-
Milstead, J.L.: Standards for relationships between subject indexing terms (2001)
0.15
0.14562103 = product of:
0.19416137 = sum of:
0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 1148) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01029941 = score(doc=1148,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1148, 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=1148)
0.16261986 = weight(_text_:standards in 1148) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.16261986 = score(doc=1148,freq=12.0), product of:
0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.7237192 = fieldWeight in 1148, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1148)
0.021242103 = product of:
0.042484205 = sum of:
0.042484205 = weight(_text_:organization in 1148) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042484205 = score(doc=1148,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.23635197 = fieldWeight in 1148, 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=1148)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.75 = coord(3/4)
- Abstract
- Relationships between the terms in thesauri and Indexes are the subject of national and international standards. The standards for thesauri enumerate and provide criteria for three basic types of relationship: equivalence, hierarchical, and associative. Standards and guidelines for indexes draw an the thesaurus standards to provide less detailed guidance for showing relationships between the terms used in an Index. The international standard for multilingual thesauri adds recommendations for assuring equal treatment of the languages of a thesaurus. The present standards were developed when lookup and search were essentially manual, and the value of the kinds of relationships has never been determined. It is not clear whether users understand or can use the distinctions between kinds of relationships. On the other hand, sophisticated text analysis systems may be able both to assist with development of more powerful term relationship schemes and to use the relationships to improve retrieval.
- Series
- Information science and knowledge management; vol.2
- Source
- Relationships in the organization of knowledge. Eds.: Bean, C.A. u. R. Green
-
Dextre Clarke, S.G.; Gilchrist, A.; Will, L.: Revision and extension of thesaurus standards (2004)
0.12
0.11920848 = product of:
0.15894464 = sum of:
0.013732546 = weight(_text_:information in 2615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013732546 = score(doc=2615,freq=8.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 2615, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2615)
0.12518483 = weight(_text_:standards in 2615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12518483 = score(doc=2615,freq=16.0), product of:
0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.5571193 = fieldWeight in 2615, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2615)
0.020027246 = product of:
0.040054493 = sum of:
0.040054493 = weight(_text_:organization in 2615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040054493 = score(doc=2615,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.22283478 = fieldWeight in 2615, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2615)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.75 = coord(3/4)
- Abstract
- The current standards for monolingual and multilingual thesauri are long overdue for an update. This applies to the international standards ISO 2788 and ISO 5964, as well as the corresponding national standards in several countries and the American standard ANSI/NISO Z39.19. Work is now under way in the UK and in the USA to revise and extend the standards, with particular emphasis on interoperability needs in our world of vast electronic networks. Work in the UK is starting with the British Standards, in the hope of leading on to one international standard to serve all. Some of the issues still under discussion include the treatment of facet analysis, coverage of additional types of controlled vocabulary such as classification schemes, taxonomies and ontologies, and mapping from one vocabulary to another. 1. Are thesaurus standards still needed? Since the 1960s, even before the renowned Cranfield experiments (Cleverdon et al., 1966; Cleverdon, 1967) arguments have raged over the usefulness or otherwise of controlled vocabularies. The case has never been proved definitively one way or the other. At the same time, a recognition has become widespread that no one search method can answer all retrieval requirements. In today's environment of very large networks of resources, the skilled information professional uses a range of techniques. Among these, controlled vocabularies are valued alongside others. The first international standard for monolingual thesauri was issued in 1974. In those days, the main application was for postcoordinate indexing and retrieval from document collections or bibliographic databases. For many information professionals the only practicable alternative to a thesaurus was a classification scheme. And so the thesaurus developed a strong following. After computer systems with full text search capability became widely available, however, the arguments against controlled vocabularies gained more followers. The cost of building and maintaining a thesaurus or a classification scheme was a strong disincentive. Today's databases are typically immense compared with those three decades ago. Full text searching is taken for granted, not just in discrete databases but across all the resources in an intranet or even the Internet. But intranets have brought particular frustration as users discover that despite all the computer power, they cannot find items which they know to be present an the network. So the trend against controlled vocabularies is now being reversed, as many information professionals are turning to them for help. Standards to guide them are still in demand.
