Search (181 results, page 1 of 10)

0.05925397 = product of:
  0.11850794 = sum of:
    0.020663686 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020663686 = score(doc=1255,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.16542503 = fieldWeight in 1255, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1255)
    0.021174688 = weight(_text_:use in 1255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021174688 = score(doc=1255,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.16745798 = fieldWeight in 1255, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1255)
    0.018727036 = weight(_text_:of in 1255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018727036 = score(doc=1255,freq=46.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.29000556 = fieldWeight in 1255, product of:
          6.78233 = tf(freq=46.0), with freq of:
            46.0 = termFreq=46.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1255)
    0.057942525 = sum of:
      0.007724685 = weight(_text_:on in 1255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.007724685 = score(doc=1255,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.041294612 = queryNorm
          0.08505116 = fieldWeight in 1255, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1255)
      0.05021784 = weight(_text_:line in 1255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05021784 = score(doc=1255,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23157367 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
            0.041294612 = queryNorm
          0.2168547 = fieldWeight in 1255, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1255)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

As digital libraries become a major source of information for many people, we need to know more about how people seek and retrieve information in digital environments. Quite commonly, users with a problem-at-hand and associated question-in-mind repeatedly search a literature for answers, and seek information in stages over extended periods from a variety of digital information resources. The process of repeatedly searching over time in relation to a specific, but possibly an evolving information problem (including changes or shifts in a variety of variables), is called the successive search phenomenon. The study outlined in this paper is currently investigating this new and little explored line of inquiry for information retrieval, Web searching, and digital libraries. The purpose of the research project is to investigate the nature, manifestations, and behavior of successive searching by users in digital environments, and to derive criteria for use in the design of information retrieval interfaces and systems supporting successive searching behavior. This study includes two related projects. The first project is based in the School of Library and Information Sciences at the University of North Texas and is funded by a National Science Foundation POWRE Grant <http://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/show?award=9753277>. The second project is based at the Department of Information Studies at the University of Sheffield (UK) and is funded by a grant from the British Library <http://www.shef. ac.uk/~is/research/imrg/uncerty.html> Research and Innovation Center. The broad objectives of each project are to examine the nature and extent of successive search episodes in digital environments by real users over time. The specific aim of the current project is twofold: * To characterize progressive changes and shifts that occur in: user situational context; user information problem; uncertainty reduction; user cognitive styles; cognitive and affective states of the user, and consequently in their queries; and * To characterize related changes over time in the type and use of information resources and search strategies particularly related to given capabilities of IR systems, and IR search engines, and examine changes in users' relevance judgments and criteria, and characterize their differences. The study is an observational, longitudinal data collection in the U.S. and U.K. Three questionnaires are used to collect data: reference, client post search and searcher post search questionnaires. Each successive search episode with a search intermediary for textual materials on the DIALOG Information Service is audiotaped and search transaction logs are recorded. Quantitative analysis includes statistical analysis using Likert scale data from the questionnaires and log-linear analysis of sequential data. Qualitative methods include: content analysis, structuring taxonomies; and diagrams to describe shifts and transitions within and between each search episode. Outcomes of the study are the development of appropriate model(s) for IR interactions in successive search episodes and the derivation of a set of design criteria for interfaces and systems supporting successive searching.

0.058399323 = product of:
  0.11679865 = sum of:
    0.033397563 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033397563 = score(doc=4867,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 4867, 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=4867)
    0.048399284 = weight(_text_:use in 4867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048399284 = score(doc=4867,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.3827611 = fieldWeight in 4867, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4867)
    0.012622404 = weight(_text_:of in 4867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012622404 = score(doc=4867,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.19546966 = fieldWeight in 4867, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4867)
    0.0223794 = product of:
      0.0447588 = sum of:
        0.0447588 = weight(_text_:22 in 4867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0447588 = score(doc=4867,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4867, 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=4867)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

The current subject gateways have evolved over time when the discipline of Internet resource discovery was in its infancy. This is reflected by the lack of well-established, light-weight, deployable, easy-to-use, standards for metadata and information retrieval. We provide an introduction to the architecture, standards and software solutions in use by subject gateways, and to the issues that must be addressed to support future subject gateways

