Search (269 results, page 1 of 14)

  • × theme_ss:"Suchtaktik"
  1. Chamis, A.Y.: Vocabulary control and search strategies in online searching (1991) 0.26
    0.25833118 = product of:
      0.41332987 = sum of:
        0.066795126 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.066795126 = score(doc=820,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.5347345 = fieldWeight in 820, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=820)
        0.048399284 = weight(_text_:use in 820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048399284 = score(doc=820,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.3827611 = fieldWeight in 820, 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=820)
        0.017850775 = weight(_text_:of in 820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017850775 = score(doc=820,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 820, 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=820)
        0.1929104 = sum of:
          0.030581824 = weight(_text_:on in 820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.030581824 = score(doc=820,freq=6.0), product of:
              0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041294612 = queryNorm
              0.33671528 = fieldWeight in 820, 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=820)
          0.16232859 = weight(_text_:line in 820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.16232859 = score(doc=820,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.23157367 = queryWeight, product of:
                5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041294612 = queryNorm
              0.7009803 = fieldWeight in 820, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=820)
        0.08737431 = product of:
          0.17474861 = sum of:
            0.17474861 = weight(_text_:computers in 820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.17474861 = score(doc=820,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.21710795 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.8048927 = fieldWeight in 820, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=820)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.625 = coord(5/8)
    
    Abstract
    Based on the author's 1984 dissertation, this technical and detailed volume looks at problems related to control of terms used in searching among a variety of databases
    COMPASS
    Information retrieval
    Information retrieval / Use of / On-line computers
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Computers in libraries 12(1992) no.2, S.46-47; Library quarterly 62(1992) no.3, S.347-349 (R. Fidel)
    Subject
    Information retrieval
    Information retrieval / Use of / On-line computers
  2. Keen, E.M.: Some aspects of proximity searching in text retrieval systems (1992) 0.07
    0.06668018 = product of:
      0.13336036 = sum of:
        0.047231287 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047231287 = score(doc=6190,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.37811437 = fieldWeight in 6190, 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=6190)
        0.048399284 = weight(_text_:use in 6190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048399284 = score(doc=6190,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.3827611 = fieldWeight in 6190, 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=6190)
        0.025244808 = weight(_text_:of in 6190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025244808 = score(doc=6190,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.39093933 = fieldWeight in 6190, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6190)
        0.012484977 = product of:
          0.024969954 = sum of:
            0.024969954 = weight(_text_:on in 6190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.024969954 = score(doc=6190,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.27492687 = fieldWeight in 6190, 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=6190)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    Describes and evaluates the proximity search facilities in external online systems and in-house retrieval software. Discusses and illustrates capabilities, syntax and circumstances of use. Presents measurements of the overheads required by proximity for storage, record input time and search time. The search strategy narrowing effect of proximity is illustrated by recall and precision test results. Usage and problems lead to a number of design ideas for better implementation: some based on existing Boolean strategies, one on the use of weighted proximity to automatically produce ranked output. A comparison of Boolean, quorum and proximate term pairs distance is included
    Source
    Journal of information science. 18(1992), S.89-98
  3. Case, D.O.: Looking for information : a survey on research on information seeking, needs, and behavior (2002) 0.06
    0.062973216 = product of:
      0.12594643 = sum of:
        0.03067762 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03067762 = score(doc=1270,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.24559249 = fieldWeight in 1270, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1270)
        0.022228792 = weight(_text_:use in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022228792 = score(doc=1270,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.17579426 = fieldWeight in 1270, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1270)
        0.02063242 = weight(_text_:of in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02063242 = score(doc=1270,freq=76.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.3195122 = fieldWeight in 1270, product of:
              8.717798 = tf(freq=76.0), with freq of:
                76.0 = termFreq=76.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1270)
        0.052407596 = sum of:
          0.009363732 = weight(_text_:on in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.009363732 = score(doc=1270,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041294612 = queryNorm
              0.10309757 = fieldWeight in 1270, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1270)
          0.043043863 = weight(_text_:line in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.043043863 = score(doc=1270,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.23157367 = queryWeight, product of:
                5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041294612 = queryNorm
              0.18587546 = fieldWeight in 1270, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1270)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Footnote
