Search (56 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Social tagging"
  1. Hotho, A.; Jäschke, R.; Benz, D.; Grahl, M.; Krause, B.; Schmitz, C.; Stumme, G.: Social Bookmarking am Beispiel BibSonomy (2009) 0.03 
    0.0327579 = product of:
  0.08189475 = sum of:
    0.044167973 = weight(_text_:b in 4873) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044167973 = score(doc=4873,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14104119 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.31315655 = fieldWeight in 4873, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4873)
    0.037726775 = weight(_text_:u in 4873) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037726775 = score(doc=4873,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13035181 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.28942272 = fieldWeight in 4873, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4873)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Social Semantic Web: Web 2.0, was nun? Hrsg.: A. Blumauer u. T. Pellegrini
  2. Held, C.; Cress, U.: Social Tagging aus kognitionspsychologischer Sicht (2008) 0.03 
    0.028663162 = product of:
  0.0716579 = sum of:
    0.038646974 = weight(_text_:b in 2885) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038646974 = score(doc=2885,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14104119 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.27401197 = fieldWeight in 2885, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2885)
    0.03301093 = weight(_text_:u in 2885) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03301093 = score(doc=2885,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13035181 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.25324488 = fieldWeight in 2885, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2885)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Good tags - bad tags: Social Tagging in der Wissensorganisation. Hrsg.: B. Gaiser, u.a
  3. Müller-Prove, M.: Modell und Anwendungsperspektive des Social Tagging (2008) 0.03 
    0.026296867 = product of:
  0.065742165 = sum of:
    0.044167973 = weight(_text_:b in 2882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044167973 = score(doc=2882,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14104119 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.31315655 = fieldWeight in 2882, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2882)
    0.02157419 = product of:
      0.04314838 = sum of:
        0.04314838 = weight(_text_:22 in 2882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04314838 = score(doc=2882,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13940376 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.039808836 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2882, 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=2882)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Pages
    S.15-22
    Source
    Good tags - bad tags: Social Tagging in der Wissensorganisation. Hrsg.: B. Gaiser, u.a
  4. Web-2.0-Dienste als Ergänzung zu algorithmischen Suchmaschinen (2008) 0.02 
    0.024568424 = product of:
  0.06142106 = sum of:
    0.033125978 = weight(_text_:b in 4323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033125978 = score(doc=4323,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14104119 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.23486741 = fieldWeight in 4323, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4323)
    0.028295081 = weight(_text_:u in 4323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028295081 = score(doc=4323,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13035181 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.21706703 = fieldWeight in 4323, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4323)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Mit sozialen Suchdiensten - wie z. B. Yahoo Clever, Lycos iQ oder Mister Wong - ist eine Ergänzung und teilweise sogar eine Konkurrenz zu den bisherigen Ansätzen in der Web-Suche entstanden. Während Google und Co. automatisch generierte Trefferlisten bieten, binden soziale Suchdienste die Anwender zu Generierung der Suchergebnisse in den Suchprozess ein. Vor diesem Hintergrund wird in diesem Buch der Frage nachgegangen, inwieweit soziale Suchdienste mit traditionellen Suchmaschinen konkurrieren oder diese qualitativ ergänzen können. Der vorliegende Band beleuchtet die hier aufgeworfene Fragestellung aus verschiedenen Perspektiven, um auf die Bedeutung von sozialen Suchdiensten zu schließen.