Date

22. 6.2002 19:38:24

0.049198337 = product of:
  0.098396674 = sum of:
    0.047231287 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047231287 = score(doc=4869,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.37811437 = fieldWeight in 4869, 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=4869)
    0.019957775 = weight(_text_:of in 4869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019957775 = score(doc=4869,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.3090647 = fieldWeight in 4869, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4869)
    0.008828212 = product of:
      0.017656423 = sum of:
        0.017656423 = weight(_text_:on in 4869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017656423 = score(doc=4869,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 4869, 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=4869)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.0223794 = product of:
      0.0447588 = sum of:
        0.0447588 = weight(_text_:22 in 4869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0447588 = score(doc=4869,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4869, 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=4869)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

This article gives an overview of the design and organisation of DutchESS, a Dutch information subject gateway created as a national collaborative effort of the National Library and a number of academic libraries. The combined centralised and distributed model of DutchESS is discussed, as well as its selection policy, its metadata format, classification scheme and retrieval options. Also some options for future collaboration on an international level are explored

Date

22. 6.2002 19:39:23

Theme

Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval

0.04435267 = product of:
  0.08870534 = sum of:
    0.036153924 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4738) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036153924 = score(doc=4738,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.28943354 = fieldWeight in 4738, 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=4738)
    0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 4738) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021389665 = score(doc=4738,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 4738, 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=4738)
    0.021604925 = weight(_text_:of in 4738) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021604925 = score(doc=4738,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.33457235 = fieldWeight in 4738, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4738)
    0.00955682 = product of:
      0.01911364 = sum of:
        0.01911364 = weight(_text_:on in 4738) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01911364 = score(doc=4738,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.21044704 = fieldWeight in 4738, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4738)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

Purpose - To investigate ways of demonstrating how portal implementations positively alter user information retrieval behaviour. Design/methodology/approach - An opinion piece reflecting on existing evidence about the nature of portal implementations, which extrapolates trends in user behaviour on the basis of these reflections. Findings - Although portal technologies probably do offer a way for libraries to create information tools that can compete with "one-stop shop" Internet search engines, there are likely difficulties in their pattern of usage which will have to be detected by effective quality measurement techniques. Research limitations/implications - An expression of opinion about the possible pitfalls of using portals to optimise users' information retrieval activity. Practical implications - This opinion piece gives some clear and practical guidelines for the evaluation of the success of library portal implementations. Originality/value - This editorial points out that, because the portal can be defined as a deliberate clone of a typical successful Internet search engine and may be presented to the naïve user in the same terms, the danger is that library portals might also clone the same information habits as Internet search engines, because of their ease of use. In trying to produce a tool that can meet Google on its own terms but with better content, we might reproduce some of the same educational disbenefits as Google: quality information retrieval is not purely a function of content, it is also a function of the user's perceptions and information habits.

0.04389717 = product of:
  0.08779434 = sum of:
    0.035423465 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035423465 = score(doc=3393,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 3393, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3393)
    0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 3393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025667597 = score(doc=3393,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.20298971 = fieldWeight in 3393, 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=3393)
    0.02008212 = weight(_text_:of in 3393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02008212 = score(doc=3393,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.3109903 = fieldWeight in 3393, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3393)
    0.006621159 = product of:
      0.013242318 = sum of:
        0.013242318 = weight(_text_:on in 3393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013242318 = score(doc=3393,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 3393, 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=3393)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

Digital Libraries currently face the challenge of integrating many different types of research information (e.g. publications, primary data, expert's profiles, institutional profiles, project information etc.) according to their scientific users' needs. To date no general, integrated model for knowledge organization and retrieval in Digital Libraries exists. This causes the problem of structural and semantic heterogeneity due to the wide range of metadata standards, indexing vocabularies and indexing approaches used for different types of information. The research presented in this paper focuses on areas in which activities are being undertaken in the field of Digital Libraries in order to treat semantic interoperability problems. We present a model for the integrated retrieval of factual and textual data which combines multiple approaches to semantic interoperability und sets them into context. Embedded in the research cycle, traditional content indexing methods for publications meet the newer, but rarely used ontology-based approaches which seem to be better suited for representing complex information like the one contained in survey data. The benefits of our model are (1) easy re-use of available knowledge organisation systems and (2) reduced efforts for domain modelling with ontologies.

