not support filtering as a mode of search. Subject classification really requires relatively sophisticated linguistic and logical constructors and modifiers, such as adjectives, adverbs, functions, binary relations, and transitive verbs. These can be part of a synthetic subject classification scheme, but they pose a challenge for faceting.
- Content
- Beitrag in einem Special Issue: Selected Papers from the International UDC Seminar 2017, Faceted Classification Today: Theory, Technology and End Users, 14-15 September, London UK.
-
Minnigh, L.D.: Chaos in informatie, onderwerpsontsluiting en kennisoverdracht : de rol van de wetenschappelijke bibliotheek (1993)
0.06
0.05656203 = product of:
0.11312406 = sum of:
0.092054576 = weight(_text_:subject in 6606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.092054576 = score(doc=6606,freq=6.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.5475522 = fieldWeight in 6606, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6606)
0.02106948 = product of:
0.04213896 = sum of:
0.04213896 = weight(_text_:classification in 6606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04213896 = score(doc=6606,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 6606, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6606)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Existing classification systems require constant expansion to accomodate new subject fields, while subject indexing techniques fail to display the relationship of subjects. Relational databases are currently being developed which will guide users through the differing levels of subjects, using the 'cartography of science'. Such developments will enable librarians to play a more interactive role in information retrieval and will have far-reaching consequences on the design of subject-indexing systems
-
Szostak, R.: ¬A grammatical approach to subject classification in museums (2017)
0.06
0.056239747 = product of:
0.11247949 = sum of:
0.08054776 = weight(_text_:subject in 4136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08054776 = score(doc=4136,freq=6.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.4791082 = fieldWeight in 4136, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4136)
0.031931736 = product of:
0.06386347 = sum of:
0.06386347 = weight(_text_:classification in 4136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06386347 = score(doc=4136,freq=6.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.42661208 = fieldWeight in 4136, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4136)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Several desiderata of a system of subject classification for museums are identified. The limitations of existing approaches are reviewed. It is argued that an approach which synthesizes basic concepts within a grammatical structure can achieve the goals of subject classification in museums while addressing diverse challenges. The same approach can also be applied in galleries, archives, and libraries. The approach is described in some detail and examples are provided of its application. The article closes with brief discussions of thesauri and linked open data.
-
Tennis, J.T.: ¬The strange case of eugenics : a subject's ontogeny in a long-lived classification scheme and the question of collocative integrity (2012)
0.06
0.05582783 = product of:
0.11165566 = sum of:
0.07516225 = weight(_text_:subject in 275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07516225 = score(doc=275,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.4470745 = fieldWeight in 275, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=275)
0.036493413 = product of:
0.07298683 = sum of:
0.07298683 = weight(_text_:classification in 275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07298683 = score(doc=275,freq=6.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.48755667 = fieldWeight in 275, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=275)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- This article introduces the problem of collocative integrity present in long-lived classification schemes that undergo several changes. A case study of the subject "eugenics" in the Dewey Decimal Classification is presented to illustrate this phenomenon. Eugenics is strange because of the kinds of changes it undergoes. The article closes with a discussion of subject ontogeny as the name for this phenomenon and describes implications for information searching and browsing.
-
Holman, E.E.: Statistical properties of large published classifications (1992)
0.06
0.05566291 = product of:
0.11132582 = sum of:
0.0797216 = weight(_text_:subject in 4250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0797216 = score(doc=4250,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.4741941 = fieldWeight in 4250, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4250)
0.031604223 = product of:
0.063208446 = sum of:
0.063208446 = weight(_text_:classification in 4250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.063208446 = score(doc=4250,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 4250, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4250)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Reports the results of a survey of 23 published classifications taken from a variety of subject fields
- Source
- Journal of classification. 9(1992) no.2, S.187-210
-
Araghi, G.F.: ¬A new scheme for library classification (2004)
0.05
0.053824443 = product of:
0.10764889 = sum of:
0.046504267 = weight(_text_:subject in 5659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046504267 = score(doc=5659,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.27661324 = fieldWeight in 5659, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5659)
0.06114462 = product of:
0.12228924 = sum of:
0.12228924 = weight(_text_:classification in 5659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12228924 = score(doc=5659,freq=22.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.81689996 = fieldWeight in 5659, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5659)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- This proposed new classification scheme is based on two main elements: hierarchism and binary theory. Hence, it is called Universal Binary Classification (UBC). Some advantages of this classification are highlighted including are subject heading development, construction of a thesaurus and all terms with meaningful features arranged in tabular form that can help researchers, through a semantic process, to find what they need. This classification scheme is fully consistent with the classification of knowledge. The classification of knowledge is also based on hierarchism and binary principle. Finally, a survey on randomly selected books in McLennan Library of McGill University is presented to compare the codes of this new classification with the currently employed Library of Congress Classification (LCC) numbers in the discipline of Library and Information Sciences.
- Object
- Universal Binary Classification
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 38(2004) no.2, S.xx-xx
-
Kochar, R.S.: Library classification systems (1998)
0.05
0.052401684 = product of:
0.10480337 = sum of:
0.046504267 = weight(_text_:subject in 931) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046504267 = score(doc=931,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.27661324 = fieldWeight in 931, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=931)
0.058299106 = product of:
0.11659821 = sum of:
0.11659821 = weight(_text_:classification in 931) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11659821 = score(doc=931,freq=20.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.7788835 = fieldWeight in 931, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=931)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Library classification traces the origins of the subject and leads an to the latest developments in it. This user-friendly text explains concepts through analogies, diagrams, and tables. The fundamental but important topics an terminology of classification has been uniquely explained. The book deals with the recent trends in the use of computers in cataloguing including on-line systems, artificial intelligence systems etc. With its up-to-date and comprehensive coverage the book will serve as a degree students of Library and Information Science and also prove to be invaluable reference material to professionals and researchers.
- Content
- Contents: Preface. 1. Classification systems. 2. Automatic classification. 3. Knowledge classification. 4. Reflections on library classification. 5. General classification schemes. 6. Hierarchical classification. 7. Faceted classification. B. Present methods and future directions. Index.
-
Hurt, C.D.: Classification and subject analysis : looking to the future at a distance (1997)
0.05
0.052378606 = product of:
0.10475721 = sum of:
0.053147733 = weight(_text_:subject in 6929) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.053147733 = score(doc=6929,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16812018 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.31612942 = fieldWeight in 6929, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6929)
0.05160948 = product of:
0.10321896 = sum of:
0.10321896 = weight(_text_:classification in 6929) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10321896 = score(doc=6929,freq=12.0), product of:
0.14969917 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.04700564 = queryNorm
0.6895092 = fieldWeight in 6929, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6929)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Classic classification schemes are uni-dimensional, with few exceptions. One of the challenges of distance education and new learning strategies is that the proliferation of course work defies the traditional categorization. The rigidity of most present classification schemes does not mesh well with the burgeoning fluidity of the academic environment. One solution is a return to a largely forgotten area of study - classification theory. Some suggestions for exploration are nonmonotonic logic systems, neural network models, and non-library models.
- Footnote
- Beitrag eines Themenheftes "Cataloging and classification: trends, transformations, teaching, and training."
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 24(1997) nos.1/2, S.97-112