    Editor
    Lewandowski, D. u. C. Maaß
  5. Harrer, A.; Lohmann, S.: Potenziale von Tagging als partizipative Methode für Lehrportale und E-Learning-Kurse (2008) 0.02 
    0.023009757 = product of:
  0.05752439 = sum of:
    0.038646974 = weight(_text_:b in 2889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038646974 = score(doc=2889,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14104119 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.27401197 = fieldWeight in 2889, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2889)
    0.018877417 = product of:
      0.037754834 = sum of:
        0.037754834 = weight(_text_:22 in 2889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037754834 = score(doc=2889,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13940376 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.039808836 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2889, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2889)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    21. 6.2009 12:22:44
    Source
    Good tags - bad tags: Social Tagging in der Wissensorganisation. Hrsg.: B. Gaiser, u.a
  6. Niemann, C.: Intelligenz im Chaos : erste Schritte zur Analyse des Kreativen Potenzials eines Tagging-Systems (2010) 0.02 
    0.020473689 = product of:
  0.051184222 = sum of:
    0.027604984 = weight(_text_:b in 4375) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027604984 = score(doc=4375,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14104119 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.19572285 = fieldWeight in 4375, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4375)
    0.023579236 = weight(_text_:u in 4375) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023579236 = score(doc=4375,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13035181 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.1808892 = fieldWeight in 4375, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4375)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Die Auszeichnung digitaler Medien durch Tagging ist zur festen Größe für das Wissensmanagement im Internet avanciert. Im Kontext des zunehmenden information overload' stehen wissenschaftliche Bibliotheken vor der Aufgabe, die große Flut digital publizierter Artikel und Werke möglichst inhaltlich erschlossen verfügbar zu machen. Die Frage ist, ob durch den Einsatz von Tagging-Systemen die kollaborative Intelligenz der NutzerInnen für die Sacherschließung eingesetzt werden kann, während diese von einer intuitiven und individuellen Wissensorganisation profitieren. Die große Freiheit bei der Vergabe von Deskriptoren durch die NutzerInnen eines Tagging-Systems ist nämlich ein ambivalentes Phänomen: Kundennähe und kreatives Potenzial stehen der großen Menge völlig unkontrollierter Meta-Informationen gegenüber, deren inhaltliche Qualität und Aussagekraft noch unklar ist. Bisherige Forschungsbemühungen konzentrieren sich hauptsächlich auf die automatische Hierarchisierung bzw. Relationierung der Tag-Daten (etwa mittels Ähnlichkeitsalgorithmen) oder auf die Analyse des (Miss-)Erfolgs, den die NutzerInnen bei einer Suchanfrage subjektiv erfahren. Aus der Sicht stark strukturierter Wissensorganisation, wie sie Experten z. B. durch die Anwendung von Klassifikationen realisieren, handelt es sich bei den zunächst unvermittelt nebeneinander stehenden Tags allerdings kurz gesagt um Chaos. Dass in diesem Chaos aber auch Struktur und wertvolles Wissen als Gemeinschaftsprodukt erzeugt werden kann, ist eine der zentralen Thesen dieses Artikels.
    Source
    ¬The Ne(x)t generation: das Angebot der Bibliotheken; 30. Österreichischer Bibliothekartag, Graz, 15.-18.9.2009. Hrsg.: Ute Bergner u. Erhard Göbel
  7. Kruk, S.R.; Kruk, E.; Stankiewicz, K.: Evaluation of semantic and social technologies for digital libraries (2009) 0.02 
    0.019722648 = product of:
  0.04930662 = sum of:
    0.033125978 = weight(_text_:b in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033125978 = score(doc=3387,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14104119 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.23486741 = fieldWeight in 3387, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3387)
    0.016180642 = product of:
      0.032361284 = sum of:
        0.032361284 = weight(_text_:22 in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032361284 = score(doc=3387,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13940376 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.039808836 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3387, 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=3387)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    1. 8.2010 12:35:22
    Source
    Semantic digital libraries. Eds.: S.R. Kruk, B. McDaniel
  8. Rolla, P.J.: User tags versus Subject headings : can user-supplied data improve subject access to library collections? (2009) 0.02 
    0.019722648 = product of:
  0.04930662 = sum of:
    0.033125978 = weight(_text_:b in 3601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033125978 = score(doc=3601,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14104119 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.23486741 = fieldWeight in 3601, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3601)
    0.016180642 = product of:
      0.032361284 = sum of:
        0.032361284 = weight(_text_:22 in 3601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032361284 = score(doc=3601,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13940376 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.039808836 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3601, 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=3601)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Type