0.04211296 = product of:
  0.08422592 = sum of:
    0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4879) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020873476 = score(doc=4879,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 4879, 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=4879)
    0.037047986 = weight(_text_:use in 4879) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037047986 = score(doc=4879,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.29299045 = fieldWeight in 4879, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4879)
    0.01850135 = weight(_text_:of in 4879) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01850135 = score(doc=4879,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.28651062 = fieldWeight in 4879, 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=4879)
    0.007803111 = product of:
      0.015606222 = sum of:
        0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 4879) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015606222 = score(doc=4879,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 4879, 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=4879)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

The paper gives a short overview of the history of use of UDC in Internet subject gateways (SGs) with an English interface, from 1993 to 2006. There were in total, nine quality controlled SGs that were functional for shorter or longer periods of time. Their typology and functionality is described. Quality SGs have evolved and the role of classification has changed accordingly from supporting subject organization on the interface and automatic categorization of resources, towards supporting a semantic linking, control and vocabulary mapping between different indexing systems in subject hubs and federated SGs. In this period, many SGs ceased to exist and little information remains available regarding their status. SGs currently using UDC, for some part of their resource organization, do not use a UDC subject hierarchy at the interface and its role in resource indexing has become more difficult to observe. Since 2000, UDC has become more prevalent in East European SGs, portals and hubs, which are outside the scope of this research. This paper is an attempt to provide a record on this particular application of UDC and to offer some consideration of the changes in requirements when it comes to the use of library classification in resource discovery.

Theme

Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval

0.03757597 = product of:
  0.07515194 = sum of:
    0.033397563 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2799) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033397563 = score(doc=2799,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 2799, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2799)
    0.01711173 = weight(_text_:use in 2799) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01711173 = score(doc=2799,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.13532647 = fieldWeight in 2799, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2799)
    0.018400159 = weight(_text_:of in 2799) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018400159 = score(doc=2799,freq=34.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.28494355 = fieldWeight in 2799, product of:
          5.8309517 = tf(freq=34.0), with freq of:
            34.0 = termFreq=34.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2799)
    0.0062424885 = product of:
      0.012484977 = sum of:
        0.012484977 = weight(_text_:on in 2799) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012484977 = score(doc=2799,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.13746344 = fieldWeight in 2799, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2799)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

Grounded on a strong belief that ontologies enhance the performance of information retrieval systems, there has been an upsurge of interest in ontologies. Its importance is identified in diverse research fields such as knowledge engineering, knowledge representation, qualitative modeling, language engineering, database design, information integration, object-oriented analysis, information retrieval and extraction, knowledge management and agent-based systems design (Guarino, 1998). While the role-played by ontologies, automatically lends a place of legitimacy for these tools, research in this area gains greater significance in the wake of various challenges faced in the contemporary digital environment. With the objective of overcoming various pitfalls associated with current search mechanisms, ontologies are increasingly used for developing efficient information retrieval systems. An indicator of research interest in the area of ontology is the Swoogle, a search engine for Semantic Web documents, terms and data found on the Web (Ding, Li et al, 2004). Given the complex nature of the digital content archived in digital libraries, ontologies can be employed for designing efficient forms of information retrieval in digital libraries. Knowledge representation assumes greater significance due to its crucial role in ontology development. These systems aid in developing intelligent information systems, wherein the notion of intelligence implies the ability of the system to find implicit consequences of its explicitly represented knowledge (Baader and Nutt, 2003). Knowledge representation formalisms such as 'Description Logics' are used to obtain explicit knowledge representation of the subject domain. These representations are developed into ontologies, which are used for developing intelligent information systems. Against this backdrop, the paper examines the use of Description Logics for conceptually modeling a chosen domain, which would be utilized for developing domain ontologies. The knowledge representation languages identified for this purpose are Web Ontology Language (OWL) and KArlsruhe ONtology (KAON) language. Drawing upon the various technical constructs in developing ontology-based information systems, the paper explains the working of the prototypes and also presents a comparative study of the two prototypes.

