Search (36 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × author_ss:"Soergel, D."
  1. Komlodi, A.; Soergel, D.; Marchionini, G.: Search histories for user support in user interfaces (2006) 0.07 
    0.06624834 = product of:
  0.105997354 = sum of:
    0.025048172 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5298) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025048172 = score(doc=5298,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 5298, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5298)
    0.036299463 = weight(_text_:use in 5298) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036299463 = score(doc=5298,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2870708 = fieldWeight in 5298, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5298)
    0.016396983 = weight(_text_:of in 5298) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016396983 = score(doc=5298,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.25392252 = fieldWeight in 5298, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5298)
    0.011468184 = product of:
      0.022936368 = sum of:
        0.022936368 = weight(_text_:on in 5298) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022936368 = score(doc=5298,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.25253648 = fieldWeight in 5298, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5298)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.016784549 = product of:
      0.033569098 = sum of:
        0.033569098 = weight(_text_:22 in 5298) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033569098 = score(doc=5298,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5298, 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=5298)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.625 = coord(5/8)
    Abstract
    The authors describe user interface tools based on search histories to support legal information seekers. The design of the tools was informed by the results of a user study (Komlodi, 2002a) that examined the use of human memory, external memory aids, and search histories in legal information seeking and derived interface design recommendations for information storage and retrieval systems. The data collected were analyzed to identify potential task areas where search histories can support information seeking and use. The results show that many information-seeking tasks can take advantage of automatically and manually recorded history information. These findings encouraged the design of user interface tools building on search history information: direct search history displays, history-enabled scratchpad facilities, and organized results collection tools.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 18:04:19
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einer Special Section "Perspectives on Search User Interfaces: Best Practices and Future Visions"
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.6, S.803-897
  2. Soergel, D.: Mathematical analysis of documentation systems : an attempt to a theory of classification and search request formulation (1967) 0.05 
    0.049086094 = product of:
  0.09817219 = sum of:
    0.04174695 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04174695 = score(doc=5449,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 5449, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5449)
    0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 5449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021389665 = score(doc=5449,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 5449, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5449)
    0.029517945 = weight(_text_:of in 5449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029517945 = score(doc=5449,freq=56.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.45711282 = fieldWeight in 5449, product of:
          7.483315 = tf(freq=56.0), with freq of:
            56.0 = termFreq=56.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5449)
    0.0055176322 = product of:
      0.0110352645 = sum of:
        0.0110352645 = weight(_text_:on in 5449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0110352645 = score(doc=5449,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 5449, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5449)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)
    Abstract
    As an attempt to make a general structural theory of information retrieval, a documentation system (DS) is defined as a formal system consisting of (a) a set o of objects (documents); (b) a set A++ of elementary attributes (key-words), from which further attributes may be constructed: A++ generates A; (c) a set of axioms of the form X++(x)=m (m¯M, M a set of constant connecting attributes with objects: from the axioms further theorems (=true statements) may be constructed. By use of the theorems, different mappings O -> P(o) (P(o) set of all subsets of o) (search question -> set of documents retrieved) are defined. The type of a DS depends on two basic decisions: (1) choice of the rules for the construction of attributes and theorems, e.g., logical product in coordinate indexing; links. (2) choice of M; M may consist of the two constants 'applicable' and 'not applicable', or some positive integers, ...; Further practical decisions: A++ hierarchical or not; kind of mapping; introduction of roles (=further attributes). The most simple case - ordinary two-valued Coordinate Indexing - is discusssed in detail; o is a free distributive (but not Boolean) lattice, the homographic image a ring of subsets of o; instead of negation which is not useful, a useful retrieval operation 'praeternagation' is introduced. Furthermore these are discussed: a generalized definition of superimposed coding, some functions for the distance of objects or attributes; optimization and automatic derivation of classifications. The model takes into account term-term relations and document-document relations. It may serve as a structural framework in terms of which the functional problems of retrieval theory may be expressed more clearly
    Source
    Information storage and retrieval. 3(1967), S.129-173
  3. Wang, P.; Soergel, D.: ¬A cognitive model of document use during a research project : Study I: Document selection (1998) 0.05 
    0.04659471 = product of:
  0.09318942 = sum of:
    0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020873476 = score(doc=443,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 443, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=443)
    0.04277933 = weight(_text_:use in 443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04277933 = score(doc=443,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.3383162 = fieldWeight in 443, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=443)
    0.01850135 = weight(_text_:of in 443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01850135 = score(doc=443,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.28651062 = fieldWeight in 443, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=443)
    0.0110352645 = product of:
      0.022070529 = sum of:
        0.022070529 = weight(_text_:on in 443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022070529 = score(doc=443,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.24300331 = fieldWeight in 443, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=443)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)
    Abstract
    This article proposes a model of document selection by real users of a bibliographic retrieval system. It reports on Part 1 of a longitudinal study of decision making on document use by academics during a actual research project. (Part 2 followed up the same users on how the selected documents were actually used in subsequent stages). The participants are 25 self-selected faculty and graduate students in Agricultural Economics. After a reference interview, the researcher conducted a search of DIALOG databases and prepared a printout. The users selected documents from this printout, They were asked to read and think aloud while selecting documents. There verbal reports were recorded and analyzed from a utiliy-theoretic perspective. The following model of the decision-making in the selection process emerged: document information lemenets (DIEs) in document records provide the information for judging the documents on 11 criteria (including topicality, orientation, quality, novelty, and authority); the criteria judgments are comninded in an assessment of document value along 5 dimensions (Epistemic, functional, conditional, social, and emotional values), leading to the use decision. This model accounts for the use of personal knowledge and decision strategies applied in the selection process. The model has implications for the design of an intelligent document selection assistant
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 49(1998) no.2, S.115-133
  4. Soergel, D.: Indexing and retrieval performance : the logical evidence (1994) 0.05 
    0.04557497 = product of:
  0.12153325 = sum of:
    0.082654744 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 579) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.082654744 = score(doc=579,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.6617001 = fieldWeight in 579, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=579)
    0.02342914 = weight(_text_:of in 579) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02342914 = score(doc=579,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.36282203 = fieldWeight in 579, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=579)
    0.01544937 = product of:
      0.03089874 = sum of:
        0.03089874 = weight(_text_:on in 579) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03089874 = score(doc=579,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.34020463 = fieldWeight in 579, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=579)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)
    Abstract
    This article presents a logical analysis of the characteristics of indexing and their effects on retrieval performance.It establishes the ability to ask the questions one needs to ask as the foundation of performance evaluation, and recall and discrimination as the basic quantitative performance measures for binary noninteractive retrieval systems. It then defines the characteristics of indexing that affect retrieval - namely, indexing devices, viewpoint-based and importance-based indexing exhaustivity, indexing specifity, indexing correctness, and indexing consistency - and examines in detail their effects on retrieval. It concludes that retrieval performance depends chiefly on the match between indexing and the requirements of the individual query and on the adaption of the query formulation to the characteristics of the retrieval system, and that the ensuing complexity must be considered in the design and testing of retrieval systems
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 45(1994) no.8, S.589-599
  5. Golub, K.; Soergel, D.; Buchanan, G.; Tudhope, D.; Lykke, M.; Hiom, D.: ¬A framework for evaluating automatic indexing or classification in the context of retrieval (2016) 0.04 
    0.039419614 = product of:
  0.07883923 = sum of:
    0.036153924 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036153924 = score(doc=3311,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.28943354 = fieldWeight in 3311, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3311)
    0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 3311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021389665 = score(doc=3311,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 3311, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3311)
    0.015778005 = weight(_text_:of in 3311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015778005 = score(doc=3311,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 3311, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3311)
    0.0055176322 = product of:
      0.0110352645 = sum of:
        0.0110352645 = weight(_text_:on in 3311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0110352645 = score(doc=3311,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 3311, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3311)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)
    Abstract
    Tools for automatic subject assignment help deal with scale and sustainability in creating and enriching metadata, establishing more connections across and between resources and enhancing consistency. Although some software vendors and experimental researchers claim the tools can replace manual subject indexing, hard scientific evidence of their performance in operating information environments is scarce. A major reason for this is that research is usually conducted in laboratory conditions, excluding the complexities of real-life systems and situations. The article reviews and discusses issues with existing evaluation approaches such as problems of aboutness and relevance assessments, implying the need to use more than a single "gold standard" method when evaluating indexing and retrieval, and proposes a comprehensive evaluation framework. The framework is informed by a systematic review of the literature on evaluation approaches: evaluating indexing quality directly through assessment by an evaluator or through comparison with a gold standard, evaluating the quality of computer-assisted indexing directly in the context of an indexing workflow, and evaluating indexing quality indirectly through analyzing retrieval performance.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.1, S.3-16
  6. Komlodi, A.; Marchionini, G.; Soergel, D.: Search history support for finding and using information : user interface design recommendations from a user study (2007) 0.03 
    0.03402663 = product of:
  0.090737686 = sum of:
    0.062872514 = weight(_text_:use in 892) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.062872514 = score(doc=892,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.49722123 = fieldWeight in 892, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=892)
    0.016396983 = weight(_text_:of in 892) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016396983 = score(doc=892,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.25392252 = fieldWeight in 892, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=892)
    0.011468184 = product of:
      0.022936368 = sum of:
        0.022936368 = weight(_text_:on in 892) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022936368 = score(doc=892,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.25253648 = fieldWeight in 892, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=892)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)
    Abstract
    Recording search histories, presenting them to the searcher, and building additional interface tools on them offer many opportunities for supporting user tasks in information seeking and use. This study investigated the use of search history information in legal information seeking. Qualitative methods were used to explore how attorneys and law librarians used their memory and external memory aids while searching for information and in transferring to information use. Based on the findings, interface design recommendations were made for information systems. Results of the study from the legal user group presented evidence of the usefulness of search histories and history-based interface tools. Both user manifestations and researcher observations revealed that searchers need historical information in information seeking. Search histories were found to be useful in many user tasks: memory support, search system use, information seeking, information use, task management, task integration, and collaboration. Integrating information across various user tasks and collaborating with others are extensions of traditional information-seeking and use models. These findings encouraged the design of user interface tools and guidelines building on search history information.
  7. Soergel, D.: Knowledge organization for learning (2014) 0.03 
    0.03212321 = product of:
  0.085661896 = sum of:
    0.042349376 = weight(_text_:use in 1400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042349376 = score(doc=1400,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.33491597 = fieldWeight in 1400, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1400)
    0.015619429 = weight(_text_:of in 1400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015619429 = score(doc=1400,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 1400, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1400)
    0.027693095 = product of:
      0.05538619 = sum of:
        0.05538619 = weight(_text_:22 in 1400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05538619 = score(doc=1400,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 1400, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1400)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)
    Abstract
    This paper discusses and illustrates through examples how meaningful or deep learning can be supported through well-structured presentation of material, through giving learners schemas they can use to organize knowledge in their minds, and through helping learners to understand knowledge organization principles they can use to construct their own schemas. It is a call to all authors, educators and information designers to pay attention to meaningful presentation that expresses the internal structure of the domain and facilitates the learner's assimilation of concepts and their relationships.
    Pages
    S.22-32
    Source
    Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
  8. Wang, P.; Soergel, D.: Beyond topical relevance : document selection behaviour of real users of IR systems (1993) 0.03 
    0.031063372 = product of:
  0.08283566 = sum of:
    0.047231287 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 7960) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047231287 = score(doc=7960,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.37811437 = fieldWeight in 7960, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7960)
    0.026776161 = weight(_text_:of in 7960) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026776161 = score(doc=7960,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.41465375 = fieldWeight in 7960, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7960)
    0.008828212 = product of:
      0.017656423 = sum of:
        0.017656423 = weight(_text_:on in 7960) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017656423 = score(doc=7960,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 7960, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7960)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)
    Abstract
    Reports on part of a study of real users' behaviour in selecting documents from a list of citations resulting from a search of an information retrieval system. Document selection involves value judgements and decision making. Understanding how users evaluate documents and make decisions provides a basis for designing intelligent information retrieval system that can do a better job of predicting usefulness
    Source
    Integrating technologies - converging professions: proceedings of the 56th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, Columbus, OH, 24-28 October 1993. Ed.: S. Bonzi
  9. Ding, W.; Soergel, D.; Marchionini, G.: Performance of visual, verbal, and combined video surrogates (1999) 0.03 
    0.02993661 = product of:
  0.07983096 = sum of:
    0.029222867 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029222867 = score(doc=6679,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 6679, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6679)
    0.029945528 = weight(_text_:use in 6679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029945528 = score(doc=6679,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23682132 = fieldWeight in 6679, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6679)
    0.020662563 = weight(_text_:of in 6679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020662563 = score(doc=6679,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 6679, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6679)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)
    Abstract
    This study investigates the information representation power of different modalities in the video data in order to collect empirical evidence for video surrogate creation and thus better support effective video browsing and information retrieval. Three types of video surrogates - keyframe, keyword/phrase, and combination of the two were created and compared under two user tasks-verbal comprehension and visual gisting in user performance and preference. Results and discussions follow
    Series
    Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science; vol.36
    Source
    Knowledge: creation, organization and use. Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, 31.10.-4.11.1999. Ed.: L. Woods
  10. Soergel, D.: Unleashing the power of data through organization : structure and connections for meaning, learning and discovery (2015) 0.03 
    0.026420958 = product of:
  0.052841917 = sum of:
    0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 2376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021389665 = score(doc=2376,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 2376, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2376)
    0.009662016 = weight(_text_:of in 2376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009662016 = score(doc=2376,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.1496253 = fieldWeight in 2376, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2376)
    0.007803111 = product of:
      0.015606222 = sum of:
        0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 2376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015606222 = score(doc=2376,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 2376, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2376)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.013987125 = product of:
      0.02797425 = sum of:
        0.02797425 = weight(_text_:22 in 2376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02797425 = score(doc=2376,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2376, 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=2376)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)
    Abstract
    Knowledge organization is needed everywhere. Its importance is marked by its pervasiveness. This paper will show many areas, tasks, and functions where proper use of knowledge organization, construed as broadly as the term implies, provides support for learning and understanding, for sense making and meaning making, for inference, and for discovery by people and computer programs and thereby will make the world a better place. The paper focuses not on metadata but rather on structuring and representing the actual data or knowledge itself and argues for more communication between the largely separated KO, ontology, data modeling, and semantic web communities to address the many problems that need better solutions. In particular, the paper discusses the application of knowledge organization in knowledge bases for question answering and cognitive systems, knowledge bases for information extraction from text or multimedia, linked data, big data and data analytics, electronic health records as one example, influence diagrams (causal maps), dynamic system models, process diagrams, concept maps, and other node-link diagrams, information systems in organizations, knowledge organization for understanding and learning, and knowledge transfer between domains. The paper argues for moving beyond triples to a more powerful representation using entities and multi-way relationships but not attributes.
    Date
    27.11.2015 20:52:22
  11. Fidel, R.; Soergel, D.: Factors affecting online bibliographic retrieval : a conceptual framework for research (1983) 0.02 
    0.021161474 = product of:
  0.0846459 = sum of:
    0.066795126 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.066795126 = score(doc=2588,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.5347345 = fieldWeight in 2588, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2588)
    0.017850775 = weight(_text_:of in 2588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017850775 = score(doc=2588,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 2588, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2588)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 34(1983), S.163-180
  12. Zhang, P.; Soergel, D.: Cognitive mechanisms in sensemaking : a qualitative user study (2020) 0.02 
    0.020955104 = product of:
  0.05588028 = sum of:
    0.030249555 = weight(_text_:use in 5614) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030249555 = score(doc=5614,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23922569 = fieldWeight in 5614, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5614)
    0.02011309 = weight(_text_:of in 5614) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02011309 = score(doc=5614,freq=26.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.31146988 = fieldWeight in 5614, product of:
          5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
            26.0 = termFreq=26.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5614)
    0.0055176322 = product of:
      0.0110352645 = sum of:
        0.0110352645 = weight(_text_:on in 5614) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0110352645 = score(doc=5614,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 5614, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5614)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)
    Abstract
    Throughout an information search, a user needs to make sense of the information found to create an understanding. This requires cognitive effort that can be demanding. Building on prior sensemaking models and expanding them with ideas from learning and cognitive psychology, we examined the use of cognitive mechanisms during individual sensemaking. We conducted a qualitative user study of 15 students who searched for and made sense of information for business analysis and news writing tasks. Through the analysis of think-aloud protocols, recordings of screen movements, intermediate work products of sensemaking, including notes and concept maps, and final reports, we observed the use of 17 data-driven and structure-driven mechanisms for processing new information, examining individual concepts and relationships, and detecting anomalies. These cognitive mechanisms, as the basic operators that move sensemaking forward, provide in-depth understanding of how people process information to produce sense. Meaningful learning and sensemaking are closely related, so our findings apply to learning as well. Our results contribute to a better understanding of the sensemaking process-how people think-and this better understanding can inform the teaching of thinking skills and the design of improved sensemaking assistants and mind tools.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.2, S.158-171
  13. Soergel, D.: Indexing and retrieval performance : the logical evidence (1997) 0.02 
    0.02055297 = product of:
  0.054807924 = sum of:
    0.033397563 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033397563 = score(doc=578,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 578, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=578)
    0.008925388 = weight(_text_:of in 578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008925388 = score(doc=578,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.13821793 = fieldWeight in 578, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=578)
    0.012484977 = product of:
      0.024969954 = sum of:
        0.024969954 = weight(_text_:on in 578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024969954 = score(doc=578,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.27492687 = fieldWeight in 578, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=578)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)
    Source
    From classification to 'knowledge organization': Dorking revisited or 'past is prelude'. A collection of reprints to commemorate the firty year span between the Dorking Conference (First International Study Conference on Classification Research 1957) and the Sixth International Study Conference on Classification Research (London 1997). Ed.: A. Gilchrist
  14. Huang, X.; Soergel, D.: Relevance: an improved framework for explicating the notion (2013) 0.02 
    0.019951642 = product of:
  0.05320438 = sum of:
    0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 527) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020873476 = score(doc=527,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 527, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=527)
    0.015778005 = weight(_text_:of in 527) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015778005 = score(doc=527,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 527, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=527)
    0.016552899 = product of:
      0.033105798 = sum of:
        0.033105798 = weight(_text_:on in 527) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033105798 = score(doc=527,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.364505 = fieldWeight in 527, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=527)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)
    Abstract
    Synthesizing and building on many ideas from the literature, this article presents an improved conceptual framework that clarifies the notion of relevance with its many elements, variables, criteria, and situational factors. Relevance is defined as a Relationship (R) between an Information Object (I) and an Information Need (N) (which consists of Topic, User, Problem/Task, and Situation/Context) with focus on R. This defines Relevance-as-is (conceptual relevance, strong relevance). To determine relevance, an Agent A (a person or system) operates on a representation I? of the information object and a representation N? of the information need, resulting in relevance-as-determined (operational measure of relevance, weak relevance, an approximation). Retrieval tests compare relevance-as-determined by different agents. This article discusses and compares two major approaches to conceptualizing relevance: the entity-focused approach (focus on elaborating the entities involved in relevance) and the relationship-focused approach (focus on explicating the relational nature of relevance). The article argues that because relevance is fundamentally a relational construct the relationship-focused approach deserves a higher priority and more attention than it has received. The article further elaborates on the elements of the framework with a focus on clarifying several critical issues on the discourse on relevance.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.1, S.18-35
  15. Golub, K.; Hansson, J.; Soergel, D.; Tudhope, D.: Managing classification in libraries : a methodological outline for evaluating automatic subject indexing and classification in Swedish library catalogues (2015) 0.02 
    0.01991275 = product of:
  0.053100668 = sum of:
    0.029519552 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029519552 = score(doc=2300,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 2300, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2300)
    0.015778005 = weight(_text_:of in 2300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015778005 = score(doc=2300,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 2300, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2300)
    0.007803111 = product of:
      0.015606222 = sum of:
        0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 2300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015606222 = score(doc=2300,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 2300, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2300)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)
    Abstract
    Subject terms play a crucial role in resource discovery but require substantial effort to produce. Automatic subject classification and indexing address problems of scale and sustainability and can be used to enrich existing bibliographic records, establish more connections across and between resources and enhance consistency of bibliographic data. The paper aims to put forward a complex methodological framework to evaluate automatic classification tools of Swedish textual documents based on the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) recently introduced to Swedish libraries. Three major complementary approaches are suggested: a quality-built gold standard, retrieval effects, domain analysis. The gold standard is built based on input from at least two catalogue librarians, end-users expert in the subject, end users inexperienced in the subject and automated tools. Retrieval effects are studied through a combination of assigned and free tasks, including factual and comprehensive types. The study also takes into consideration the different role and character of subject terms in various knowledge domains, such as scientific disciplines. As a theoretical framework, domain analysis is used and applied in relation to the implementation of DDC in Swedish libraries and chosen domains of knowledge within the DDC itself.
    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
  16. Ahn, J.-w.; Soergel, D.; Lin, X.; Zhang, M.: Mapping between ARTstor terms and the Getty Art and Architecture Thesaurus (2014) 0.02 
    0.019469604 = product of:
  0.051918946 = sum of:
    0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 1421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025667597 = score(doc=1421,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.20298971 = fieldWeight in 1421, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1421)
    0.009466803 = weight(_text_:of in 1421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009466803 = score(doc=1421,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.14660224 = fieldWeight in 1421, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1421)
    0.016784549 = product of:
      0.033569098 = sum of:
        0.033569098 = weight(_text_:22 in 1421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033569098 = score(doc=1421,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1421, 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=1421)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)
    Abstract
    To make better use of knowledge organization systems (KOS) for query expansion, we have developed a pattern-based technique for composition ontology mapping in a specific domain. The technique was tested in a two-step mapping. The user's free-text queries were first mapped to Getty's Art & Architecture Thesaurus (AAT) terms. The AAT-based queries were then mapped to a search engine's indexing vocabulary (ARTstor terms). The result indicated that our technique has improved the mapping success rate from 40% to 70%. We discuss also how the technique may be applied to other KOS mapping and how it may be implemented in practical systems.
    Source
    Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
  17. Soergel, D.: Towards a relation ontology for the Semantic Web (2011) 0.02 
    0.018749822 = product of:
  0.049999524 = sum of:
    0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 4342) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025667597 = score(doc=4342,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.20298971 = fieldWeight in 4342, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4342)
    0.017710768 = weight(_text_:of in 4342) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017710768 = score(doc=4342,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2742677 = fieldWeight in 4342, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4342)
    0.006621159 = product of:
      0.013242318 = sum of:
        0.013242318 = weight(_text_:on in 4342) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013242318 = score(doc=4342,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 4342, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4342)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)
    Abstract
    The Semantic Web consists of data structured for use by computer programs, such as data sets made available under the Linked Open Data initiative. Much of this data is structured following the entity-relationship model encoded in RDF for syntactic interoperability. For semantic interoperability, the semantics of the relationships used in any given dataset needs to be made explicit. Ultimately this requires an inventory of these relationships structured around a relation ontology. This talk will outline a blueprint for such an inventory, including a format for the description/definition of binary and n-ary relations, drawing on ideas put forth in the classification and thesaurus community over the last 60 years, upper level ontologies, systems like FrameNet, the Buffalo Relation Ontology, and an analysis of linked data sets.
    Source
    Classification and ontology: formal approaches and access to knowledge: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar, 19-20 September 2011, The Hague, The Netherlands. Eds.: A. Slavic u. E. Civallero
  18. Zhang, P.; Soergel, D.: Towards a comprehensive model of the cognitive process and mechanisms of individual sensemaking (2014) 0.02 
    0.016796412 = product of:
  0.04479043 = sum of:
    0.023000197 = weight(_text_:of in 1344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023000197 = score(doc=1344,freq=34.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.35617945 = fieldWeight in 1344, product of:
          5.8309517 = tf(freq=34.0), with freq of:
            34.0 = termFreq=34.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1344)
    0.007803111 = product of:
      0.015606222 = sum of:
        0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 1344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015606222 = score(doc=1344,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 1344, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1344)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.013987125 = product of:
      0.02797425 = sum of:
        0.02797425 = weight(_text_:22 in 1344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02797425 = score(doc=1344,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1344, 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=1344)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)
    Abstract
    This review introduces a comprehensive model of the cognitive process and mechanisms of individual sensemaking to provide a theoretical basis for: - empirical studies that improve our understanding of the cognitive process and mechanisms of sensemaking and integration of results of such studies; - education in critical thinking and sensemaking skills; - the design of sensemaking assistant tools that support and guide users. The paper reviews and extends existing sensemaking models with ideas from learning and cognition. It reviews literature on sensemaking models in human-computer interaction (HCI), cognitive system engineering, organizational communication, and library and information sciences (LIS), learning theories, cognitive psychology, and task-based information seeking. The model resulting from this synthesis moves to a stronger basis for explaining sensemaking behaviors and conceptual changes. The model illustrates the iterative processes of sensemaking, extends existing models that focus on activities by integrating cognitive mechanisms and the creation of instantiated structure elements of knowledge, and different types of conceptual change to show a complete picture of the cognitive processes of sensemaking. The processes and cognitive mechanisms identified provide better foundations for knowledge creation, organization, and sharing practices and a stronger basis for design of sensemaking assistant systems and tools.
    Date
    22. 8.2014 16:55:39
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.9, S.1733-1756
  19. Berti, Jr., D.W.; Lima, G.; Maculan, B.; Soergel, D.: Computer-assisted checking of conceptual relationships in a large thesaurus (2018) 0.01 
    0.010057544 = product of:
  0.040230177 = sum of:
    0.017850775 = weight(_text_:of in 4721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017850775 = score(doc=4721,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 4721, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4721)
    0.0223794 = product of:
      0.0447588 = sum of:
        0.0447588 = weight(_text_:22 in 4721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0447588 = score(doc=4721,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4721, 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=4721)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Date
    17. 1.2019 19:04:22
    Source
    Challenges and opportunities for knowledge organization in the digital age: proceedings of the Fifteenth International ISKO Conference, 9-11 July 2018, Porto, Portugal / organized by: International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO Spain and Portugal Chapter, University of Porto - Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Research Centre in Communication, Information and Digital Culture (CIC.digital) - Porto. Eds.: F. Ribeiro u. M.E. Cerveira
  20. Soergel, D.: ¬The Broad System of Ordering : a critique (1979) 0.01 
    0.009288389 = product of:
  0.037153557 = sum of:
    0.021862645 = weight(_text_:of in 1864) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021862645 = score(doc=1864,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.33856338 = fieldWeight in 1864, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1864)
    0.015290912 = product of:
      0.030581824 = sum of:
        0.030581824 = weight(_text_:on in 1864) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030581824 = score(doc=1864,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.33671528 = fieldWeight in 1864, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1864)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    Critical comments on the BSO concern basic principles used in system construction, the quality of which, from the standpoint of the author, does not meet the requirements set out for the BSO. First of all, it would be necessary to revise and clearly formulate the purpose of the system, to make and consistently implement a basic decision on its structural characteristics, to provide for high-quality conceptual analysis and subject expertise which directly influence the content of the tables, and to clearly display supplemetary materials for the tables
    Source
    International forum on information and documentation. 4(1979) no.3, S.21-24

Authors

Years

Types

  • a 36
  • el 1
  • More… Less…

Themes