    Rez. in: JASIST 54(2003) no.7, S.695-697 (R. Savolainen): "Donald O. Case has written an ambitious book to create an overall picture of the major approaches to information needs and seeking (INS) studies. The aim to write an extensive review is reflected in the list of references containing about 700 items. The high ambitions are explained an p. 14, where Case states that he is aiming at a multidisciplinary understanding of the concept of information seeking. In the Preface, the author characterizes his book as an introduction to the topic for students at the graduate level, as well as as a review and handbook for scholars engagged in information behavior research. In my view, Looking for Information is particularly welcome as an academic textbook because the field of INS studies suffers from the lack of monographs. Along with the continuous growth of the number of journal articles and conference papers, there is a genuine need for a book that picks up the numerous pieces and puts them together. The use of the study as a textbook is facilitated by clearly delineated sections an major themes and the wealth of concrete examples of information seeking in everyday contexts. The book is lucidly written and it is accessible to novice readers, too. At first glance, the idea of providing a comprehensive review of INS studies may seem a mission impossible because the current number of articles, papers, and other contributions in this field is nearing the 10,000 range (p. 224). Donald Case is not alone in the task of coming to grips with an increasing number of studies; similar problems have been faced by those writing INS-related chapters for the Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST). Case has solved the problem of "too many publications to be reviewed" by concentrating an the INS literature published during the last two decades. Secondly, studies an library use and information retrieval are discussed only to a limited extent. In addition, Case is highly selective as to studies focusing an the use of specific sources and channels such as WWW. These delineations are reasonable, even though they beg some questions. First, how should one draw the line between studies an information seeking and information retrieval? Case does not discuss this question in greater detail, although in recent years, the overlapping areas of information seeking and retrieval studies have been broadened, along with the growing importance of WWW in information seeking/retrieval. Secondly, how can one define the concept of information searching (or, more specifically, Internet or Web searching) in relation to information seeking and information retrieval? In the field of Web searching studies, there is an increasing number of contributions that are of direct relevance to information-seeking studies. Clearly, the advent of the Internet, particularly, the Web, has blurred the previous lines between INS and IR literature, making them less clear cut. The book consists of five main sections, and comprises 13 chapters. There is an Appendix serving the needs of an INS textbook (questions for discussion and application). The structure of the book is meticulously planned and, as a whole, it offers a sufficiently balanced contribution to theoretical, methodological, and empirical issues of INS. The title, Looking for Information: A Survey of Research an Information Seeking, Needs, and Behavior aptly describes the main substance of the book. . . . It is easy to agree with Case about the significance of the problem of specialization and fragmentation. This problem seems to be concomitant with the broadening field of INS research. In itself, Case's book can be interpreted as a struggle against this fragmentation. His book suggests that this struggle is not hopeless and that it is still possible to draw an overall picture of the evolving research field. The major pieces of the puzzle were found and the book will provide a useful overview of INS studies for many years."
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  4. Pejtersen, A.M.: Design of a classification scheme for fiction based on an analysis of actual user-librarian communication, and use of the scheme for control of librarians' search strategies (1980) 0.06
    0.056844056 = product of:
      0.11368811 = sum of:
        0.04277933 = weight(_text_:use in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04277933 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.3383162 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
        0.027328307 = weight(_text_:of in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027328307 = score(doc=5835,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.42320424 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
        0.015606222 = product of:
          0.031212443 = sum of:
            0.031212443 = weight(_text_:on in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031212443 = score(doc=5835,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.3436586 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.02797425 = product of:
          0.0559485 = sum of:
            0.0559485 = weight(_text_:22 in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0559485 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Date
    5. 8.2006 13:22:44
    Source
    Theory and application of information research. Proc. of the 2nd Int. Research Forum on Information Science, 3.-6.8.1977, Copenhagen. Ed.: O. Harbo u, L. Kajberg
  5. Limberg, L.: Three conceptions of information seeking and use (1999) 0.06
    0.055611208 = product of:
      0.111222416 = sum of:
        0.062872514 = weight(_text_:use in 281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.062872514 = score(doc=281,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.49722123 = fieldWeight in 281, 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=281)
        0.022201622 = weight(_text_:of in 281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022201622 = score(doc=281,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.34381276 = fieldWeight in 281, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=281)
        0.009363732 = product of:
          0.018727465 = sum of:
            0.018727465 = weight(_text_:on in 281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018727465 = score(doc=281,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.20619515 = fieldWeight in 281, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=281)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.016784549 = product of:
          0.033569098 = sum of:
            0.033569098 = weight(_text_:22 in 281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.033569098 = score(doc=281,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 281, 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=281)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    This study grew out of a need for better research based understanding of information seeking and use in a specific context. Several researchers in library and information studies (LIS) pointed out the predominance of research on information needs and information seeking and expressed a need for the study of information use (i.a. Kuhlthau 1993; Vakkari 1997; Wilson 1981). The role of context for information seeking behaviour has been stressed (i.a. Dervin 1997; Wilson 1981, 1994). The complex process of information seeking and use in learning contexts needs further exploration, according to i.a. Kuhlthau (1993). My research project investigated how students used information and what they learnt from the information they retrieved and used for an assignment. The aim of the project was to study information seeking through an explorative investigation of the interaction between information seeking and use and learning outcomes.