0.036702618 = product of:
  0.073405236 = sum of:
    0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 2199) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025667597 = score(doc=2199,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.20298971 = fieldWeight in 2199, 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=2199)
    0.017710768 = weight(_text_:of in 2199) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017710768 = score(doc=2199,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2742677 = fieldWeight in 2199, 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=2199)
    0.013242318 = product of:
      0.026484637 = sum of:
        0.026484637 = weight(_text_:on in 2199) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026484637 = score(doc=2199,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.29160398 = fieldWeight in 2199, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2199)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.016784549 = product of:
      0.033569098 = sum of:
        0.033569098 = weight(_text_:22 in 2199) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033569098 = score(doc=2199,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2199, 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=2199)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

The Europeana, the European digital library web-service, is being developed in the framework of the EU-funded network EDLnet. The demo version of this webservice was shown at an international conference at the German National Library in Frankfurt on 1 February 2008, the prototype will be launched in November 2008. In November 2007 the EDL Foundation was established to provide cross-domain multilingual access to Europe's cultural heritage. It will facilitate formal agreement across museums, archives, audio-visual archives and libraries on how to cooperate in the delivery and sustainability of a joint portal and will provide a legal framework for use by the EU for funding purposes and as a springboard for future governance. The European Commission is supporting the process towards the Europeana with a set of projects centering on The European Library. This webservice created by the European national libraries is seen as one of the major building blocks of the Europeana.

Date

22. 2.2009 19:11:35

Source

New pespectives on subject indexing and classification: essays in honour of Magda Heiner-Freiling. Red.: K. Knull-Schlomann, u.a

0.03639507 = product of:
  0.09705352 = sum of:
    0.050096344 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050096344 = score(doc=6040,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 6040, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6040)
    0.013388081 = weight(_text_:of in 6040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013388081 = score(doc=6040,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 6040, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6040)
    0.033569098 = product of:
      0.067138195 = sum of:
        0.067138195 = weight(_text_:22 in 6040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.067138195 = score(doc=6040,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6040, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6040)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Date

22. 6.2002 19:42:47

Theme

Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval

0.0347585 = product of:
  0.069517 = sum of:
    0.023615643 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023615643 = score(doc=1196,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.18905719 = fieldWeight in 1196, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1196)
    0.024199642 = weight(_text_:use in 1196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024199642 = score(doc=1196,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.19138055 = fieldWeight in 1196, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1196)
    0.0154592255 = weight(_text_:of in 1196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0154592255 = score(doc=1196,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23940048 = fieldWeight in 1196, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1196)
    0.0062424885 = product of:
      0.012484977 = sum of:
        0.012484977 = weight(_text_:on in 1196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012484977 = score(doc=1196,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.13746344 = fieldWeight in 1196, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1196)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

This article describes the journey from the conception of and vision for a modern search-engine-based search environment to its technological realisation. In doing so, it takes up the thread of an earlier article on this subject, this time from a technical viewpoint. As well as presenting the conceptual considerations of the initial stages, this article will principally elucidate the technological aspects of this journey. The starting point for the deliberations about development of an academic search engine was the experience we gained through the generally successful project "Digital Library NRW", in which from 1998 to 2000-with Bielefeld University Library in overall charge-we designed a system model for an Internet-based library portal with an improved academic search environment at its core. At the heart of this system was a metasearch with an availability function, to which we added a user interface integrating all relevant source material for study and research. The deficiencies of this approach were felt soon after the system was launched in June 2001. There were problems with the stability and performance of the database retrieval system, with the integration of full-text documents and Internet pages, and with acceptance by users, because users are increasingly performing the searches themselves using search engines rather than going to the library for help in doing searches. Since a long list of problems are also encountered using commercial search engines for academic use (in particular the retrieval of academic information and long-term availability), the idea was born for a search engine configured specifically for academic use. We also hoped that with one single access point founded on improved search engine technology, we could access the heterogeneous academic resources of subject-based bibliographic databases, catalogues, electronic newspapers, document servers and academic web pages.

0.034155738 = product of:
  0.068311475 = sum of:
    0.033397563 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033397563 = score(doc=1205,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 1205, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1205)
    0.01711173 = weight(_text_:use in 1205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01711173 = score(doc=1205,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.13532647 = fieldWeight in 1205, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1205)
    0.0133880805 = weight(_text_:of in 1205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0133880805 = score(doc=1205,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.20732687 = fieldWeight in 1205, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1205)
    0.004414106 = product of:
      0.008828212 = sum of:
        0.008828212 = weight(_text_:on in 1205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008828212 = score(doc=1205,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.097201325 = fieldWeight in 1205, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1205)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