    b
  9. Strader, C.R.: Author-assigned keywords versus Library of Congress Subject Headings : implications for the cataloging of electronic theses and dissertations (2009) 0.02 
    0.019722648 = product of:
  0.04930662 = sum of:
    0.033125978 = weight(_text_:b in 3602) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033125978 = score(doc=3602,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14104119 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.23486741 = fieldWeight in 3602, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3602)
    0.016180642 = product of:
      0.032361284 = sum of:
        0.032361284 = weight(_text_:22 in 3602) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032361284 = score(doc=3602,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13940376 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.039808836 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3602, 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=3602)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Type
    b
  10. Peters, I.: Folksonomies : indexing and retrieval in Web 2.0 (2009) 0.02 
    0.01637895 = product of:
  0.040947374 = sum of:
    0.022083987 = weight(_text_:b in 4203) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022083987 = score(doc=4203,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14104119 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.15657827 = fieldWeight in 4203, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4203)
    0.018863387 = weight(_text_:u in 4203) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018863387 = score(doc=4203,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13035181 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.14471136 = fieldWeight in 4203, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4203)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Footnote
    Zugl.: Düsseldorf, Univ., Diss., 2009 u.d.T.: Peters, Isabella: Folksonomies in Wissensrepräsentation und Information Retrieval Rez. in: IWP - Information Wissenschaft & Praxis, 61(2010) Heft 8, S.469-470 (U. Spree): "... Nachdem sich die Rezensentin durch 418 Seiten Text hindurch gelesen hat, bleibt sie unentschieden, wie der auffällige Einsatz langer Zitate (im Durchschnitt drei Zitate, die länger als vier kleingedruckte Zeilen sind, pro Seite) zu bewerten ist, zumal die Zitate nicht selten rein illustrativen Charakter haben bzw. Isabella Peters noch einmal zitiert, was sie bereits in eigenen Worten ausgedrückt hat. Redundanz und Verlängerung der Lesezeit halten sich hier die Waage mit der Möglichkeit, dass sich die Leserin einen unmittelbaren Eindruck von Sprache und Duktus der zitierten Literatur verschaffen kann. Eindeutig unschön ist das Beenden eines Gedankens oder einer Argumentation durch ein Zitat (z. B. S. 170). Im deutschen Original entstehen auf diese Weise die für deutsche wissenschaftliche Qualifikationsarbeiten typischen denglischen Texte. Für alle, die sich für Wissensrepräsentation, Information Retrieval und kollaborative Informationsdienste interessieren, ist "Folksonomies : Indexing and Retrieval in Web 2.0" trotz der angeführten kleinen Mängel zur Lektüre und Anschaffung - wegen seines beinahe enzyklopädischen Charakters auch als Nachschlage- oder Referenzwerk geeignet - unbedingt zu empfehlen. Abschließend möchte ich mich in einem Punkt der Produktinfo von de Gruyter uneingeschränkt anschließen: ein "Grundlagenwerk für Folksonomies".
  11. Vander Wal, T.: Welcome to the Matrix! (2008) 0.01 
    0.0131484335 = product of:
  0.032871082 = sum of:
    0.022083987 = weight(_text_:b in 2881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022083987 = score(doc=2881,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14104119 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.15657827 = fieldWeight in 2881, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2881)
    0.010787095 = product of:
      0.02157419 = sum of:
        0.02157419 = weight(_text_:22 in 2881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02157419 = score(doc=2881,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13940376 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.039808836 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2881, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2881)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    22. 6.2009 9:15:45
    Source
    Good tags - bad tags: Social Tagging in der Wissensorganisation. Hrsg.: B. Gaiser, u.a
  12. Sack, H.; Waitelonis, J.: Zeitbezogene kollaborative Annotation zur Verbesserung der inhaltsbasierten Videosuche (2008) 0.01 
    0.010931017 = product of:
  0.054655083 = sum of:
    0.054655083 = weight(_text_:b in 2890) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.054655083 = score(doc=2890,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14104119 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.3875115 = fieldWeight in 2890, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2890)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Social-Tagging-Systeme ermöglichen die Annotation beliebiger Ressourcen mit nutzerbasierten Metadaten. Ressourcen wurden in diesem Zusammenhang stets als Ganzes betrachtet, ohne dass eine differenzierte Annotation einzelner Ressourcen-Fragmente möglich war. Dies fällt insbesondere bei zeitabhängigen Multimediadaten, wie z. B. Videodaten ins Gewicht, da der Nutzer oft nur an einzelnen Szenen einer umfangreichen Videodatei interessiert ist. Dieser Beitrag stellt eine einfache Möglichkeit der zeitbezogenen, kollaborativen Annotation von Multimediadaten vor und veranschaulicht deren Umsetzung am Beispiel der Videosuchmaschine yovisto.