    Date
    22. 3.2002 9:53:10
    Source
    Exploring the contexts of information behaviour: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts, Sheffield, UK, 1998. Ed. by D.K. Wilson u. D.K. Allen
  6. Spink, A.; Ozmutlu, H.C.; Ozmutlu, S.: Multitasking information seeking and searching processes (2002) 0.05
    0.051229827 = product of:
      0.13661288 = sum of:
        0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020873476 = score(doc=600,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 600, 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=600)
        0.019324033 = weight(_text_:of in 600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019324033 = score(doc=600,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 600, 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=600)
        0.09641537 = sum of:
          0.024675604 = weight(_text_:on in 600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.024675604 = score(doc=600,freq=10.0), product of:
              0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041294612 = queryNorm
              0.271686 = fieldWeight in 600, product of:
                3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                  10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=600)
          0.07173977 = weight(_text_:line in 600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.07173977 = score(doc=600,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.23157367 = queryWeight, product of:
                5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041294612 = queryNorm
              0.30979243 = fieldWeight in 600, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=600)
      0.375 = coord(3/8)
    
    Abstract
    Recent studies show that humans engage in multitasking behaviors as they seek and search information retrieval (IR) systems for information on more than one topic at the same time. For example, a Web search session by a single user may consist of searching on single topics or multitasking. Findings are presented from four separate studies of the prevalence of multitasking information seeking and searching by Web, IR system, and library users. Incidence of multitasking identified in the four different studies included: (1) users of the Excite Web search engine who completed a survey form, (2) Excite Web search engine users filtered from an Excite transaction log from 20 December 1999, (3) mediated on-line databases searches, and (4) academic library users. Findings include: (1) multitasking information seeking and searching is a common human behavior, (2) users may conduct information seeking and searching on related or unrelated topics, (3) Web or IR multitasking search sessions are longer than single topic sessions, (4) mean number of topics per Web search ranged of 1 to more than 10 topics with a mean of 2.11 topic changes per search session, and (4) many Web search topic changes were from hobbies to shopping and vice versa. A more complex model of human seeking and searching levels that incorporates multitasking information behaviors is presented, and a theoretical framework for human information coordinating behavior (HICB) is proposed. Multitasking information seeking and searching is developing as major research area that draws together IR and information seeking studies toward a focus on IR within the context of human information behavior. Implications for models of information seeking and searching, IR/Web systems design, and further research are discussed.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 53(2002) no.8, S.639-652
  7. Crestani, F.; Du, H.: Written versus spoken queries : a qualitative and quantitative comparative analysis (2006) 0.05
    0.04870652 = product of:
      0.09741304 = sum of:
        0.050096344 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5047) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050096344 = score(doc=5047,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 5047, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5047)
        0.021168415 = weight(_text_:of in 5047) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021168415 = score(doc=5047,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 5047, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5047)
        0.009363732 = product of:
          0.018727465 = sum of:
            0.018727465 = weight(_text_:on in 5047) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018727465 = score(doc=5047,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.20619515 = fieldWeight in 5047, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5047)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.016784549 = product of:
          0.033569098 = sum of:
            0.033569098 = weight(_text_:22 in 5047) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.033569098 = score(doc=5047,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5047, 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=5047)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    The authors report on an experimental study on the differences between spoken and written queries. A set of written and spontaneous spoken queries are generated by users from written topics. These two sets of queries are compared in qualitative terms and in terms of their retrieval effectiveness. Written and spoken queries are compared in terms of length, duration, and part of speech. In addition, assuming perfect transcription of the spoken queries, written and spoken queries are compared in terms of their aptitude to describe relevant documents. The retrieval effectiveness of spoken and written queries is compared using three different information retrieval models. The results show that using speech to formulate one's information need provides a way to express it more naturally and encourages the formulation of longer queries. Despite that, longer spoken queries do not seem to significantly improve retrieval effectiveness compared with written queries.