Music websites are ubiquitous, and music downloads, such as MP3, are a major source of Web traffic. As the amount of musical content increases and the Web becomes an important mechanism for distributing music, we expect to see a rising demand for music search services. Many currently available music search engines rely on file names, song title, composer or performer as the indexing and retrieval mechanism. These systems do not make use of the musical content. We believe that a more natural, effective, and usable music-information retrieval (MIR) system should have audio input, where the user can query with musical content. We are developing a system called MusArt for audio-input MIR. With MusArt, as with other audio-input MIR systems, a user sings or plays a theme, hook, or riff from the desired piece of music. The system transcribes the query and searches for related themes in a database, returning the most similar themes, given some measure of similarity. We call this "retrieval by query." In this paper, we describe the architecture of MusArt. An important element of MusArt is metadata creation: we believe that it is essential to automatically abstract important musical elements, particularly themes. Theme extraction is performed by a subsystem called MME, which we describe later in this paper. Another important element of MusArt is its support for a variety of search engines, as we believe that MIR is too complex for a single approach to work for all queries. Currently, MusArt supports a dynamic time-warping search engine that has high recall, and a complementary stochastic search engine that searches over themes, emphasizing speed and relevancy. The stochastic search engine is discussed in this paper.

0.031834994 = product of:
  0.06366999 = sum of:
    0.024199642 = weight(_text_:use in 1447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024199642 = score(doc=1447,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.19138055 = fieldWeight in 1447, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1447)
    0.019452432 = weight(_text_:of in 1447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019452432 = score(doc=1447,freq=38.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.30123898 = fieldWeight in 1447, product of:
          6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
            38.0 = termFreq=38.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1447)
    0.008828212 = product of:
      0.017656423 = sum of:
        0.017656423 = weight(_text_:on in 1447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017656423 = score(doc=1447,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 1447, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1447)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.0111897 = product of:
      0.0223794 = sum of:
        0.0223794 = weight(_text_:22 in 1447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0223794 = score(doc=1447,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1447, 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=1447)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

The BAER Web Resources Group was charged in October 1999 with defining and describing the parameters of electronic resources that do not clearly belong to the categories being defined by the BAER Digital Group or the BAER Electronic Journals Group. After some difficulty identifying precisely which resources fell under the Group's charge, we finally named the following types of resources for our consideration: web sites, electronic texts, indexes, databases and abstracts, online reference resources, and networked and non-networked CD-ROMs. Electronic resources are a vast and growing collection that touch nearly every department within the Library. It is unrealistic to think one department can effectively administer all aspects of the collection. The Group then began to focus on the concern of bibliographic access to these varied resources, and to define parameters for handling or processing them within the Library. Some key elements became evident as the work progressed. * Selection process of resources to be acquired for the collection * Duplication of effort * Use of CORC * Resource Finder design * Maintenance of Resource Finder * CD-ROMs not networked * Communications * Voyager search limitations. An unexpected collaboration with the Web Development Committee on the Resource Finder helped to steer the Group to more detailed descriptions of bibliographic access. This collaboration included development of data elements for the Resource Finder database, and some discussions on Library staff processing of the resources. The Web Resources Group invited expert testimony to help the Group broaden its view to envision public use of the resources and discuss concerns related to technical services processing. The first testimony came from members of the Resource Finder Committee. Some background information on the Web Development Resource Finder Committee was shared. The second testimony was from librarians who select electronic texts. Three main themes were addressed: accessing CD-ROMs; the issue of including non-networked CD-ROMs in the Resource Finder; and, some special concerns about electronic texts. The third testimony came from librarians who select indexes and abstracts and also provide Reference services. Appendices to this report include minutes of the meetings with the experts (Appendix A), a list of proposed data elements to be used in the Resource Finder (Appendix B), and recommendations made to the Resource Finder Committee (Appendix C). Below are summaries of the key elements.

Date

21. 4.2002 10:22:31

0.031230694 = product of:
  0.062461387 = sum of:
    0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 2420) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025667597 = score(doc=2420,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.20298971 = fieldWeight in 2420, 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=2420)
    0.013388081 = weight(_text_:of in 2420) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013388081 = score(doc=2420,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 2420, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2420)
    0.006621159 = product of:
      0.013242318 = sum of:
        0.013242318 = weight(_text_:on in 2420) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013242318 = score(doc=2420,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 2420, 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=2420)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.016784549 = product of:
      0.033569098 = sum of:
        0.033569098 = weight(_text_:22 in 2420) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033569098 = score(doc=2420,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2420, 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=2420)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

The German information science community - with the support of the two main funding agencies in Germany - will develop a scientific portal, vascoda, for cross-searching distributed metadata collections. In platitudinous words, one of the services of vascoda is going to be a ldquoGooglerdquo-like search for the academic community, an easy to use, yet sophisticated search-engine to supply information on high-quality resources from different media and technical environments. Reaching this objective requires considerable standardisation activity amongst the main players to harmonise the already existing services (e.g. regarding metadata, protocols, etc.). The co-operation amongst the participants including both of the funding agencies is creating a unique team-work situation in Germany thus strengthening the information science community.

