-
Fallis, D.: Social epistemology and information science (2006)
0.09
0.09330946 = product of:
0.23327366 = sum of:
0.047037303 = weight(_text_:information in 4368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047037303 = score(doc=4368,freq=6.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.5375032 = fieldWeight in 4368, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4368)
0.18623635 = sum of:
0.07817236 = weight(_text_:technology in 4368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07817236 = score(doc=4368,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.5265094 = fieldWeight in 4368, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4368)
0.108063996 = weight(_text_:22 in 4368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.108063996 = score(doc=4368,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4368, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4368)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Date
- 13. 7.2008 19:22:28
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 40(2006), S.xxx-xxx
- Theme
- Information
-
Smith, L.C.: Artificial intelligence and information retrieval (1987)
0.09
0.089856856 = product of:
0.22464214 = sum of:
0.038405795 = weight(_text_:information in 335) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038405795 = score(doc=335,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.43886948 = fieldWeight in 335, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=335)
0.18623635 = sum of:
0.07817236 = weight(_text_:technology in 335) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07817236 = score(doc=335,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.5265094 = fieldWeight in 335, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=335)
0.108063996 = weight(_text_:22 in 335) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.108063996 = score(doc=335,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 335, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=335)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 22(1987), S.41-77
-
Saracevic, T.: Relevance: a review of the literature and a framework for thinking on the notion in information science. Part II : nature and manifestations of relevance (2007)
0.09
0.08609076 = product of:
0.107613444 = sum of:
0.061346166 = weight(_text_:section in 612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.061346166 = score(doc=612,freq=2.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.23320788 = fieldWeight in 612, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=612)
0.02131451 = weight(_text_:on in 612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02131451 = score(doc=612,freq=8.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 612, 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=612)
0.015181223 = weight(_text_:information in 612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015181223 = score(doc=612,freq=10.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.1734784 = fieldWeight in 612, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=612)
0.009771545 = product of:
0.01954309 = sum of:
0.01954309 = weight(_text_:technology in 612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01954309 = score(doc=612,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.13162735 = fieldWeight in 612, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=612)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.8 = coord(4/5)
- Abstract
- Relevance is a, if not even the, key notion in information science in general and information retrieval in particular. This two-part critical review traces and synthesizes the scholarship on relevance over the past 30 years and provides an updated framework within which the still widely dissonant ideas and works about relevance might be interpreted and related. It is a continuation and update of a similar review that appeared in 1975 under the same title, considered here as being Part I. The present review is organized into two parts: Part II addresses the questions related to nature and manifestations of relevance, and Part III addresses questions related to relevance behavior and effects. In Part II, the nature of relevance is discussed in terms of meaning ascribed to relevance, theories used or proposed, and models that have been developed. The manifestations of relevance are classified as to several kinds of relevance that form an interdependent system of relevances. In Part III, relevance behavior and effects are synthesized using experimental and observational works that incorporate data. In both parts, each section concludes with a summary that in effect provides an interpretation and synthesis of contemporary thinking on the topic treated or suggests hypotheses for future research. Analyses of some of the major trends that shape relevance work are offered in conclusions.
- Content
- Relevant: Having significant and demonstrable bearing on the matter at hand.[Note *][A version of this article has been published in 2006 as a chapter in E.G. Abels & D.A. Nitecki (Eds.), Advances in Librarianship (Vol. 30, pp. 3-71). San Diego: Academic Press. (Saracevic, 2006).] Relevance: The ability as of an information retrieval system to retrieve material that satisfies the needs of the user. - Merriam-Webster Dictionary 2005
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.13, S.1915-1933
-
Enser, P.G.B.: Visual image retrieval (2008)
0.09
0.08535734 = product of:
0.21339335 = sum of:
0.027156997 = weight(_text_:information in 3281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027156997 = score(doc=3281,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 3281, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3281)
0.18623635 = sum of:
0.07817236 = weight(_text_:technology in 3281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07817236 = score(doc=3281,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.5265094 = fieldWeight in 3281, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3281)
0.108063996 = weight(_text_:22 in 3281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.108063996 = score(doc=3281,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 3281, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3281)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Date
- 22. 1.2012 13:01:26
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 42(2008), S.3-42
-
Morris, S.A.: Mapping research specialties (2008)
0.09
0.08535734 = product of:
0.21339335 = sum of:
0.027156997 = weight(_text_:information in 3962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027156997 = score(doc=3962,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 3962, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3962)
0.18623635 = sum of:
0.07817236 = weight(_text_:technology in 3962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07817236 = score(doc=3962,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.5265094 = fieldWeight in 3962, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3962)
0.108063996 = weight(_text_:22 in 3962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.108063996 = score(doc=3962,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 3962, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3962)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Date
- 13. 7.2008 9:30:22
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 42(2008), S.xxx-xxx
-
Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007)
0.09
0.08535734 = product of:
0.21339335 = sum of:
0.027156997 = weight(_text_:information in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027156997 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
0.18623635 = sum of:
0.07817236 = weight(_text_:technology in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07817236 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.5265094 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
0.108063996 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.108063996 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Date
- 13. 7.2008 19:53:22
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 41(2007), S.xxx-xxx
-
Belkin, N.J.; Croft, W.B.: Retrieval techniques (1987)
0.09
0.08535734 = product of:
0.21339335 = sum of:
0.027156997 = weight(_text_:information in 334) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027156997 = score(doc=334,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 334, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=334)
0.18623635 = sum of:
0.07817236 = weight(_text_:technology in 334) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07817236 = score(doc=334,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.5265094 = fieldWeight in 334, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=334)
0.108063996 = weight(_text_:22 in 334) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.108063996 = score(doc=334,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 334, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=334)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 22(1987), S.109-145
-
Warner, A.J.: Natural language processing (1987)
0.09
0.08535734 = product of:
0.21339335 = sum of:
0.027156997 = weight(_text_:information in 337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027156997 = score(doc=337,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 337, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=337)
0.18623635 = sum of:
0.07817236 = weight(_text_:technology in 337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07817236 = score(doc=337,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.5265094 = fieldWeight in 337, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=337)
0.108063996 = weight(_text_:22 in 337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.108063996 = score(doc=337,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 337, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=337)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 22(1987), S.79-108
-
Haas, S.W.: Natural language processing : toward large-scale, robust systems (1996)
0.08
0.08018135 = product of:
0.13363558 = sum of:
0.02131451 = weight(_text_:on in 7415) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02131451 = score(doc=7415,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 7415, 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=7415)
0.019202897 = weight(_text_:information in 7415) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019202897 = score(doc=7415,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 7415, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7415)
0.093118176 = sum of:
0.03908618 = weight(_text_:technology in 7415) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03908618 = score(doc=7415,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.2632547 = fieldWeight in 7415, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7415)
0.054031998 = weight(_text_:22 in 7415) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054031998 = score(doc=7415,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7415, 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=7415)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- State of the art review of natural language processing updating an earlier review published in ARIST 22(1987). Discusses important developments that have allowed for significant advances in the field of natural language processing: materials and resources; knowledge based systems and statistical approaches; and a strong emphasis on evaluation. Reviews some natural language processing applications and common problems still awaiting solution. Considers closely related applications such as language generation and th egeneration phase of machine translation which face the same problems as natural language processing. Covers natural language methodologies for information retrieval only briefly