    Date
    5. 6.2006 11:22:23
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.7, S.881-890
  8. Barsky, E.; Bar-Ilan, J.: ¬The impact of task phrasing on the choice of search keywords and on the search process and success (2012) 0.04
    0.04465286 = product of:
      0.08930572 = sum of:
        0.029519552 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 455) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029519552 = score(doc=455,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 455, 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=455)
        0.030249555 = weight(_text_:use in 455) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030249555 = score(doc=455,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23922569 = fieldWeight in 455, 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=455)
        0.01850135 = weight(_text_:of in 455) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01850135 = score(doc=455,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.28651062 = fieldWeight in 455, 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=455)
        0.0110352645 = product of:
          0.022070529 = sum of:
            0.022070529 = weight(_text_:on in 455) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022070529 = score(doc=455,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.24300331 = fieldWeight in 455, 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=455)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    This experiment studied the impact of various task phrasings on the search process. Eighty-eight searchers performed four web search tasks prescribed by the researchers. Each task was linked to an existing target web page, containing a piece of text that served as the basis for the task. A matching phrasing was a task whose wording matched the text of the target page. A nonmatching phrasing was synonymous with the matching phrasing, but had no match with the target page. Searchers received tasks for both types in English and in Hebrew. The search process was logged. The findings confirm that task phrasing shapes the search process and outcome, and also user satisfaction. Each search stage-retrieval of the target page, visiting the target page, and finding the target answer-was associated with different phenomena; for example, target page retrieval was negatively affected by persistence in search patterns (e.g., use of phrases), user-originated keywords, shorter queries, and omitting key keywords from the queries. Searchers were easily driven away from the top-ranked target pages by lower-ranked pages with title tags matching the queries. Some searchers created consistently longer queries than other searchers, regardless of the task length. Several consistent behavior patterns that characterized the Hebrew language were uncovered, including the use of keyword modifications (replacing infinitive forms with nouns), omitting prefixes and articles, and preferences for the common language. The success self-assessment also depended on whether the wording of the answer matched the task phrasing.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.10, S.1987-2005
  9. Lucas, W.; Topi, H.: Form and function : the impact of query term and operator usage on Web search results (2002) 0.04
    0.04414038 = product of:
      0.08828076 = sum of:
        0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 198) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020873476 = score(doc=198,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 198, 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=198)
        0.037047986 = weight(_text_:use in 198) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037047986 = score(doc=198,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.29299045 = fieldWeight in 198, 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=198)
        0.019324033 = weight(_text_:of in 198) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019324033 = score(doc=198,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 198, 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=198)
        0.0110352645 = product of:
          0.022070529 = sum of:
            0.022070529 = weight(_text_:on in 198) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022070529 = score(doc=198,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.24300331 = fieldWeight in 198, 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=198)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    Conventional wisdom holds that queries to information retrieval systems will yield more relevant results if they contain multiple topic-related terms and use Boolean and phrase operators to enhance interpretation. Although studies have shown that the users of Web-based search engines typically enter short, term-based queries and rarely use search operators, little information exists concerning the effects of term and operator usage on the relevancy of search results. In this study, search engine users formulated queries on eight search topics. Each query was submitted to the user-specified search engine, and relevancy ratings for the retrieved pages were assigned. Expert-formulated queries were also submitted and provided a basis for comparing relevancy ratings across search engines. Data analysis based on our research model of the term and operator factors affecting relevancy was then conducted. The results show that the difference in the number of terms between expert and nonexpert searches, the percentage of matching terms between those searches, and the erroneous use of nonsupported operators in nonexpert searches explain most of the variation in the relevancy of search results. These findings highlight the need for designing search engine interfaces that provide greater support in the areas of term selection and operator usage
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 53(2002) no.2, S.95-108
  10. Xu, Y.: ¬The dynamics of interactive information retrieval behavior : part I: an activity theory perspective (2007) 0.04
    0.04362188 = product of:
      0.08724376 = sum of:
        0.04338471 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04338471 = score(doc=331,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.34732026 = fieldWeight in 331, 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=331)
        0.017710768 = weight(_text_:of in 331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017710768 = score(doc=331,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.2742677 = fieldWeight in 331, 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=331)
        0.009363732 = product of:
          0.018727465 = sum of:
            0.018727465 = weight(_text_:on in 331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018727465 = score(doc=331,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.20619515 = fieldWeight in 331, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=331)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.016784549 = product of:
          0.033569098 = sum of:
            0.033569098 = weight(_text_:22 in 331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.033569098 = score(doc=331,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 331, 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=331)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    Human information-seeking behavior is a topic of increasing interest in many disciplines. However, the dynamics of this behavior remain elusive. The extant research has taken cognitive and behavioral perspectives to study information-seeking behavior, and observed its dynamics in multiple sessions. However, the underlying mechanisms that govern the dynamics of information-seeking behavior are not well understood. With a focus on interactive information retrieval behavior, this study proposes an integrated framework based on activity theory. This framework is not only comprehensive and integrated, but also offers an explanation of the mechanisms governing the interaction between users' cognitive states and their manifested behavior when using an information retrieval system. A set of four propositions are advanced to describe the mechanisms. The implications are discussed.
    Date
    27. 5.2007 13:55:22
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.7, S.958-970
  11. Ren, P.; Chen, Z.; Ma, J.; Zhang, Z.; Si, L.; Wang, S.: Detecting temporal patterns of user queries (2017) 0.04
    0.04361538 = product of:
      0.08723076 = sum of:
        0.025048172 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3315) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025048172 = score(doc=3315,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 3315, 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=3315)
        0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 3315) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025667597 = score(doc=3315,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.20298971 = fieldWeight in 3315, 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=3315)
        0.025046807 = weight(_text_:of in 3315) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025046807 = score(doc=3315,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.38787308 = fieldWeight in 3315, product of:
              5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
                28.0 = termFreq=28.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3315)
        0.011468184 = product of:
          0.022936368 = sum of:
            0.022936368 = weight(_text_:on in 3315) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022936368 = score(doc=3315,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.25253648 = fieldWeight in 3315, 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=3315)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    Query classification is an important part of exploring the characteristics of web queries. Existing studies are mainly based on Broder's classification scheme and classify user queries into navigational, informational, and transactional categories according to users' information needs. In this article, we present a novel classification scheme from the perspective of queries' temporal patterns. Queries' temporal patterns are inherent time series patterns of the search volumes of queries that reflect the evolution of the popularity of a query over time. By analyzing the temporal patterns of queries, search engines can more deeply understand the users' search intents and thus improve performance. Furthermore, we extract three groups of features based on the queries' search volume time series and use a support vector machine (SVM) to automatically detect the temporal patterns of user queries. Extensive experiments on the Million Query Track data sets of the Text REtrieval Conference (TREC) demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.1, S.113-128
  12. White, R.W.; Jose, J.M.; Ruthven, I.: ¬A task-oriented study on the influencing effects of query-biased summarisation in web searching (2003) 0.04
    0.041463543 = product of:
      0.082927085 = sum of:
        0.029519552 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029519552 = score(doc=1081,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 1081, 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=1081)
        0.030249555 = weight(_text_:use in 1081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030249555 = score(doc=1081,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23922569 = fieldWeight in 1081, 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=1081)
        0.017640345 = weight(_text_:of in 1081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017640345 = score(doc=1081,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.27317715 = fieldWeight in 1081, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1081)
        0.0055176322 = product of:
          0.0110352645 = sum of:
            0.0110352645 = weight(_text_:on in 1081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0110352645 = score(doc=1081,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 1081, 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=1081)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    The aim of the work described in this paper is to evaluate the influencing effects of query-biased summaries in web searching. For this purpose, a summarisation system has been developed, and a summary tailored to the user's query is generated automatically for each document retrieved. The system aims to provide both a better means of assessing document relevance than titles or abstracts typical of many web search result lists. Through visiting each result page at retrieval-time, the system provides the user with an idea of the current page content and thus deals with the dynamic nature of the web. To examine the effectiveness of this approach, a task-oriented, comparative evaluation between four different web retrieval systems was performed; two that use query-biased summarisation, and two that use the standard ranked titles/abstracts approach. The results from the evaluation indicate that query-biased summarisation techniques appear to be more useful and effective in helping users gauge document relevance than the traditional ranked titles/abstracts approach. The same methodology was used to compare the effectiveness of two of the web's major search engines; AltaVista and Google.
  13. Vakkari, P.: Task complexity, information types, search strategies and relevance : integrating studies on information retrieval and seeking (1999) 0.04
    0.041165598 = product of:
      0.082331195 = sum of:
        0.029519552 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029519552 = score(doc=299,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 299, 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=299)
        0.030249555 = weight(_text_:use in 299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030249555 = score(doc=299,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23922569 = fieldWeight in 299, 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=299)
        0.014758972 = weight(_text_:of in 299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014758972 = score(doc=299,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.22855641 = fieldWeight in 299, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=299)
        0.007803111 = product of:
          0.015606222 = sum of:
            0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.015606222 = score(doc=299,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 299, 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=299)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    Research in information science aims to comprehend the facilitation of access to information for supporting purposeful action. The major themes to be addressed have been how information is organized for access, how it is retrieved from storage, and how it is sought out and used for various purposes. Two central research areas in the field are information retrieval (IR) and information seeking (IS) (Vakkari & Rochester, 1998). Although intuitively the fields seem to be overlapping, their research communities have been active in their own enclosures. Few researchers have visited the neighboring side. However, there are researchers (Bates, 1989; Belkin & Vickery, 1986; Belkin, 1993; Ellis, 1989; Ingwersen, 1992, 1996; Järvelin 1987; Kuhlthau, 1993; Marchionini, 1995; Saracevic & Kantor, 1988) who have stressed the need to connect results from both research traditions. IR can be seen as a part of a broader process of information seeking. By IS is understood a process of searching, obtaining and using information for a purpose (e.g., form a solution for a task) when a person does not have sufficient prior knowledge. By 1R is understood the use of an information system for obtaining relevant information for a purpose (e.g., a task). This implies that information systems are a specific means among other sources and channels for obtaining information.