Source

Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 7th European Conference, proceedings / ECDL 2003, Trondheim, Norway, August 17-22, 2003

0.030784523 = product of:
  0.08209206 = sum of:
    0.051335193 = weight(_text_:use in 2083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051335193 = score(doc=2083,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.40597942 = fieldWeight in 2083, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2083)
    0.024135707 = weight(_text_:of in 2083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024135707 = score(doc=2083,freq=26.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.37376386 = fieldWeight in 2083, product of:
          5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
            26.0 = termFreq=26.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2083)
    0.006621159 = product of:
      0.013242318 = sum of:
        0.013242318 = weight(_text_:on in 2083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013242318 = score(doc=2083,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 2083, 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=2083)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

Millions of dollars have been invested into the development of digital libraries. There are many unanswered questions regarding their evaluation, in particular, from users' perspectives. This study intends to investigate users' use, their criteria and their evaluation of the two selected digital libraries. Nineteen subjects were recruited to participate in the study. They were instructed to keep a diary for their use of the two digital libraries, rate the importance of digital library evaluation criteria, and evaluate the two digital libraries by applying their perceived important criteria. The results show patterns of users' use of digital libraries, their perceived important evaluation criteria, and the positive and negative aspects of digital libraries. Finally, the relationships between perceived importance of digital library evaluation criteria and actual evaluation of digital libraries and the relationships between use of digital libraries and evaluation of digital libraries as well as users' preference, experience and knowledge structure on digital library evaluation are further discussed.

0.02971195 = product of:
  0.0594239 = sum of:
    0.016698781 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016698781 = score(doc=4679,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.13368362 = fieldWeight in 4679, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4679)
    0.01711173 = weight(_text_:use in 4679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01711173 = score(doc=4679,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.13532647 = fieldWeight in 4679, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4679)
    0.014801081 = weight(_text_:of in 4679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014801081 = score(doc=4679,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2292085 = fieldWeight in 4679, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4679)
    0.010812307 = product of:
      0.021624614 = sum of:
        0.021624614 = weight(_text_:on in 4679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021624614 = score(doc=4679,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23809364 = fieldWeight in 4679, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4679)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

European digital libraries have existed in diverse forms and with quite different functions, priorities, and aims. However, there are some common features of European-based initiatives that are relevant to non-European communities. There are now many more challenges and changes than ever before, and the development rate of new digital libraries is ever accelerating. Delivering educational, cultural, and research resources-especially from major scientific and cultural organizations-has become a core mission of these organizations. Using these resources they will be able to investigate, educate, and elucidate, in order to promote and disseminate and to preserve civilization. Extremely important in conceptualizing the digital environment priorities in Europe was its cultural heritage and the feeling that these rich resources should be open to Europe and the global community. In this book we focus on European digitized heritage and digital culture, and its potential in the digital age. We specifically look at the EU and its approaches to digitization and digital culture, problems detected, and achievements reached, all with an emphasis on digital cultural heritage. We seek to report on important documents that were prepared on digitization; copyright and related documents; research and education in the digital libraries field under the auspices of the EU; some other European and national initiatives; and funded projects. The aim of this book is to discuss the development of digital libraries in the European context by presenting, primarily to non-European communities interested in digital libraries, the phenomena, initiatives, and developments that dominated in Europe. We describe the main projects and their outcomes, and shine a light on the number of challenges that have been inspiring new approaches, cooperative efforts, and the use of research methodology at different stages of the digital libraries development. The specific goals are reflected in the structure of the book, which can be conceived as a guide to several main topics and sub-topics. However, the author?s scope is far from being comprehensive, since the field of digital libraries is very complex and digital libraries for cultural heritage is even moreso.