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 31(1996), S.83-119
-
Khoo, S.G.; Na, J.-C.: Semantic relations in information science (2006)
0.08
0.07536412 = product of:
0.09420515 = sum of:
0.046009623 = weight(_text_:section in 1978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046009623 = score(doc=1978,freq=2.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.17490591 = fieldWeight in 1978, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1978)
0.023978824 = weight(_text_:on in 1978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023978824 = score(doc=1978,freq=18.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.21870299 = fieldWeight in 1978, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1978)
0.016888045 = weight(_text_:information in 1978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016888045 = score(doc=1978,freq=22.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.19298252 = fieldWeight in 1978, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1978)
0.0073286593 = product of:
0.014657319 = sum of:
0.014657319 = weight(_text_:technology in 1978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014657319 = score(doc=1978,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.09872051 = fieldWeight in 1978, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1978)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.8 = coord(4/5)
- Abstract
- This chapter examines the nature of semantic relations and their main applications in information science. The nature and types of semantic relations are discussed from the perspectives of linguistics and psychology. An overview of the semantic relations used in knowledge structures such as thesauri and ontologies is provided, as well as the main techniques used in the automatic extraction of semantic relations from text. The chapter then reviews the use of semantic relations in information extraction, information retrieval, question-answering, and automatic text summarization applications. Concepts and relations are the foundation of knowledge and thought. When we look at the world, we perceive not a mass of colors but objects to which we automatically assign category labels. Our perceptual system automatically segments the world into concepts and categories. Concepts are the building blocks of knowledge; relations act as the cement that links concepts into knowledge structures. We spend much of our lives identifying regular associations and relations between objects, events, and processes so that the world has an understandable structure and predictability. Our lives and work depend on the accuracy and richness of this knowledge structure and its web of relations. Relations are needed for reasoning and inferencing. Chaffin and Herrmann (1988b, p. 290) noted that "relations between ideas have long been viewed as basic to thought, language, comprehension, and memory." Aristotle's Metaphysics (Aristotle, 1961; McKeon, expounded on several types of relations. The majority of the 30 entries in a section of the Metaphysics known today as the Philosophical Lexicon referred to relations and attributes, including cause, part-whole, same and opposite, quality (i.e., attribute) and kind-of, and defined different types of each relation. Hume (1955) pointed out that there is a connection between successive ideas in our minds, even in our dreams, and that the introduction of an idea in our mind automatically recalls an associated idea. He argued that all the objects of human reasoning are divided into relations of ideas and matters of fact and that factual reasoning is founded on the cause-effect relation. His Treatise of Human Nature identified seven kinds of relations: resemblance, identity, relations of time and place, proportion in quantity or number, degrees in quality, contrariety, and causation. Mill (1974, pp. 989-1004) discoursed on several types of relations, claiming that all things are either feelings, substances, or attributes, and that attributes can be a quality (which belongs to one object) or a relation to other objects.
Linguists in the structuralist tradition (e.g., Lyons, 1977; Saussure, 1959) have asserted that concepts cannot be defined on their own but only in relation to other concepts. Semantic relations appear to reflect a logical structure in the fundamental nature of thought (Caplan & Herrmann, 1993). Green, Bean, and Myaeng (2002) noted that semantic relations play a critical role in how we represent knowledge psychologically, linguistically, and computationally, and that many systems of knowledge representation start with a basic distinction between entities and relations. Green (2001, p. 3) said that "relationships are involved as we combine simple entities to form more complex entities, as we compare entities, as we group entities, as one entity performs a process on another entity, and so forth. Indeed, many things that we might initially regard as basic and elemental are revealed upon further examination to involve internal structure, or in other words, internal relationships." Concepts and relations are often expressed in language and text. Language is used not just for communicating concepts and relations, but also for representing, storing, and reasoning with concepts and relations. We shall examine the nature of semantic relations from a linguistic and psychological perspective, with an emphasis on relations expressed in text. The usefulness of semantic relations in information science, especially in ontology construction, information extraction, information retrieval, question-answering, and text summarization is discussed. Research and development in information science have focused on concepts and terms, but the focus will increasingly shift to the identification, processing, and management of relations to achieve greater effectiveness and refinement in information science techniques. Previous chapters in ARIST on natural language processing (Chowdhury, 2003), text mining (Trybula, 1999), information retrieval and the philosophy of language (Blair, 2003), and query expansion (Efthimiadis, 1996) provide a background for this discussion, as semantic relations are an important part of these applications.