    Source
    Exploring the contexts of information behaviour: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts, Sheffield, UK, 1998. Ed. by D.K. Wilson u. D.K. Allen
  14. Topi, H.; Lucas, W.: Mix and match : combining terms and operators for successful Web searches (2005) 0.04
    0.041165598 = product of:
      0.082331195 = sum of:
        0.029519552 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029519552 = score(doc=1051,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 1051, 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=1051)
        0.030249555 = weight(_text_:use in 1051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030249555 = score(doc=1051,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23922569 = fieldWeight in 1051, 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=1051)
        0.014758972 = weight(_text_:of in 1051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014758972 = score(doc=1051,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.22855641 = fieldWeight in 1051, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1051)
        0.007803111 = product of:
          0.015606222 = sum of:
            0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 1051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.015606222 = score(doc=1051,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 1051, 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=1051)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    This paper presents a detailed analysis of the structure and components of queries written by experimental participants in a study that manipulated two factors found to affect end-user information retrieval performance: training in Boolean logic and the type of search interface. As reported previously, we found that both Boolean training and the use of an assisted interface improved the participants' ability to find correct responses to information requests. Here, we examine the impact of these training and interface manipulations on the Boolean operators and search terms that comprise the submitted queries. Our analysis shows that both Boolean training and the use of an assisted interface improved the participants' ability to correctly utilize various operators. An unexpected finding is that this training also had a positive impact on term selection. The terms and, to a lesser extent, the operators comprising a query were important factors affecting the participants' performance in query tasks. Our findings demonstrate that even small training interventions can improve the users' search performance and highlight the need for additional information retrieval research into how search interfaces can provide superior support to today's untrained users of the Web.
  15. Slone, D.J.: Encounters with the OPAC : On-line searching in public libraries (2000) 0.04
    0.040799852 = product of:
      0.16319941 = sum of:
        0.014968331 = weight(_text_:of in 4810) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014968331 = score(doc=4810,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23179851 = fieldWeight in 4810, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4810)
        0.14823107 = sum of:
          0.026484637 = weight(_text_:on in 4810) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.026484637 = score(doc=4810,freq=8.0), product of:
              0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041294612 = queryNorm
              0.29160398 = fieldWeight in 4810, 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=4810)
          0.12174644 = weight(_text_:line in 4810) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.12174644 = score(doc=4810,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.23157367 = queryWeight, product of:
                5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041294612 = queryNorm
              0.52573526 = fieldWeight in 4810, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4810)
      0.25 = coord(2/8)
    
    Abstract
    This article reports on a qualitative study exploring: (1) strategies and behaviors of public library users during interaction with an OPAC; and (2) users' confidence in finding needed information on-line. Questionnaires, interviews, and observations were employed to gather data from 32 public library users. the results found search behaviors, confidence, and other feelings varied, based on 3 types of searches: unknown-item searches; area searches; and known-item searches. Term generation was the most important factor in unknown-item search strategies. Speed and convenience palyed a role in area searches, and simplicity characterized known-item searches. Of the 3 types, unknown-item searchers experienced the most frustration and doubt; known-item searchers the most disappointment; and area searchers the most confidence and contentment. Knowledge of these differences may prove helpful for librarians and interface designers
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(2000) no.8, S.757-773
  16. Spink, A.: Towards a theoretical framework for information retrieval in an information seeking context (1999) 0.04
    0.040371194 = product of:
      0.08074239 = sum of:
        0.029519552 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029519552 = score(doc=300,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 300, 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=300)
        0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021389665 = score(doc=300,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 300, 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=300)
        0.02431554 = weight(_text_:of in 300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02431554 = score(doc=300,freq=38.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.37654874 = fieldWeight in 300, product of:
              6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
                38.0 = termFreq=38.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=300)
        0.0055176322 = product of:
          0.0110352645 = sum of:
            0.0110352645 = weight(_text_:on in 300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0110352645 = score(doc=300,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 300, 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=300)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    This paper presents the initial stages of the development of a three-dimensional model as a theoretical framework for conceptualizing and exploring interactive information retrieval (IR) with an information seeking context. The model, displayed in Figure 1, includes a Plane of Judgment within a Plane of Interaction within a Plane of Time. The Plane of Judgment includes levels and regions of relevance judgments, and other user judgments during interactive IR, e.g., magnitude or strategy feedback, tactics, search strategies, or search terms. The Plane of Judgment exists within a Plane of Interaction. The Plane of Interaction consists of interactive IR models, including Ingwersen (1992, 1996), Belkin, Cool, Stein and Theil (1995), and Saracevic (1996b, 1997). The Plane of Interaction includes movement or shifts within interactions or search episodes, e.g., tactics, information problem, strategies, terms, feedback, goal states, or uncertainty. IR interactions that occur within a Plane of Interaction exist within a Plane of Time. The Plane of Time includes users' information seeking stages, represented in the model by Kuhlthau's Information Search Process Model (1993) and users' successive searches over time related to the same or evolving information problem (Spink, 1996). The three-dimensional model is a framework for the development of theoretical and empirical research to: 1. Integrate interactive IR research within information-seeking context 2. Explore users' interactive IR episodes within their changing information-seeking contexts 3. Examine relevance judgments within users' information seeking processes 4. Broaden relevance research to include the concurrent exploration of relevance judgment level, region and time
    Source
    Exploring the contexts of information behaviour: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts, Sheffield, UK, 1998. Ed. by D.K. Wilson u. D.K. Allen
  17. Nori, R.: Web searching and navigation : age, intelligence, and familiarity (2020) 0.04
    0.03988464 = product of:
      0.07976928 = sum of:
        0.030249555 = weight(_text_:use in 5945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030249555 = score(doc=5945,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23922569 = fieldWeight in 5945, 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=5945)
        0.012473608 = weight(_text_:of in 5945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012473608 = score(doc=5945,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.19316542 = fieldWeight in 5945, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5945)
        0.0055176322 = product of:
          0.0110352645 = sum of:
            0.0110352645 = weight(_text_:on in 5945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0110352645 = score(doc=5945,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 5945, 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=5945)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.031528484 = product of:
          0.06305697 = sum of:
            0.06305697 = weight(_text_:computers in 5945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06305697 = score(doc=5945,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21710795 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.29044062 = fieldWeight in 5945, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5945)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    In using the Internet to solve everyday problems, older adults tend to find fewer correct answers compared to younger adults. Some authors have argued that these differences could be explained by age-related decline. The present study aimed to analyze the relationship between web-searching navigation and users' age, considering the Intelligence Quotient (IQ) and frequency of Internet and personal computer use. The intent was to identify differences due to age and not to other variables (that is, cognitive decline, expertise with the tool). Eighteen students (18-30?years) and 18 older adults (60-75?years) took part in the experiment. Inclusion criteria were the frequent use of computers and a web-searching activity; the older adults performed the Mini-Mental State Examination to exclude cognitive impairment. Participants were requested to perform the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test 2nd ed. to measure their IQ level, and nine everyday web-searching tasks of differing complexity. The results showed that older participants spent more time on solving tasks than younger participants, but with the same accuracy as young people. Furthermore, nonverbal IQ improved performance in terms of time among the older participants. Age did not influence web-searching behavior in users with normal expertise and intelligence.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.8, S.902-915
  18. Byström, K.: Information seekers in context : an analysis of the 'doer' in INSU studies (1999) 0.04
    0.03967849 = product of:
      0.07935698 = sum of:
        0.030249555 = weight(_text_:use in 297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030249555 = score(doc=297,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23922569 = fieldWeight in 297, 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=297)
        0.021604925 = weight(_text_:of in 297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021604925 = score(doc=297,freq=30.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.33457235 = fieldWeight in 297, 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=297)
        0.013515383 = product of:
          0.027030766 = sum of:
            0.027030766 = weight(_text_:on in 297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027030766 = score(doc=297,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.29761705 = fieldWeight in 297, product of:
                  3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                    12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=297)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.013987125 = product of:
          0.02797425 = sum of:
            0.02797425 = weight(_text_:22 in 297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02797425 = score(doc=297,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 297, 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=297)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    In information needs, seeking and use (INSU) research, individuals have most commonly been perceived as users (e.g., Kuhlthau, 1991; Dervin & Nilan, 1986; Dervin, 1989; Belkin, 1980). The concept user originates from the user of libraries and other information services and information systems. Over the years the scope of the concept has become wider and it is nowadays often understood in the sense of seekers of information (e.g., Wilson, 1981; Marchionini, 1995) and users of information (e.g., Streatfield, 1983). Nevertheless, the concept has remained ambiguous by being on the one hand universal and on the other hand extremely specific. The purpose of this paper is to map and evaluate views on people whose information behaviour has been in one way or another the core of our research area. The goal is to shed some light on various relationships between the different aspects of doers in INSU studies. The paper is inspired by Dervin's (1997) analysis of context where she identified among other themes the nature of subject by contrasting a `transcendental individual' with a `decentered subject', and Talja's (1997) presentation about constituting `information' and `user' from the discourse analytic viewpoint as opposed to the cognitive viewpoint. Instead of the metatheoretical approach applied by Dervin and Talja, a more concrete approach is valid in the present analysis where no direct arguments for or against the underlying metatheories are itemised. The focus is on doers in INSU studies leaving other, even closely-related concepts (i.e., information, information seeking, knowledge etc.), outside the scope of the paper.
    Date
    22. 3.2002 9:55:52
    Source
    Exploring the contexts of information behaviour: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts, Sheffield, UK, 1998. Ed. by D.K. Wilson u. D.K. Allen
  19. Yuan, X.; Belkin, N.J.: Investigating information retrieval support techniques for different information-seeking strategies (2010) 0.04
    0.03826997 = product of:
      0.07653994 = sum of:
        0.029519552 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029519552 = score(doc=3699,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 3699, 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=3699)
        0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 3699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021389665 = score(doc=3699,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 3699, 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=3699)
        0.02011309 = weight(_text_:of in 3699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02011309 = score(doc=3699,freq=26.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.31146988 = fieldWeight in 3699, 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=3699)
        0.0055176322 = product of:
          0.0110352645 = sum of:
            0.0110352645 = weight(_text_:on in 3699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0110352645 = score(doc=3699,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 3699, 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=3699)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    We report on a study that investigated the efficacy of four different interactive information retrieval (IIR) systems, each designed to support a specific information-seeking strategy (ISS). These systems were constructed using different combinations of IR techniques (i.e., combinations of different methods of representation, comparison, presentation and navigation), each of which was hypothesized to be well suited to support a specific ISS. We compared the performance of searchers in each such system, designated experimental, to an appropriate baseline system, which implemented the standard specified query and results list model of current state-of-the-art experimental and operational IR systems. Four within-subjects experiments were conducted for the purpose of this comparison. Results showed that each of the experimental systems was superior to its baseline system in supporting user performance for the specific ISS (that is, the information problem leading to that ISS) for which the system was designed. These results indicate that an IIR system, which intends to support more than one kind of ISS, should be designed within a framework which allows the use and combination of different IR support techniques for different ISSs.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.8, S.1543-1563
  20. Cole, C.: ¬A theory of information need for information retrieval that connects information to knowledge (2011) 0.04
    0.038122024 = product of:
      0.07624405 = sum of:
        0.029519552 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4474) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029519552 = score(doc=4474,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 4474, 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=4474)
        0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 4474) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021389665 = score(doc=4474,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 4474, 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=4474)
        0.015778005 = weight(_text_:of in 4474) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015778005 = score(doc=4474,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 4474, 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=4474)
        0.00955682 = product of:
          0.01911364 = sum of:
            0.01911364 = weight(_text_:on in 4474) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.01911364 = score(doc=4474,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041294612 = queryNorm
                0.21044704 = fieldWeight in 4474, 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=4474)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(4/8)
    
    Abstract
    This article proposes a theory of information need for information retrieval (IR). Information need traditionally denotes the start state for someone seeking information, which includes information search using an IR system. There are two perspectives on information need. The dominant, computer science perspective is that the user needs to find an answer to a well-defined question which is easy for the user to formulate into a query to the system. Ironically, information science's best known model of information need (Taylor, 1968) deems it to be a "black box"-unknowable and nonspecifiable by the user in a query to the information system. Information science has instead devoted itself to studying eight adjacent or surrogate concepts (information seeking, search and use; problem, problematic situation and task; sense making and evolutionary adaptation/information foraging). Based on an analysis of these eight adjacent/surrogate concepts, we create six testable propositions for a theory of information need. The central assumption of the theory is that while computer science sees IR as an information- or answer-finding system, focused on the user finding an answer, an information science or user-oriented theory of information need envisages a knowledge formulation/acquisition system.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.7, S.1216-1231

Languages

  • e 265
  • d 2
  • ja 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 257
  • m 9
  • el 2
  • s 2
  • More… Less…