- Series
- Advances in knowledge organization; vol.9
- Source
- Knowledge organization and the global information society: Proceedings of the 8th International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004, London, UK. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
-
Relationships in the organization of knowledge (2001)
0.08
0.079195365 = product of:
0.10559382 = sum of:
0.014865918 = weight(_text_:information in 1139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014865918 = score(doc=1139,freq=6.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 1139, 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=1139)
0.0553244 = weight(_text_:standards in 1139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0553244 = score(doc=1139,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.24621427 = fieldWeight in 1139, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1139)
0.035403505 = product of:
0.07080701 = sum of:
0.07080701 = weight(_text_:organization in 1139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07080701 = score(doc=1139,freq=8.0), product of:
0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.39391994 = fieldWeight in 1139, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1139)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.75 = coord(3/4)
- Abstract
- With fourteen contributions grouped in two sections, "Theoretical background" and "Systems", this work discusses the most common relationships used in the organization of recorded knowledge to facilitate information retrieval: the relationships between bibliographic entities, intra- and intertextual relationships, relevance relationships, and subject relationships in thesauri and other classificatory structures. The editors' goal is to "spur further interest, debate, research, and development".
- Content
- Enthält u.a. die Beiträge: GREEN, R.: Relationships in the organization of knowledge: an overview; TILLETT, B.: Bibliographic relationships; CLARKE, S.G.D.: Thesaural relationships; MILSTEAD, J.L.: Standards for relationships between subject indexing terms; HUDON, M.: Relationships in multilingual thesauri; BODENREIDER, O. u. C.A. BEAN: Relationships among knowledge structures: vocabulary integration within a subject domain; BEGHTOL, C.: Relationships in classificatory structure and meaning; BEAN, C.A. u. R. GREEN: Relevance relationships; EL-HOSHY, L.M.: Relationships in Library of Congress Subject Headings; MOLHOLT, P.: The Art and Architecture Thesaurus: controlling relationships through rules and structure; NELSON, S.J. u.a.: Relationships in Medical Subject Headings (MeSH); NEELAMEGHAN, A.: Lateral relationships in multicultural, mulrilingual databases in the spiritual and religous domains: the OM information service; SATIJA, M.P.: Relationships in Ranganathan's Colon classification; MITCHELL, J.S.: Relationships in the Dewey Decimal Classification System
- Footnote
- Rez. in: Knowledge organization 28(2001) no.4, S.208-210 (S. Betrand-Gastaldy)
- Series
- Information science and knowledge management; vol.2
-
Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Thesaural relationships (2001)
0.05
0.05469762 = product of:
0.10939524 = sum of:
0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012015978 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1149, 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=1149)
0.09737927 = sum of:
0.049564905 = weight(_text_:organization in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049564905 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.27574396 = fieldWeight in 1149, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1149)
0.047814365 = weight(_text_:22 in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047814365 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1149, 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=1149)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Date
- 22. 9.2007 15:45:57
- Series
- Information science and knowledge management; vol.2
- Source
- Relationships in the organization of knowledge. Eds.: Bean, C.A. u. R. Green
-
Degez, D.: Compatibilité des langages d'indexation mariage, cohabitation ou fusion? : Quelques examples concrèts (1998)
0.05
0.050680675 = product of:
0.10136135 = sum of:
0.077454165 = weight(_text_:standards in 2245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.077454165 = score(doc=2245,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.34469998 = fieldWeight in 2245, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2245)
0.023907183 = product of:
0.047814365 = sum of:
0.047814365 = weight(_text_:22 in 2245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047814365 = score(doc=2245,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2245, 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=2245)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- To illustrate the theoretical analysis presented by J. Maniez published in Documentaliste 34(1997) nos.4/5 presents some concrete examples drawn for experience of the difficulties increasingly faced in trying to make different indexing languages compatible. Various types of problems may be considered: comparing semantic terms and relationships that compose indexing languages, setting standards for writing and vocabulary, and opposing pre and post coordinated descriptors. Proposes several solutions and discusses the need for further applied research in this area
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
-
Farradane, J.: Concept organization for information retrieval (1967)
0.04
0.041775614 = product of:
0.08355123 = sum of:
0.03398632 = weight(_text_:information in 35) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03398632 = score(doc=35,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.3840108 = fieldWeight in 35, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=35)
0.049564905 = product of:
0.09912981 = sum of:
0.09912981 = weight(_text_:organization in 35) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09912981 = score(doc=35,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.5514879 = fieldWeight in 35, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=35)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Source
- Information storage and retrieval. 3(1967) S.297-314
-
Subject indexing systems : concepts, methods and techniques (1998)
0.03
0.03154151 = product of:
0.06308302 = sum of:
0.02059882 = weight(_text_:information in 6022) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02059882 = score(doc=6022,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 6022, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6022)
0.042484205 = product of:
0.08496841 = sum of:
0.08496841 = weight(_text_:organization in 6022) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08496841 = score(doc=6022,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.47270393 = fieldWeight in 6022, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6022)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Footnote
- Rez. in: Knowledge organization 27(2000) no.3, S.177-178 (M.P. Satija)
- Imprint
- Calcutta : Indian Association of Special Libraries and Information Centres (IASLIC)
-
Green, R.: Relationships in the organization of knowledge : an overview (2001)
0.03
0.027470224 = product of:
0.054940447 = sum of:
0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 1142) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012015978 = score(doc=1142,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1142, 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=1142)
0.04292447 = product of:
0.08584894 = sum of:
0.08584894 = weight(_text_:organization in 1142) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08584894 = score(doc=1142,freq=6.0), product of:
0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.47760257 = fieldWeight in 1142, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1142)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Relationships are specified by simultaneously identifying a semantic relationship and the set of participants involved in it, pairing each participant with its role in the relationship. Properties pertaining to the participant set and the nature of the relationship are explored. Relationships in the organization of knowledge are surveyed, encompassing relationships between units of recorded knowledge based an descriptions of those units; intratextual and intertextual relationships, including relationships based an text structure, citation relationships, and hypertext links; subject relationships in thesauri and other classificatory structures, including relationships for literature-based knowledge discovery; and relevance relationships.
- Series
- Information science and knowledge management; vol.2
- Source
- Relationships in the organization of knowledge. Eds.: Bean, C.A. u. R. Green
-
Fugmann, R.: Unusual possibilities in indexing and classification (1990)
0.03
0.026893519 = product of:
0.053787038 = sum of:
0.013732546 = weight(_text_:information in 4781) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013732546 = score(doc=4781,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 4781, 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=4781)
0.040054493 = product of:
0.080108985 = sum of:
0.080108985 = weight(_text_:organization in 4781) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.080108985 = score(doc=4781,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.44566956 = fieldWeight in 4781, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4781)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Contemporary research in information science has concentrated on the development of methods for the algorithmic processing of natural language texts. Often, the equivalence of this approach to the intellectual technique of content analysis and indexing is claimed. It is, however, disregarded that contemporary intellectual techniques are far from exploiting their full capabilities. This is largely due to the omission of vocabulary categorisation. It is demonstrated how categorisation can drastically improve the quality of indexing and classification, and, hence, of retrieval
- Series
- Advances in knowledge organization; vol.1
- Source
- Tools for knowledge organization and the human interface. Proceedings of the 1st International ISKO Conference, Darmstadt, 14.-17.8.1990. Pt.1
-
Green, R.; Fraser, L.: Patterns in verbal polysemy (2004)
0.03
0.026893519 = product of:
0.053787038 = sum of:
0.013732546 = weight(_text_:information in 2621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013732546 = score(doc=2621,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 2621, 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=2621)
0.040054493 = product of:
0.080108985 = sum of:
0.080108985 = weight(_text_:organization in 2621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.080108985 = score(doc=2621,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.44566956 = fieldWeight in 2621, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2621)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Series
- Advances in knowledge organization; vol.9
- Source
- Knowledge organization and the global information society: Proceedings of the 8th International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004, London, UK. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
-
Francu, V.: ¬A linguistic approach to information languages (2003)
0.03
0.026284594 = product of:
0.05256919 = sum of:
0.017165681 = weight(_text_:information in 3538) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017165681 = score(doc=3538,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 3538, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3538)
0.035403505 = product of:
0.07080701 = sum of:
0.07080701 = weight(_text_:organization in 3538) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07080701 = score(doc=3538,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.39391994 = fieldWeight in 3538, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3538)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Source
- Tendencias de investigación en organización del conocimient: IV Cologuio International de Ciencas de la Documentación , VI Congreso del Capitulo Espanol de ISKO = Trends in knowledge organization research. Eds.: J.A. Frias u. C. Travieso
-
Szostak, R.: Toward a classification of relationships (2012)
0.03
0.026020419 = product of:
0.052040838 = sum of:
0.01699316 = weight(_text_:information in 131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01699316 = score(doc=131,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 131, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=131)
0.03504768 = product of:
0.07009536 = sum of:
0.07009536 = weight(_text_:organization in 131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07009536 = score(doc=131,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.38996086 = fieldWeight in 131, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=131)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Several attempts have been made to develop a classification of relationships, but none of these have been widely accepted or applied within information science. It would seem that information scientists, while appreciating the potential value of a classification of relationships, have found all previous classifications to be too complicated in application relative to the benefits they provide. This paper begins by reviewing previous attempts and drawing lessons from these. It then surveys a range of sources within and beyond the field of knowledge organization that can together provide the basis for the development of a novel classification of relationships. One critical insight is that relationships governing causation/influence should be accorded priority.
- Source
- Knowledge organization. 39(2012) no.2, S.83-94
-
Miller, U.; Teitelbaum, R.: Pre-coordination and post-coordination : past and future (2002)
0.02
0.024407204 = product of:
0.04881441 = sum of:
0.024031956 = weight(_text_:information in 1395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024031956 = score(doc=1395,freq=8.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 1395, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1395)
0.024782453 = product of:
0.049564905 = sum of:
0.049564905 = weight(_text_:organization in 1395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049564905 = score(doc=1395,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.27574396 = fieldWeight in 1395, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1395)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- This article deals with the meaningful processing of information in relation to two systems of Information processing: pre-coordination and post-coordination. The different approaches are discussed, with emphasis an the need for a controlled vocabulary in information retrieval. Assigned indexing, which employs a controlled vocabulary, is described in detail. Types of indexing language can be divided into two broad groups - those using pre-coordinated terms and those depending an post-coordination. They represent two different basic approaches in processing and Information retrieval. The historical development of these two approaches is described, as well as the two tools that apply to these approaches: thesauri and subject headings.
- Source
- Knowledge organization. 29(2002) no.2, S.87-93
-
Peters, I.; Weller. K.: Paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations in knowledge organization systems (2008)
0.02
0.023531828 = product of:
0.047063656 = sum of:
0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 1593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012015978 = score(doc=1593,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1593, 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=1593)
0.03504768 = product of:
0.07009536 = sum of:
0.07009536 = weight(_text_:organization in 1593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07009536 = score(doc=1593,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.38996086 = fieldWeight in 1593, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1593)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Classical knowledge representation methods have been successfully working for years with established - but in a way restricted and vague - relations such as synonymy, hierarchy (meronymy, hyponymy) and unspecified associations. Recent developments like ontologies and folksonomies show new forms of collaboration, indexing and knowledge representation and encourage the reconsideration of standard knowledge relationships for practical use. In a summarizing overview we show which relations are currently used in knowledge organization systems (controlled vocabularies, ontologies and folksonomies) and which relations are expressed explicitly or which may be inherently hidden in them.
- Source
- Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 59(2008) H.2, S.100-107
-
Hudon, M.: ¬A preliminary investigation of the usefulness of semantic relations and of standardized definitions for the purpose of specifying meaning in a thesaurus (1998)
0.02
0.022303218 = product of:
0.044606436 = sum of:
0.014565565 = weight(_text_:information in 55) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014565565 = score(doc=55,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 55, 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=55)
0.030040871 = product of:
0.060081743 = sum of:
0.060081743 = weight(_text_:organization in 55) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060081743 = score(doc=55,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.33425218 = fieldWeight in 55, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=55)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- The terminological consistency of indexers working with a thesaurus as indexing aid remains low. This suggests that indexers cannot perceive easily or very clearly the meaning of each descriptor available as index term. This paper presents the background nd some of the findings of a small scale experiment designed to study the effect on interindexer terminological consistency of modifying the nature of the semantic information given with descriptors in a thesaurus. The study also provided some insights into the respective usefulness of standardized definitions and of traditional networks of hierarchical and associative relationships as means of providing essential meaning information in the thesaurus used as indexing aid
- Series
- Advances in knowledge organization; vol.6
- Source
- Structures and relations in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the 5th International ISKO-Conference, Lille, 25.-29.8.1998. Ed.: W. Mustafa el Hadi et al
-
Mai, J.-E.: Actors, domains, and constraints in the design and construction of controlled vocabularies (2008)
0.02
0.02109987 = product of:
0.04219974 = sum of:
0.017165681 = weight(_text_:information in 1921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017165681 = score(doc=1921,freq=8.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 1921, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1921)
0.025034059 = product of:
0.050068118 = sum of:
0.050068118 = weight(_text_:organization in 1921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050068118 = score(doc=1921,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.27854347 = fieldWeight in 1921, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1921)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Classification schemes, thesauri, taxonomies, and other controlled vocabularies play important roles in the organization and retrieval of information in many different environments. While the design and construction of controlled vocabularies have been prescribed at the technical level in great detail over the past decades, the methodological level has been somewhat neglected. However, classification research has in recent years focused on developing approaches to the analysis of users, domains, and activities that could produce requirements for the design of controlled vocabularies. Researchers have often argued that the design, construction, and use of controlled vocabularies need to be based on analyses and understandings of the contexts in which these controlled vocabularies function. While one would assume that the growing body of research on human information behavior might help guide the development of controlled vocabularies shed light on these contexts, unfortunately, much of the research in this area is descriptive in nature and of little use for systems design. This paper discusses these trends and outlines a holistic approach that demonstrates how the design of controlled vocabularies can be informed by investigations of people's interactions with information. This approach is based on the Cognitive Work Analysis framework and outlines several dimensions of human-information interactions. Application of this approach will result is a comprehensive understanding of the contexts in which the controlled vocabulary will function and which can be used for the development of for the development of controlled vocabularies.
- Source
- Knowledge organization. 35(2008) no.1, S.16-29
-
Hjoerland, B.: Semantics and knowledge organization (2007)
0.02
0.02109987 = product of:
0.04219974 = sum of:
0.017165681 = weight(_text_:information in 1980) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017165681 = score(doc=1980,freq=8.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 1980, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1980)
0.025034059 = product of:
0.050068118 = sum of:
0.050068118 = weight(_text_:organization in 1980) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050068118 = score(doc=1980,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.27854347 = fieldWeight in 1980, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1980)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- The aim of this chapter is to demonstrate that semantic issues underlie all research questions within Library and Information Science (LIS, or, as hereafter, IS) and, in particular, the subfield known as Knowledge Organization (KO). Further, it seeks to show that semantics is a field influenced by conflicting views and discusses why it is important to argue for the most fruitful one of these. Moreover, the chapter demonstrates that IS has not yet addressed semantic problems in systematic fashion and examines why the field is very fragmented and without a proper theoretical basis. The focus here is on broad interdisciplinary issues and the long-term perspective. The theoretical problems involving semantics and concepts are very complicated. Therefore, this chapter starts by considering tools developed in KO for information retrieval (IR) as basically semantic tools. In this way, it establishes a specific IS focus on the relation between KO and semantics. It is well known that thesauri consist of a selection of concepts supplemented with information about their semantic relations (such as generic relations or "associative relations"). Some words in thesauri are "preferred terms" (descriptors), whereas others are "lead-in terms." The descriptors represent concepts. The difference between "a word" and "a concept" is that different words may have the same meaning and similar words may have different meanings, whereas one concept expresses one meaning.
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 41(2007), S.367-405
-
Vickery, B.C.: Structure and function in retrieval languages (1997)
0.02
0.021027675 = product of:
0.04205535 = sum of:
0.013732546 = weight(_text_:information in 572) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013732546 = score(doc=572,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 572, 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=572)
0.028322803 = product of:
0.056645606 = sum of:
0.056645606 = weight(_text_:organization in 572) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056645606 = score(doc=572,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.31513596 = fieldWeight in 572, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=572)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Imprint
- The Hague : International Federation for Information and Documentation (FID)
- Source
- From classification to 'knowledge organization': Dorking revisited or 'past is prelude'. A collection of reprints to commemorate the firty year span between the Dorking Conference (First International Study Conference on Classification Research 1957) and the Sixth International Study Conference on Classification Research (London 1997). Ed.: A. Gilchrist
-
Green, R.; Bean, C.A.: Aligning systems of relationships (2006)
0.02
0.021027675 = product of:
0.04205535 = sum of:
0.013732546 = weight(_text_:information in 4949) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013732546 = score(doc=4949,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 4949, 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=4949)
0.028322803 = product of:
0.056645606 = sum of:
0.056645606 = weight(_text_:organization in 4949) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056645606 = score(doc=4949,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.31513596 = fieldWeight in 4949, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4949)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Source
- Knowledge organization, information systems and other essays: Professor A. Neelameghan Festschrift. Ed. by K.S. Raghavan and K.N. Prasad
-
Bodenreider, O.; Bean, C.A.: Relationships among knowledge structures : vocabulary integration within a subject domain (2001)
0.02
0.021027675 = product of:
0.04205535 = sum of:
0.013732546 = weight(_text_:information in 1145) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013732546 = score(doc=1145,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 1145, 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=1145)
0.028322803 = product of:
0.056645606 = sum of:
0.056645606 = weight(_text_:organization in 1145) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056645606 = score(doc=1145,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.31513596 = fieldWeight in 1145, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1145)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Series
- Information science and knowledge management; vol.2
- Source
- Relationships in the organization of knowledge. Eds.: Bean, C.A. u. R. Green