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 40(2006), S.157-228
-
Grudin, J.: Human-computer interaction (2011)
0.07
0.07468768 = product of:
0.1867192 = sum of:
0.023762373 = weight(_text_:information in 1601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023762373 = score(doc=1601,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 1601, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1601)
0.16295682 = sum of:
0.06840082 = weight(_text_:technology in 1601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06840082 = score(doc=1601,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.46069574 = fieldWeight in 1601, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1601)
0.094556 = weight(_text_:22 in 1601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.094556 = score(doc=1601,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 1601, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1601)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Date
- 27.12.2014 18:54:22
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 45(2011) no.1, S.367-430
-
Capurro, R.; Hjoerland, B.: ¬The concept of information (2002)
0.07
0.07376175 = product of:
0.12293624 = sum of:
0.07969101 = weight(_text_:section in 5079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07969101 = score(doc=5079,freq=6.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.30294594 = fieldWeight in 5079, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=5079)
0.030551622 = weight(_text_:information in 5079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030551622 = score(doc=5079,freq=72.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.34911853 = fieldWeight in 5079, product of:
8.485281 = tf(freq=72.0), with freq of:
72.0 = termFreq=72.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=5079)
0.012693611 = product of:
0.025387222 = sum of:
0.025387222 = weight(_text_:technology in 5079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025387222 = score(doc=5079,freq=6.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.17098896 = fieldWeight in 5079, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=5079)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- The concept of information as we use it in everyday English, in the sense of knowledge communicated, plays a central role in contemporary society. The development and widespread use of computer networks since the end of World War II, and the emergence of information science as a discipline in the 1950s, are evidence of this focus. Although knowledge and its communication are basic phenomena of every human society, it is the rise of information technology and its global impacts that characterize ours as an information society. It is commonplace to consider information as a basic condition for economic development together with capital, labor, and raw material; but what makes information especially significant at present is its digital nature. The impact of information technology an the natural and social sciences in particular has made this everyday notion a highly controversial concept. Claude Shannon's (1948) "A Mathematical Theory of Communication" is a landmark work, referring to the common use of information with its semantic and pragmatic dimensions, while at the same time redefining the concept within an engineering framework. The fact that the concept of knowledge communication has been designated by the word information seems, prima facie, a linguistic happenstance. For a science like information science (IS), it is of course important how fundamental terms are defined; and in IS, as in other fields, the question of how to define information is often raised. This chapter is an attempt to review the status of the concept of information in IS, with reference also to interdisciplinary trends. In scientific discourse, theoretical concepts are not true or false elements or glimpses of some element of reality; rather, they are constructions designed to do a job in the best possible way. Different conceptions of fundamental terms like information are thus more or less fruitful, depending an the theories (and in the end, the practical actions) they are expected to support. In the opening section, we discuss the problem of defining terms from the perspective of the philosophy of science. The history of a word provides us with anecdotes that are tangential to the concept itself. But in our case, the use of the word information points to a specific perspective from which the concept of knowledge communication has been defined. This perspective includes such characteristics as novelty and relevante; i.e., it refers to the process of knowledge transformation, and particularly to selection and interpretation within a specific context. The discussion leads to the questions of why and when this meaning was designated with the word information. We will explore this history, and we believe that our results may help readers better understand the complexity of the concept with regard to its scientific definitions.
Discussions about the concept of information in other disciplines are very important for IS because many theories and approaches in IS have their origins elsewhere (see the section "Information as an Interdisciplinary Concept" in this chapter). The epistemological concept of information brings into play nonhuman information processes, particularly in physics and biology. And vice versa: the psychic and sociological processes of selection and interpretation may be considered using objective parameters, leaving aside the semantic dimension, or more precisely, by considering objective or situational parameters of interpretation. This concept can be illustrated also in physical terms with regard to release mechanisms, as we suggest. Our overview of the concept of information in the natural sciences as well as in the humanities and social sciences cannot hope to be comprehensive. In most cases, we can refer only to fragments of theories. However, the reader may wish to follow the leads provided in the bibliography. Readers interested primarily in information science may derive most benefit from the section an "Information in Information Science," in which we offer a detailed explanation of diverse views and theories of information within our field; supplementing the recent ARIST chapter by Cornelius (2002). We show that the introduction of the concept of information circa 1950 to the domain of special librarianship and documentation has in itself had serious consequences for the types of knowledge and theories developed in our field. The important question is not only what meaning we give the term in IS, but also how it relates to other basic terms, such as documents, texts, and knowledge. Starting with an objectivist view from the world of information theory and cybernetics, information science has turned to the phenomena of relevance and interpretation as basic aspects of the concept of information. This change is in no way a turn to a subjectivist theory, but an appraisal of different perspectives that may determine in a particular context what is being considered as informative, be it a "thing" (Buckland, 1991b) or a document. Different concepts of information within information science reflect tensions between a subjective and an objective approach. The concept of interpretation or selection may be considered to be the bridge between these two poles. It is important, however, to consider the different professions involved with the interpretation and selection of knowledge. The most important thing in IS (as in information policy) is to consider information as a constitutive forte in society and, thus, recognize the teleological nature of information systems and services (Braman, 1989).
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 37(2003), S.343-411
- Theme
- Information
-
Zhu, B.; Chen, H.: Information visualization (2004)
0.07
0.070766665 = product of:
0.117944434 = sum of:
0.075912006 = weight(_text_:section in 4276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.075912006 = score(doc=4276,freq=4.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.28858003 = fieldWeight in 4276, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4276)
0.027223215 = weight(_text_:information in 4276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027223215 = score(doc=4276,freq=42.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.31108427 = fieldWeight in 4276, product of:
6.4807405 = tf(freq=42.0), with freq of:
42.0 = termFreq=42.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4276)
0.014809214 = product of:
0.029618427 = sum of:
0.029618427 = weight(_text_:technology in 4276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029618427 = score(doc=4276,freq=6.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.19948712 = fieldWeight in 4276, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4276)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- Advanced technology has resulted in the generation of about one million terabytes of information every year. Ninety-reine percent of this is available in digital format (Keim, 2001). More information will be generated in the next three years than was created during all of previous human history (Keim, 2001). Collecting information is no longer a problem, but extracting value from information collections has become progressively more difficult. Various search engines have been developed to make it easier to locate information of interest, but these work well only for a person who has a specific goal and who understands what and how information is stored. This usually is not the Gase. Visualization was commonly thought of in terms of representing human mental processes (MacEachren, 1991; Miller, 1984). The concept is now associated with the amplification of these mental processes (Card, Mackinlay, & Shneiderman, 1999). Human eyes can process visual cues rapidly, whereas advanced information analysis techniques transform the computer into a powerful means of managing digitized information. Visualization offers a link between these two potent systems, the human eye and the computer (Gershon, Eick, & Card, 1998), helping to identify patterns and to extract insights from large amounts of information. The identification of patterns is important because it may lead to a scientific discovery, an interpretation of clues to solve a crime, the prediction of catastrophic weather, a successful financial investment, or a better understanding of human behavior in a computermediated environment. Visualization technology shows considerable promise for increasing the value of large-scale collections of information, as evidenced by several commercial applications of TreeMap (e.g., http://www.smartmoney.com) and Hyperbolic tree (e.g., http://www.inxight.com) to visualize large-scale hierarchical structures. Although the proliferation of visualization technologies dates from the 1990s where sophisticated hardware and software made increasingly faster generation of graphical objects possible, the role of visual aids in facilitating the construction of mental images has a long history. Visualization has been used to communicate ideas, to monitor trends implicit in data, and to explore large volumes of data for hypothesis generation. Imagine traveling to a strange place without a map, having to memorize physical and chemical properties of an element without Mendeleyev's periodic table, trying to understand the stock market without statistical diagrams, or browsing a collection of documents without interactive visual aids. A collection of information can lose its value simply because of the effort required for exhaustive exploration. Such frustrations can be overcome by visualization.
Visualization can be classified as scientific visualization, software visualization, or information visualization. Although the data differ, the underlying techniques have much in common. They use the same elements (visual cues) and follow the same rules of combining visual cues to deliver patterns. They all involve understanding human perception (Encarnacao, Foley, Bryson, & Feiner, 1994) and require domain knowledge (Tufte, 1990). Because most decisions are based an unstructured information, such as text documents, Web pages, or e-mail messages, this chapter focuses an the visualization of unstructured textual documents. The chapter reviews information visualization techniques developed over the last decade and examines how they have been applied in different domains. The first section provides the background by describing visualization history and giving overviews of scientific, software, and information visualization as well as the perceptual aspects of visualization. The next section assesses important visualization techniques that convert abstract information into visual objects and facilitate navigation through displays an a computer screen. It also explores information analysis algorithms that can be applied to identify or extract salient visualizable structures from collections of information. Information visualization systems that integrate different types of technologies to address problems in different domains are then surveyed; and we move an to a survey and critique of visualization system evaluation studies. The chapter concludes with a summary and identification of future research directions.
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 39(2005), S.139-177
-
Jacob, E.K.; Shaw, D.: Sociocognitive perspectives on representation (1999)
0.07
0.065323316 = product of:
0.10887219 = sum of:
0.04262902 = weight(_text_:on in 4688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04262902 = score(doc=4688,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.3888053 = fieldWeight in 4688, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4688)
0.027156997 = weight(_text_:information in 4688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027156997 = score(doc=4688,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 4688, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4688)
0.03908618 = product of:
0.07817236 = sum of:
0.07817236 = weight(_text_:technology in 4688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07817236 = score(doc=4688,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.5265094 = fieldWeight in 4688, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4688)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 33(1998), S.131-186
-
Smeaton, A.F.: Indexing, browsing, and searching of digital video (2003)
0.06
0.062157776 = product of:
0.10359629 = sum of:
0.07668271 = weight(_text_:section in 4274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07668271 = score(doc=4274,freq=2.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.29150987 = fieldWeight in 4274, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4274)
0.014699157 = weight(_text_:information in 4274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014699157 = score(doc=4274,freq=6.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 4274, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4274)
0.012214432 = product of:
0.024428863 = sum of:
0.024428863 = weight(_text_:technology in 4274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024428863 = score(doc=4274,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 4274, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4274)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- Video is a communications medium that normally brings together moving pictures with a synchronized audio track into a discrete piece or pieces of information. A "piece" of video is variously referred to as a frame, a shot, a scene, a Clip, a program, or an episode; these pieces are distinguished by their length and by their composition. We shall return to the definition of each of these in the section an automatically structuring and indexing digital video. In modern society, Video is commonplace and is usually equated with television, movies, or home Video produced by a Video camera or camcorder. We also accept Video recorded from closed circuit TVs for security and surveillance as part of our daily lives. In short, Video is ubiquitous. Digital Video is, as the name suggests, the creation or capture of Video information in digital format. Most Video produced today, commercial, surveillance, or domestic, is produced in digital form, although the medium of Video predates the development of digital computing by several decades. The essential nature of Video has not changed with the advent of digital computing. It is still moving pictures and synchronized audio. However, the production methods and the end product have gone through significant evolution, in the last decade especially.
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 38(2004), S.371-409
-
Kim, K.-S.: Recent work in cataloging and classification, 2000-2002 (2003)
0.06
0.059883334 = product of:
0.14970833 = sum of:
0.12269233 = weight(_text_:section in 152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12269233 = score(doc=152,freq=2.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.46641576 = fieldWeight in 152, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=152)
0.027015999 = product of:
0.054031998 = sum of:
0.054031998 = weight(_text_:22 in 152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054031998 = score(doc=152,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 152, 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=152)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- This article provides a review of cataloging and classification publications that appeared in the last two years. The review considers the papers in two categories. Cataloging Theories and Practices covers descriptive cataloging, authority control, classification, subject cataloging, cataloging nonbook materials, electronic resources and metadata, and international cooperation. The second section covers other issues related to cataloging, including management, and education and training. Throughout the review, the author identifies trends and important developments in the area of cataloging and classification.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Buckland, M.K.; Liu, Z.: History of information science (1995)
0.06
0.059085604 = product of:
0.147714 = sum of:
0.038405795 = weight(_text_:information in 4226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038405795 = score(doc=4226,freq=16.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.43886948 = fieldWeight in 4226, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4226)
0.10930821 = sum of:
0.05527621 = weight(_text_:technology in 4226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05527621 = score(doc=4226,freq=4.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.3722984 = fieldWeight in 4226, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4226)
0.054031998 = weight(_text_:22 in 4226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054031998 = score(doc=4226,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4226, 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=4226)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- State of the art review of the historical development of information science as deemed to be covered by the particular interests of memebers of the American Society for Information Science, as defined as the representation, storage, transmission, selection, retrieval, filtering, and use of documents and messages. Arranges the references cited roughly according to the classification scheme used by Information Science Abstracts, and so uses the headings: background; information science; techniques and technology; information related behaviour; application areas; social aspects; education for information science; institutions; individuals; geographical areas; and conclusions
- Date
- 13. 6.1996 19:22:20
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 30(1995), S.385-416
-
Herring, S.C.: Computer-mediated communication on the Internet (2002)
0.06
0.057157904 = product of:
0.09526317 = sum of:
0.03730039 = weight(_text_:on in 5323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03730039 = score(doc=5323,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.34020463 = fieldWeight in 5323, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5323)
0.023762373 = weight(_text_:information in 5323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023762373 = score(doc=5323,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 5323, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5323)
0.03420041 = product of:
0.06840082 = sum of:
0.06840082 = weight(_text_:technology in 5323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06840082 = score(doc=5323,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.46069574 = fieldWeight in 5323, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5323)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 36(2002), S.109-170
-
Allen, B.: Cognitive research in information science : implications for design (1991)
0.06
0.057053283 = product of:
0.0950888 = sum of:
0.03730039 = weight(_text_:on in 3681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03730039 = score(doc=3681,freq=8.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.34020463 = fieldWeight in 3681, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3681)
0.03360507 = weight(_text_:information in 3681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03360507 = score(doc=3681,freq=16.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.3840108 = fieldWeight in 3681, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3681)
0.024183342 = product of:
0.048366684 = sum of:
0.048366684 = weight(_text_:technology in 3681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048366684 = score(doc=3681,freq=4.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.32576108 = fieldWeight in 3681, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3681)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- Traces the history and development of cognitive research techniques in information science and surveys current research that relies on the cognitive aspect. Examines information systems that make use of the insights of cognitive research, including experimental and proposed systems. Examples include systems that are designed to make appropriate demands on user cognitive processing. Points out that cognitive research in information science has focused primarily on users of information systems and to a lesser extent on information intermediaries. Design initiatives deriving from this research have been directed toward developing information technology that can adapt to the knowledge abilities, and styles of individual users and that make efficient use of the knowledge base and cognitive process of groups of users
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 26(1991), S.3-37
-
Docotor, R.D.: Social equity and information technologies : moving toward information democracy (1992)
0.05
0.05191291 = product of:
0.086521514 = sum of:
0.027688364 = weight(_text_:on in 346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027688364 = score(doc=346,freq=6.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.25253648 = fieldWeight in 346, 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=346)
0.038104568 = weight(_text_:information in 346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038104568 = score(doc=346,freq=28.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.4354273 = fieldWeight in 346, product of:
5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
28.0 = termFreq=28.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=346)
0.02072858 = product of:
0.04145716 = sum of:
0.04145716 = weight(_text_:technology in 346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04145716 = score(doc=346,freq=4.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.2792238 = fieldWeight in 346, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=346)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- Explores the concept of information democracy, noting that is has roots in several fields: political science; sociology; social work; communication science; and library and information science; butthat it is explicitly recognized only in library and information science. Focuses on the interplay between information technologies and society and on the theme of social equity and the distribution and use of information resources. When dealing with information democracy there is a focus on the information poor: a population that goes beyond the economically poor to include the aged, disabled, those in rural areas, and those in schools. Traces the historical origins leading to the concerns for social equity and information technologies. Notes that there is power associated with the control of information resources as well as with the control of economic and political resources. Looks at social equity and information technology in several broad areas
- Imprint
- Medford, NJ : Learned Information
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 27(1992), S.43-96