Series

Synthesis lectures on information concepts, retrieval, and services ; 58

0.028108459 = product of:
  0.07495589 = sum of:
    0.047828745 = weight(_text_:use in 961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047828745 = score(doc=961,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.37824902 = fieldWeight in 961, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=961)
    0.019324033 = weight(_text_:of in 961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019324033 = score(doc=961,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 961, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=961)
    0.007803111 = product of:
      0.015606222 = sum of:
        0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015606222 = score(doc=961,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 961, 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=961)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

According to estimates the mobile device will soon be the main platform for searching the web, and yet our knowledge of how mobile consumers use information, and how that differs from desktops/laptops users, is imperfect. The paper sets out to correct this through an analysis of the logs of a major cultural website, Europeana. The behavior of nearly 70,000 mobile users was examined over a period of more than a year and compared with that for PC users of the same site and for the same period. The analyses conducted include: size and growth of use, time patterns of use; geographical location of users, digital collections used; comparative information-seeking behavior using dashboard metrics, clustering of users according to their information seeking, and user satisfaction. The main findings were that mobile users were the fastest-growing group and will rise rapidly to a million by December 2012 and that their visits were very different in the aggregate from those arising from fixed platforms. Mobile visits could be described as being information "lite": typically shorter, less interactive, and less content viewed per visit. Use took a social rather than office pattern, with mobile use peaking at nights and weekends. The variation between different mobile devices was large, with information seeking on the iPad similar to that for PCs and laptops and that for smartphones very different indeed. The research further confirms that information-seeking behavior is platform-specific and the latest platforms are changing it all again. Websites will have to adapt.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.7, S.1311-1322

0.028100632 = product of:
  0.07493502 = sum of:
    0.04338471 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04338471 = score(doc=998,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.34732026 = fieldWeight in 998, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=998)
    0.02008212 = weight(_text_:of in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02008212 = score(doc=998,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.3109903 = fieldWeight in 998, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=998)
    0.011468184 = product of:
      0.022936368 = sum of:
        0.022936368 = weight(_text_:on in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022936368 = score(doc=998,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.25253648 = fieldWeight in 998, 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=998)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

In this paper, we present a formulation and case studies of the conditions for patenting content-based retrieval processes in digital libraries, especially in image libraries. Inventors and practitioners demand a formulation of the conditions for patenting data-processing processes as computer-related inventions in the form of computer programs. A process for content-based retrieval often consists of a combination of prior disclosed means and also comprises means for parameter setting that is adjusted to retrieve specific kinds of images in certain narrow domains. We focus on requirements for technical advancement (nonobviousness) in the combination of data-processing means, i.e., processes and specification (enablement) on the means for parameter setting in computer programs. Our formulation follows the standards of patent examination and litigation on computer-related inventions in the US. We confirm the feasibility and accountability of our formulation by applying it to several inventions patented in the US.

0.027754277 = product of:
  0.055508554 = sum of:
    0.016698781 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3371) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016698781 = score(doc=3371,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.13368362 = fieldWeight in 3371, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3371)
    0.01711173 = weight(_text_:use in 3371) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01711173 = score(doc=3371,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.13532647 = fieldWeight in 3371, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3371)
    0.01728394 = weight(_text_:of in 3371) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01728394 = score(doc=3371,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.26765788 = fieldWeight in 3371, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3371)
    0.004414106 = product of:
      0.008828212 = sum of:
        0.008828212 = weight(_text_:on in 3371) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008828212 = score(doc=3371,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.097201325 = fieldWeight in 3371, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3371)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

Libraries have always been an inspiration for the standards and technologies developed by semantic web activities. However, except for the Dublin Core specification, semantic web and social networking technologies have not been widely adopted and further developed by major digital library initiatives and projects. Yet semantic technologies offer a new level of flexibility, interoperability, and relationships for digital repositories. Kruk and McDaniel present semantic web-related aspects of current digital library activities, and introduce their functionality; they show examples ranging from general architectural descriptions to detailed usages of specific ontologies, and thus stimulate the awareness of researchers, engineers, and potential users of those technologies. Their presentation is completed by chapters on existing prototype systems such as JeromeDL, BRICKS, and Greenstone, as well as a look into the possible future of semantic digital libraries. This book is aimed at researchers and graduate students in areas like digital libraries, the semantic web, social networks, and information retrieval. This audience will benefit from detailed descriptions of both today's possibilities and also the shortcomings of applying semantic web technologies to large digital repositories of often unstructured data.