    Source
    Good tags - bad tags: Social Tagging in der Wissensorganisation. Hrsg.: B. Gaiser, u.a
  13. Peters, I.: Benutzerzentrierte Erschließungsverfahren (2013) 0.01 
    0.009431695 = product of:
  0.047158472 = sum of:
    0.047158472 = weight(_text_:u in 718) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047158472 = score(doc=718,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13035181 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.3617784 = fieldWeight in 718, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=718)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation. Handbuch zur Einführung in die Informationswissenschaft und -praxis. 6., völlig neu gefaßte Ausgabe. Hrsg. von R. Kuhlen, W. Semar u. D. Strauch. Begründet von Klaus Laisiepen, Ernst Lutterbeck, Karl-Heinrich Meyer-Uhlenried
  14. Panke, S.; Gaiser, B.: "With my head up in the clouds" : Social Tagging aus Nutzersicht (2008) 0.01 
    0.009369442 = product of:
  0.04684721 = sum of:
    0.04684721 = weight(_text_:b in 2883) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04684721 = score(doc=2883,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14104119 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.3321527 = fieldWeight in 2883, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2883)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Good tags - bad tags: Social Tagging in der Wissensorganisation. Hrsg.: B. Gaiser, u.a
  15. Birkenhake, B.: Semantic Weblog : Erfahrungen vom Bloggen mit Tags und Ontologien (2008) 0.01 
    0.009369442 = product of:
  0.04684721 = sum of:
    0.04684721 = weight(_text_:b in 2894) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04684721 = score(doc=2894,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14104119 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.3321527 = fieldWeight in 2894, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2894)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Good tags - bad tags: Social Tagging in der Wissensorganisation. Hrsg.: B. Gaiser, u.a
  16. Hänger, C.: Good tags or bad tags? : Tagging im Kontext der bibliothekarischen Sacherschließung (2008) 0.01 
    0.008833595 = product of:
  0.044167973 = sum of:
    0.044167973 = weight(_text_:b in 2886) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044167973 = score(doc=2886,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14104119 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.31315655 = fieldWeight in 2886, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2886)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Good tags - bad tags: Social Tagging in der Wissensorganisation. Hrsg.: B. Gaiser, u.a
  17. Matthews, B.; Jones, C.; Puzon, B.; Moon, J.; Tudhope, D.; Golub, K.; Nielsen, M.L.: ¬An evaluation of enhancing social tagging with a knowledge organization system (2010) 0.01 
    0.007807868 = product of:
  0.03903934 = sum of:
    0.03903934 = weight(_text_:b in 4171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03903934 = score(doc=4171,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14104119 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.2767939 = fieldWeight in 4171, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4171)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
  18. Lin, N.; Li, D.; Ding, Y.; He, B.; Qin, Z.; Tang, J.; Li, J.; Dong, T.: ¬The dynamic features of Delicious, Flickr, and YouTube (2012) 0.01 
    0.007807868 = product of:
  0.03903934 = sum of:
    0.03903934 = weight(_text_:b in 4970) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03903934 = score(doc=4970,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14104119 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.2767939 = fieldWeight in 4970, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4970)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    This article investigates the dynamic features of social tagging vocabularies in Delicious, Flickr, and YouTube from 2003 to 2008. Three algorithms are designed to study the macro- and micro-tag growth as well as the dynamics of taggers' activities, respectively. Moreover, we propose a Tagger Tag Resource Latent Dirichlet Allocation (TTR-LDA) model to explore the evolution of topics emerging from those social vocabularies. Our results show that (a) at the macro level, tag growth in all the three tagging systems obeys power law distribution with exponents lower than 1; at the micro level, the tag growth of popular resources in all three tagging systems follows a similar power law distribution; (b) the exponents of tag growth vary in different evolving stages of resources; (c) the growth of number of taggers associated with different popular resources presents a feature of convergence over time; (d) the active level of taggers has a positive correlation with the macro-tag growth of different tagging systems; and (e) some topics evolve into several subtopics over time while others experience relatively stable stages in which their contents do not change much, and certain groups of taggers continue their interests in them.
  19. Xu, C.; Ma, B.; Chen, X.; Ma, F.: Social tagging in the scholarly world (2013) 0.01 
    0.007807868 = product of:
  0.03903934 = sum of:
    0.03903934 = weight(_text_:b in 1091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03903934 = score(doc=1091,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14104119 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.2767939 = fieldWeight in 1091, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1091)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    The number of research studies on social tagging has increased rapidly in the past years, but few of them highlight the characteristics and research trends in social tagging. A set of 862 academic documents relating to social tagging and published from 2005 to 2011 was thus examined using bibliometric analysis as well as the social network analysis technique. The results show that social tagging, as a research area, develops rapidly and attracts an increasing number of new entrants. There are no key authors, publication sources, or research groups that dominate the research domain of social tagging. Research on social tagging appears to focus mainly on the following three aspects: (a) components and functions of social tagging (e.g., tags, tagging objects, and tagging network), (b) taggers' behaviors and interface design, and (c) tags' organization and usage in social tagging. The trend suggest that more researchers turn to the latter two integrated with human computer interface and information retrieval, although the first aspect is the fundamental one in social tagging. Also, more studies relating to social tagging pay attention to multimedia tagging objects and not only text tagging. Previous research on social tagging was limited to a few subject domains such as information science and computer science. As an interdisciplinary research area, social tagging is anticipated to attract more researchers from different disciplines. More practical applications, especially in high-tech companies, is an encouraging research trend in social tagging.
  20. Voß, J.: Vom Social Tagging zum Semantic Tagging (2008) 0.01 
    0.007729395 = product of:
  0.038646974 = sum of:
    0.038646974 = weight(_text_:b in 2884) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038646974 = score(doc=2884,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14104119 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039808836 = queryNorm
        0.27401197 = fieldWeight in 2884, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2884)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Good tags - bad tags: Social Tagging in der Wissensorganisation. Hrsg.: B. Gaiser, u.a

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 31
  • d 25

Types

  • a 51
  • m 4
  • el 3
  • s 3
  • b 2
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications