Search (23 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × author_ss:"Mayr, P."
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Lauser, B.; Johannsen, G.; Caracciolo, C.; Hage, W.R. van; Keizer, J.; Mayr, P.: Comparing human and automatic thesaurus mapping approaches in the agricultural domain (2008) 0.04
    0.040847298 = product of:
      0.081694596 = sum of:
        0.01213797 = weight(_text_:information in 2627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01213797 = score(doc=2627,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 2627, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2627)
        0.06955662 = sum of:
          0.035403505 = weight(_text_:organization in 2627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.035403505 = score(doc=2627,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050415643 = queryNorm
              0.19695997 = fieldWeight in 2627, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2627)
          0.03415312 = weight(_text_:22 in 2627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03415312 = score(doc=2627,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050415643 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2627, 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=2627)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Knowledge organization systems (KOS), like thesauri and other controlled vocabularies, are used to provide subject access to information systems across the web. Due to the heterogeneity of these systems, mapping between vocabularies becomes crucial for retrieving relevant information. However, mapping thesauri is a laborious task, and thus big efforts are being made to automate the mapping process. This paper examines two mapping approaches involving the agricultural thesaurus AGROVOC, one machine-created and one human created. We are addressing the basic question "What are the pros and cons of human and automatic mapping and how can they complement each other?" By pointing out the difficulties in specific cases or groups of cases and grouping the sample into simple and difficult types of mappings, we show the limitations of current automatic methods and come up with some basic recommendations on what approach to use when.
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
  2. Reichert, S.; Mayr, P.: Untersuchung von Relevanzeigenschaften in einem kontrollierten Eyetracking-Experiment (2012) 0.02
    0.017528716 = product of:
      0.035057433 = sum of:
        0.014565565 = weight(_text_:information in 328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014565565 = score(doc=328,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 328, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=328)
        0.02049187 = product of:
          0.04098374 = sum of:
            0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04098374 = score(doc=328,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 328, 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=328)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    In diesem Artikel wird ein Eyetracking-Experiment beschrieben, bei dem untersucht wurde, wann und auf Basis welcher Informationen Relevanzentscheidungen bei der themenbezogenen Dokumentenbewertung fallen und welche Faktoren auf die Relevanzentscheidung einwirken. Nach einer kurzen Einführung werden relevante Studien aufgeführt, in denen Eyetracking als Untersuchungsmethode für Interaktionsverhalten mit Ergebnislisten (Information Seeking Behavior) verwendet wurde. Nutzerverhalten wird hierbei vor allem durch unterschiedliche Aufgaben-Typen, dargestellte Informationen und durch das Ranking eines Ergebnisses beeinflusst. Durch EyetrackingUntersuchungen lassen sich Nutzer außerdem in verschiedene Klassen von Bewertungs- und Lesetypen einordnen. Diese Informationen können als implizites Feedback genutzt werden, um so die Suche zu personalisieren und um die Relevanz von Suchergebnissen ohne aktives Zutun des Users zu erhöhen. In einem explorativen Eyetracking-Experiment mit 12 Studenten der Hochschule Darmstadt werden anhand der Länge der Gesamtbewertung, Anzahl der Fixationen, Anzahl der besuchten Metadatenelemente und Länge des Scanpfades zwei typische Bewertungstypen identifiziert. Das Metadatenfeld Abstract wird im Experiment zuverlässig als wichtigste Dokumenteigenschaft für die Zuordnung von Relevanz ermittelt.
    Date
    22. 7.2012 19:25:54
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 63(2012) H.3, S.145-156
  3. Mayr, P.; Schaer, P.; Mutschke, P.: ¬A science model driven retrieval prototype (2011) 0.02
    0.015770756 = product of:
      0.03154151 = sum of:
        0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01029941 = score(doc=649,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 649, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=649)
        0.021242103 = product of:
          0.042484205 = sum of:
            0.042484205 = weight(_text_:organization in 649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.042484205 = score(doc=649,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.23635197 = fieldWeight in 649, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=649)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    This paper is about a better understanding of the structure and dynamics of science and the usage of these insights for compensating the typical problems that arises in metadata-driven Digital Libraries. Three science model driven retrieval services are presented: co-word analysis based query expansion, re-ranking via Bradfordizing and author centrality. The services are evaluated with relevance assessments from which two important implications emerge: (1) precision values of the retrieval services are the same or better than the tf-idf retrieval baseline and (2) each service retrieved a disjoint set of documents. The different services each favor quite other - but still relevant - documents than pure term-frequency based rankings. The proposed models and derived retrieval services therefore open up new viewpoints on the scientific knowledge space and provide an alternative framework to structure scholarly information systems.
    Source
    Concepts in context: Proceedings of the Cologne Conference on Interoperability and Semantics in Knowledge Organization July 19th - 20th, 2010. Eds.: F. Boteram, W. Gödert u. J. Hubrich
  4. Mayr, P.; Walter, A.-K.: Mapping Knowledge Organization Systems (2008) 0.01
    0.010621051 = product of:
      0.042484205 = sum of:
        0.042484205 = product of:
          0.08496841 = sum of:
            0.08496841 = weight(_text_:organization in 1676) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08496841 = score(doc=1676,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.47270393 = fieldWeight in 1676, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1676)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Die Vernetzung der Informationssysteme und Datenbanken aus dem wissenschaftlichen Fachinformationsbereich lässt bislang den Aspekt der Kompatibilität und Konkordanz zwischen kontrollierten Vokabularen (semantische Heterogenität) weitgehend unberücksichtigt. Gerade aber für den inhaltlichen Zugang sachlich heterogen erschlössener Bestände spielen für den Nutzer die semantischen Querverbindungen (Mappings /Crosskonkordanzen) zwischen den zugrunde liegenden Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS) der Datenbanken eine entscheidende Rolle. Der Beitrag stellt Einsatzmöglichkeiten und Beispiele von Crosskonkordanzen (CK) im Projekt "Kompetenznetzwerk Modellbildung und Heterogenitätsbehandlung" (KoMoHe) sowie das Netz der bis dato entstandenen Terminolögie-Überstiege vor. Die am IZ entstandenen CK sollen künftig über einen Terminolögie-Service als Web Service genutzt werden, dieser wird im Beitrag exemplarisch vorgestellt.
    Source
    Kompatibilität, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation - Compatibility, Media and Ethics in Knowledge Organization: Proceedings der 10. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation Wien, 3.-5. Juli 2006 - Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the German Section of the International Society of Knowledge Organization Vienna, 3-5 July 2006. Ed.: H.P. Ohly, S. Netscher u. K. Mitgutsch
  5. Momeni, F.; Mayr, P.: Analyzing the research output presented at European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems workshops (2000-2015) (2016) 0.01
    0.0076650837 = product of:
      0.030660335 = sum of:
        0.030660335 = product of:
          0.06132067 = sum of:
            0.06132067 = weight(_text_:organization in 3106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06132067 = score(doc=3106,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.34114468 = fieldWeight in 3106, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3106)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    In this paper we analyze a major part of the research output of the Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) community in the period 2000 to 2015 from a network analytical perspective. We fo- cus on the paper output presented at the European NKOS workshops in the last 15 years. Our open dataset, the "NKOS bibliography", includes 14 workshop agendas (ECDL 2000-2010, TPDL 2011-2015) and 4 special issues on NKOS (2001, 2004, 2006 and 2015) which cover 171 papers with 218 distinct authors in total. A focus of the analysis is the visualization of co-authorship networks in this interdisciplinary eld. We used standard network analytic measures like degree and betweenness centrality to de- scribe the co-authorship distribution in our NKOS dataset. We can see in our dataset that 15% (with degree=0) of authors had no co-authorship with others and 53% of them had a maximum of 3 cooperations with other authors. 32% had at least 4 co-authors for all of their papers. The NKOS co-author network in the "NKOS bibliography" is a typical co- authorship network with one relatively large component, many smaller components and many isolated co-authorships or triples.
    Source
    Proceedings of the 15th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems Workshop (NKOS 2016) co-located with the 20th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries 2016 (TPDL 2016), Hannover, Germany, September 9, 2016. Edi. by Philipp Mayr et al. [http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1676/=urn:nbn:de:0074-1676-5]
  6. Mayr, P.; Scharnhorst, A.: Scientometrics and information retrieval - weak-links revitalized (2015) 0.01
    0.0072827823 = product of:
      0.02913113 = sum of:
        0.02913113 = weight(_text_:information in 1688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02913113 = score(doc=1688,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.3291521 = fieldWeight in 1688, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1688)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Footnote
    Editorial zu einem Special Issue "Combining bibliometrics and information retrieval"
  7. Mutschke, P.; Mayr, P.: Science models for search : a study on combining scholarly information retrieval and scientometrics (2015) 0.01
    0.006068985 = product of:
      0.02427594 = sum of:
        0.02427594 = weight(_text_:information in 1695) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02427594 = score(doc=1695,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 1695, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1695)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einem Special Issue "Combining bibliometrics and information retrieval"
  8. Carevic, Z.; Krichel, T.; Mayr, P.: Assessing a human mediated current awareness service (2015) 0.01
    0.006068985 = product of:
      0.02427594 = sum of:
        0.02427594 = weight(_text_:information in 2992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02427594 = score(doc=2992,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 2992, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2992)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Re:inventing information science in the networked society: Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Information Science, Zadar/Croatia, 19th-21st May 2015. Eds.: F. Pehar, C. Schloegl u. C. Wolff
  9. Daniel, F.; Maier, C.; Mayr, P.; Wirtz, H.-C.: ¬Die Kunden dort bedienen, wo sie sind : DigiAuskunft besteht Bewährungsprobe / Seit Anfang 2006 in Betrieb (2006) 0.01
    0.0059767957 = product of:
      0.023907183 = sum of:
        0.023907183 = product of:
          0.047814365 = sum of:
            0.047814365 = weight(_text_:22 in 5991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047814365 = score(doc=5991,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5991, 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=5991)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    8. 7.2006 21:06:22
  10. Mayr, P.; Petras, V.: Building a Terminology Network for Search : the KoMoHe project (2008) 0.01
    0.0059767957 = product of:
      0.023907183 = sum of:
        0.023907183 = product of:
          0.047814365 = sum of:
            0.047814365 = weight(_text_:22 in 2618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047814365 = score(doc=2618,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2618, 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=2618)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
  11. Mayr, P.; Umstätter, W.: ¬Eine bibliometrische Zeitschriftenanalyse mit Jol Scientrometrics und NfD bzw. IWP (2008) 0.01
    0.0052030715 = product of:
      0.020812286 = sum of:
        0.020812286 = weight(_text_:information in 2302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020812286 = score(doc=2302,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 2302, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2302)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    In der Studie sind 3.889 Datensätze analysiert worden, die im Zeitraum 1976-2004 in der Datenbank Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA) im Forschungsbereich der Informetrie nachgewiesen sind und das Wachstum auf diesem Gebiet belegen. Die Studie zeigt anhand einer Bradford-Verteilung (power law) die Kernzeitschriften in diesem Feld und bestätigt auf der Basis dieses LISA-Datensatzes, dass die Gründung einer neuen Zeitschrift, "Journals of Informetrics" (JoI), 2007 etwa zur rechten Zeit erfolgte. Im Verhältnis dazu wird die Entwicklung der Zeitschrift Scientometrics betrachtet und auch die der "Nachrichten für Dokumentation" (NfD) bzw. "Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis" (IWP).
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 59(2008) H.6/7, S.353-360
  12. Mayr, P.: ¬Die virtuelle Steinsuppe : kooperatives Verwalten von elektronischen Ressourcen mit Digilink (2007) 0.00
    0.004855188 = product of:
      0.019420752 = sum of:
        0.019420752 = weight(_text_:information in 567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019420752 = score(doc=567,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 567, 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=567)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Wa(h)re Information: 29. Österreichischer Bibliothekartag Bregenz, 19.-23.9.2006. Hrsg.: Harald Weigel
    Theme
    Information Gateway
  13. Mayr, P.; Mutschke, P.; Petras, V.: Reducing semantic complexity in distributed digital libraries : Treatment of term vagueness and document re-ranking (2008) 0.00
    0.0037164795 = product of:
      0.014865918 = sum of:
        0.014865918 = weight(_text_:information in 1909) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014865918 = score(doc=1909,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 1909, 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=1909)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The general science portal "vascoda" merges structured, high-quality information collections from more than 40 providers on the basis of search engine technology (FAST) and a concept which treats semantic heterogeneity between different controlled vocabularies. First experiences with the portal show some weaknesses of this approach which come out in most metadata-driven Digital Libraries (DLs) or subject specific portals. The purpose of the paper is to propose models to reduce the semantic complexity in heterogeneous DLs. The aim is to introduce value-added services (treatment of term vagueness and document re-ranking) that gain a certain quality in DLs if they are combined with heterogeneity components established in the project "Competence Center Modeling and Treatment of Semantic Heterogeneity". Design/methodology/approach - Two methods, which are derived from scientometrics and network analysis, will be implemented with the objective to re-rank result sets by the following structural properties: the ranking of the results by core journals (so-called Bradfordizing) and ranking by centrality of authors in co-authorship networks. Findings - The methods, which will be implemented, focus on the query and on the result side of a search and are designed to positively influence each other. Conceptually, they will improve the search quality and guarantee that the most relevant documents in result sets will be ranked higher. Originality/value - The central impact of the paper focuses on the integration of three structural value-adding methods, which aim at reducing the semantic complexity represented in distributed DLs at several stages in the information retrieval process: query construction, search and ranking and re-ranking.
    Theme
    Information Gateway
  14. Mayr, P.: DigiLink - Die dritte Generation der Linklisten (2005) 0.00
    0.0034331365 = product of:
      0.013732546 = sum of:
        0.013732546 = weight(_text_:information in 3582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013732546 = score(doc=3582,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 3582, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3582)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Theme
    Information Gateway
  15. Mayr, P.; Mutschke, P.; Petras, V.; Schaer, P.; Sure, Y.: Applying science models for search (2010) 0.00
    0.0034331365 = product of:
      0.013732546 = sum of:
        0.013732546 = weight(_text_:information in 4663) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013732546 = score(doc=4663,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 4663, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4663)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Information und Wissen: global, sozial und frei? Proceedings des 12. Internationalen Symposiums für Informationswissenschaft (ISI 2011) ; Hildesheim, 9. - 11. März 2011. Hrsg.: J. Griesbaum, T. Mandl u. C. Womser-Hacker
  16. Mayr, P.; Tosques, F.: Webometrische Analysen mit Hilfe der Google Web APIs (2005) 0.00
    0.0030039945 = product of:
      0.012015978 = sum of:
        0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 3189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012015978 = score(doc=3189,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3189, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3189)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 56(2005) H.1, S.41-48
  17. Mayr, P.; Mutschke, P.; Schaer, P.; Sure, Y.: Mehrwertdienste für das Information Retrieval (2013) 0.00
    0.0030039945 = product of:
      0.012015978 = sum of:
        0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 935) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012015978 = score(doc=935,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 935, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=935)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
  18. Mayr, P.: Google Scholar als akademische Suchmaschine (2009) 0.00
    0.0029731835 = product of:
      0.011892734 = sum of:
        0.011892734 = weight(_text_:information in 3023) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011892734 = score(doc=3023,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.1343758 = fieldWeight in 3023, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3023)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Neben den klassischen Informationsanbietern Bibliothek, Fachinformation und den Verlagen sind Internetsuchmaschinen inzwischen fester Bestandteil bei der Recherche nach wissenschaftlicher Information. Scirus (Elsevier, 2004) und Google Scholar sind zwei Beispiele für Suchdienste kommerzieller Suchmaschinen-Unternehmen, die eine Einschränkung auf den wissenschaftlichen Dokumentenraum anstreben und nennenswerte Dokumentzahlen in allen Disziplinen generieren. Der Vergleich der Treffermengen für beliebige Suchthemen zeigt, dass die Wahl des Suchsystems, des Dokumentenpools und der Dokumenttypen entscheidenden Einfluss auf die Relevanz und damit letztlich auch die Akzeptanz des Suchergebnisses hat. Tabelle 1 verdeutlicht die Mengenunterschiede am Beispiel der Trefferergebnisse für die Suchbegriffe "search engines" bzw. "Suchmaschinen" in der allgemeinen Internetsuchmaschine Google, der wissenschaftlichen Suchmaschine Google Scholar (GS) und der größten fachübergreifenden bibliographischen Literaturdatenbank Web of Science (WoS). Der Anteil der Dokumente, die in diesem Fall eindeutig der Wissenschaft zuzuordnen sind (siehe GS und insbesondere WoS in Tabelle 1), liegt gegenüber der allgemeinen Websuche lediglich im Promille-Bereich. Dieses Beispiel veranschaulicht, dass es ausgesprochen problematisch sein kann, fachwissenschaftliche Fragestellungen ausschließlich mit Internetsuchmaschinen zu recherchieren. Der Anteil der fachwissenschaftlich relevanten Dokumente in diesem Trefferpool ist i. d. R. sehr gering. Damit sinkt die Wahrscheinlichkeit, wissenschaftlich relevantes (z. B. einen Zeitschriftenaufsatz) auf den ersten Trefferseiten zu finden, deutlich ab.
    Die drei oben genannten Suchsysteme (Google, GS und WoS) unterscheiden sich in mehrerlei Hinsicht fundamental und eignen sich daher gut, um in die Grundthematik dieses Artikels einzuleiten. Die obigen Suchsysteme erschließen zunächst unterschiedliche Suchräume, und dies auf sehr spezifische Weise. Während Google frei zugängliche und über Hyperlink adressierbare Dokumente im Internet erfasst, gehen die beiden akademischen Suchsysteme deutlich selektiver bei der Inhaltserschließung vor. Google Scholar erfasst neben frei zugänglichen elektronischen Publikationstypen im Internet hauptsächlich wissenschaftliche Dokumente, die direkt von den akademischen Verlagen bezogen werden. Das WoS, das auf den unterschiedlichen bibliographischen Datenbanken und Zitationsindizes des ehemaligen "Institute for Scientific Information" (ISI) basiert, selektiert gegenüber den rein automatischen brute-force-Ansätzen der Internetsuchmaschine über einen qualitativen Ansatz. In den Datenbanken des WoS werden ausschließlich internationale Fachzeitschriften erfasst, die ein kontrolliertes Peer-Review durchlaufen. Insgesamt werden ca. 12.000 Zeitschriften ausgewertet und über die Datenbank verfügbar gemacht. Wie bereits erwähnt, spielt neben der Abgrenzung der Suchräume und Dokumenttypen die Zugänglichkeit und Relevanz der Dokumente eine entscheidende Bedeutung für den Benutzer. Die neueren technologischen Entwicklungen des Web Information Retrieval (IR), wie sie Google oder GS implementieren, werten insbesondere frei zugängliche Dokumente mit ihrer gesamten Text- und Linkinformation automatisch aus. Diese Verfahren sind vor allem deshalb erfolgreich, weil sie Ergebnislisten nach Relevanz gerankt darstellen, einfach und schnell zu recherchieren sind und direkt auf die Volltexte verweisen. Die qualitativen Verfahren der traditionellen Informationsanbieter (z. B. WoS) hingegen zeigen genau bei diesen Punkten (Ranking, Einfachheit und Volltextzugriff) Schwächen, überzeugen aber vor allem durch ihre Stringenz, in diesem Fall die selektive Aufnahme von qualitätsgeprüften Dokumenten in das System und die inhaltliche Erschließung der Dokumente (siehe dazu Mayr und Petras, 2008).
  19. Mayr, P.; Walter, A.-K.: Abdeckung und Aktualität des Suchdienstes Google Scholar (2006) 0.00
    0.0025748524 = product of:
      0.01029941 = sum of:
        0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 5131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01029941 = score(doc=5131,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 5131, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5131)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 57(2006) H.3, S.133-140
  20. Mayr, P.: Bradfordizing als Re-Ranking-Ansatz in Literaturinformationssystemen (2011) 0.00
    0.0025748524 = product of:
      0.01029941 = sum of:
        0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 4292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01029941 = score(doc=4292,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4292, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4292)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 62(2011) H.1, S.3-10