Content

Inhalt: Introduction to Digital Libraries and Semantic Web: Introduction / Bill McDaniel and Sebastian Ryszard Kruk - Digital Libraries and Knowledge Organization / Dagobert Soergel - Semantic Web and Ontologies / Marcin Synak, Maciej Dabrowski and Sebastian Ryszard Kruk - Social Semantic Information Spaces / John G. Breslin A Vision of Semantic Digital Libraries: Goals of Semantic Digital Libraries / Sebastian Ryszard Kruk and Bill McDaniel - Architecture of Semantic Digital Libraries / Sebastian Ryszard Kruk, Adam Westerki and Ewelina Kruk - Long-time Preservation / Markus Reis Ontologies for Semantic Digital Libraries: Bibliographic Ontology / Maciej Dabrowski, Macin Synak and Sebastian Ryszard Kruk - Community-aware Ontologies / Slawomir Grzonkowski, Sebastian Ryszard Kruk, Adam Gzella, Jakub Demczuk and Bill McDaniel Prototypes of Semantic Digital Libraries: JeromeDL: The Social Semantic Digital Library / Sebastian Ryszard Kruk, Mariusz Cygan, Adam Gzella, Tomasz Woroniecki and Maciej Dabrowski - The BRICKS Digital Library Infrastructure / Bernhard Haslhofer and Predrag Knezevié - Semantics in Greenstone / Annika Hinze, George Buchanan, David Bainbridge and Ian Witten Building the Future - Semantic Digital Libraries in Use: Hyperbooks / Gilles Falquet, Luka Nerima and Jean-Claude Ziswiler - Semantic Digital Libraries for Archiving / Bill McDaniel - Evaluation of Semantic and Social Technologies for Digital Libraries / Sebastian Ryszard Kruk, Ewelina Kruk and Katarzyna Stankiewicz - Conclusions: The Future of Semantic Digital Libraries / Sebastian Ryszard Kruk and Bill McDaniel

0.027151328 = product of:
  0.07240354 = sum of:
    0.042349376 = weight(_text_:use in 696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042349376 = score(doc=696,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.33491597 = fieldWeight in 696, 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=696)
    0.019129815 = weight(_text_:of in 696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019129815 = score(doc=696,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 696, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=696)
    0.010924355 = product of:
      0.02184871 = sum of:
        0.02184871 = weight(_text_:on in 696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02184871 = score(doc=696,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.24056101 = fieldWeight in 696, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=696)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

Nowadays, end-users have quick and direct access to massive amount of information available on the Net. However, this information is unorganized expecting users to be able to identify and evaluate it in accordance with their information needs. Subject based information Gateways SBIG, organized collections of networked information, provide users with a catalogue of authoritative Internet resources, which can be searched and/ or browsed. This paper provides an evaluation of one such gateway - the Art, Design, Architecture & Media Gateway ADAM. It provides information on who these users are, how often they use the service, what their reasons for use are, which search methods and services they prefer and what are the advantages and disadvantages of an online information service.

0.024052367 = product of:
  0.06413964 = sum of:
    0.046674512 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046674512 = score(doc=1905,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.37365708 = fieldWeight in 1905, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1905)
    0.009662016 = weight(_text_:of in 1905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009662016 = score(doc=1905,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.1496253 = fieldWeight in 1905, 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=1905)
    0.007803111 = product of:
      0.015606222 = sum of:
        0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 1905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015606222 = score(doc=1905,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 1905, 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=1905)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

Purpose - The paper aims to argue that digital library retrieval should be based on semantic representations and propose a semantic infrastructure for digital libraries. Design/methodology/approach - The approach taken is formal model based on subject representation for digital libraries. Findings - Search engines and search techniques have fallen short of user expectations as they do not give context based retrieval. Deploying semantic web technologies would lead to efficient and more precise representation of digital library content and hence better retrieval. Though digital libraries often have metadata of information resources which can be accessed through OAI-PMH, much remains to be accomplished in making digital libraries semantic web compliant. This paper presents a semantic infrastructure for digital libraries, that will go a long way in providing them and web based information services with products highly customised to users needs. Research limitations/implications - Here only a model for semantic infrastructure is proposed. This model is proposed after studying current user-centric, top-down models adopted in digital library service architectures. Originality/value - This paper gives a generic model for building semantic infrastructure for digital libraries. Faceted ontologies for digital libraries is just one approach. But the same may be adopted by groups working with different approaches in building ontologies to realise efficient retrieval in digital libraries.

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval