Search (39 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × author_ss:"Järvelin, K."
  1. Järvelin, K.: Evaluation (2011) 0.04 
    0.038843464 = product of:
  0.106819525 = sum of:
    0.005467103 = weight(_text_:a in 548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005467103 = score(doc=548,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 548, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=548)
    0.0048608496 = weight(_text_:s in 548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0048608496 = score(doc=548,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.16817348 = fieldWeight in 548, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=548)
    0.04408984 = weight(_text_:u in 548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04408984 = score(doc=548,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08704981 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.50648975 = fieldWeight in 548, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=548)
    0.05240174 = weight(_text_:k in 548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05240174 = score(doc=548,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.5521719 = fieldWeight in 548, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=548)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Pages
    S.113-138
    Source
    Interactive information seeking, behaviour and retrieval. Eds.: Ruthven, I. u. D. Kelly
    Type
    a
  2. Ingwersen, P.; Järvelin, K.: ¬The turn : integration of information seeking and retrieval in context (2005) 0.04 
    0.036454696 = product of:
  0.05728595 = sum of:
    0.002266238 = product of:
      0.004532476 = sum of:
        0.004532476 = weight(_text_:h in 1323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004532476 = score(doc=1323,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.0660481 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.026584605 = queryNorm
            0.06862386 = fieldWeight in 1323, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1323)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.0029288053 = weight(_text_:a in 1323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0029288053 = score(doc=1323,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.09554617 = fieldWeight in 1323, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1323)
    0.004621185 = product of:
      0.01848474 = sum of:
        0.01848474 = weight(_text_:o in 1323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01848474 = score(doc=1323,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13338262 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.017288 = idf(docFreq=795, maxDocs=44218)
              0.026584605 = queryNorm
            0.13858432 = fieldWeight in 1323, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.017288 = idf(docFreq=795, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1323)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    0.029011536 = weight(_text_:r in 1323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029011536 = score(doc=1323,freq=26.0), product of:
        0.088001914 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.3296694 = fieldWeight in 1323, product of:
          5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
            26.0 = termFreq=26.0
          3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1323)
    0.0012275499 = weight(_text_:s in 1323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0012275499 = score(doc=1323,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.042470217 = fieldWeight in 1323, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1323)
    0.007873186 = weight(_text_:u in 1323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007873186 = score(doc=1323,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08704981 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.0904446 = fieldWeight in 1323, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1323)
    0.009357453 = weight(_text_:k in 1323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009357453 = score(doc=1323,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.098602116 = fieldWeight in 1323, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1323)
  0.6363636 = coord(7/11)
    Abstract
    The Turn analyzes the research of information seeking and retrieval (IS&R) and proposes a new direction of integrating research in these two areas: the fields should turn off their separate and narrow paths and construct a new avenue of research. An essential direction for this avenue is context as given in the subtitle Integration of Information Seeking and Retrieval in Context. Other essential themes in the book include: IS&R research models, frameworks and theories; search and works tasks and situations in context; interaction between humans and machines; information acquisition, relevance and information use; research design and methodology based on a structured set of explicit variables - all set into the holistic cognitive approach. The present monograph invites the reader into a construction project - there is much research to do for a contextual understanding of IS&R. The Turn represents a wide-ranging perspective of IS&R by providing a novel unique research framework, covering both individual and social aspects of information behavior, including the generation, searching, retrieval and use of information. Regarding traditional laboratory information retrieval research, the monograph proposes the extension of research toward actors, search and work tasks, IR interaction and utility of information. Regarding traditional information seeking research, it proposes the extension toward information access technology and work task contexts. The Turn is the first synthesis of research in the broad area of IS&R ranging from systems oriented laboratory IR research to social science oriented information seeking studies. TOC:Introduction.- The Cognitive Framework for Information.- The Development of Information Seeking Research.- Systems-Oriented Information Retrieval.- Cognitive and User-Oriented Information Retrieval.- The Integrated IS&R Research Framework.- Implications of the Cognitive Framework for IS&R.- Towards a Research Program.- Conclusion.- Definitions.- References.- Index.
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Mitt. VÖB 59(2006) H.2, S.81-83 (O. Oberhauser): "Mit diesem Band haben zwei herausragende Vertreter der europäischen Informationswissenschaft, die Professoren Peter Ingwersen (Kopenhagen) und Kalervo Järvelin (Tampere) ein Werk vorgelegt, das man vielleicht dereinst als ihr opus magnum bezeichnen wird. Mich würde dies nicht überraschen, denn die Autoren unternehmen hier den ambitionierten Versuch, zwei informations wissenschaftliche Forschungstraditionen, die einander bisher in eher geringem Ausmass begegneten, unter einem gesamtheitlichen kognitiven Ansatz zu vereinen - das primär im sozialwissenschaftlichen Bereich verankerte Forschungsgebiet "Information Seeking and Retrieval" (IS&R) und das vorwiegend im Informatikbereich angesiedelte "Information Retrieval" (IR). Dabei geht es ihnen auch darum, den seit etlichen Jahren zwar dominierenden, aber auch als zu individualistisch kritisierten kognitiven Ansatz so zu erweitern, dass technologische, verhaltensbezogene und kooperative Aspekte in kohärenter Weise berücksichtigt werden. Dies geschieht auf folgende Weise in neun Kapiteln: - Zunächst werden die beiden "Lager" - die an Systemen und Laborexperimenten orientierte IR-Tradition und die an Benutzerfragen orientierte IS&R-Fraktion - einander gegenübergestellt und einige zentrale Begriffe geklärt. - Im zweiten Kapitel erfolgt eine ausführliche Darstellung der kognitiven Richtung der Informationswissenschaft, insbesondere hinsichtlich des Informationsbegriffes. - Daran schliesst sich ein Überblick über die bisherige Forschung zu "Information Seeking" (IS) - eine äusserst brauchbare Einführung in die Forschungsfragen und Modelle, die Forschungsmethodik sowie die in diesem Bereich offenen Fragen, z.B. die aufgrund der einseitigen Ausrichtung des Blickwinkels auf den Benutzer mangelnde Betrachtung der Benutzer-System-Interaktion. - In analoger Weise wird im vierten Kapitel die systemorientierte IRForschung in einem konzentrierten Überblick vorgestellt, in dem es sowohl um das "Labormodell" als auch Ansätze wie die Verarbeitung natürlicher Sprache und Expertensysteme geht. Aspekte wie Relevanz, Anfragemodifikation und Performanzmessung werden ebenso angesprochen wie die Methodik - von den ersten Laborexperimenten bis zu TREC und darüber hinaus.
    - Kapitel fünf enthält einen entsprechenden Überblick über die kognitive und benutzerorientierte IR-Tradition. Es zeigt, welche anderen (als nur die labororientierten) IR-Studien durchgeführt werden können, wobei sich die Betrachtung von frühen Modellen (z.B. Taylor) über Belkins ASK-Konzept bis zu Ingwersens Modell der Polyrepräsentation, und von Bates Berrypicking-Ansatz bis zu Vakkaris "taskbased" IR-Modell erstreckt. Auch Web-IR, OKAPI und Diskussionen zum Relevanzbegriff werden hier thematisiert. - Im folgenden Kapitel schlagen die Autoren ein integriertes IS&R Forschungsmodell vor, bei dem die vielfältigen Beziehungen zwischen Informationssuchenden, Systementwicklern, Oberflächen und anderen beteiligten Aspekten berücksichtigt werden. Ihr Ansatz vereint die traditionelle Laborforschung mit verschiedenen benutzerorientierten Traditionen aus IS&R, insbesondere mit den empirischen Ansätzen zu IS und zum interaktiven IR, in einem holistischen kognitiven Modell. - Kapitel sieben untersucht die Implikationen dieses Modells für IS&R, wobei besonders ins Auge fällt, wie komplex die Anfragen von Informationssuchenden im Vergleich mit der relativen Einfachheit der Algorithmen zum Auffinden relevanter Dokumente sind. Die Abbildung der vielfältig variierenden kognitiven Zustände der Anfragesteller im Rahmen der der Systementwicklung ist sicherlich keine triviale Aufgabe. Wie dabei das Problem der Einbeziehung des zentralen Aspektes der Bedeutung gelöst werden kann, sei dahingestellt. - Im achten Kapitel wird der Versuch unternommen, die zuvor diskutierten Punkte in ein IS&R-Forschungsprogramm (Prozesse - Verhalten - Systemfunktionalität - Performanz) umzusetzen, wobei auch einige kritische Anmerkungen zur bisherigen Forschungspraxis getroffen werden. - Das abschliessende neunte Kapitel fasst das Buch kurz zusammen und kann somit auch als Einstieg in dieThematik gelesen werden. Darauffolgen noch ein sehr nützliches Glossar zu allen wichtigen Begriffen, die in dem Buch Verwendung finden, eine Bibliographie und ein Sachregister. Ingwersen und Järvelin haben hier ein sehr anspruchsvolles und dennoch lesbares Buch vorgelegt. Die gebotenen Übersichtskapitel und Diskussionen sind zwar keine Einführung in die Informationswissenschaft, decken aber einen grossen Teil der heute in dieser Disziplin aktuellen und durch laufende Forschungsaktivitäten und Publikationen berührten Teilbereiche ab. Man könnte es auch - vielleicht ein wenig überspitzt - so formulieren: Was hier thematisiert wird, ist eigentlich die moderne Informationswissenschaft. Der Versuch, die beiden Forschungstraditionen zu vereinen, wird diesem Werk sicherlich einen Platz in der Geschichte der Disziplin sichern. Nicht ganz glücklich erscheint der Titel des Buches. "The Turn" soll eine Wende bedeuten, nämlich jene hin zu einer integrierten Sicht von IS und IR. Das geht vermutlich aus dem Untertitel besser hervor, doch dieser erschien den Autoren wohl zu trocken. Schade, denn "The Turn" gibt es z.B. in unserem Verbundkatalog bereits, allerdings mit dem Zusatz "from the Cold War to a new era; the United States and the Soviet Union 1983-1990". Der Verlag, der abgesehen davon ein gediegenes (wenn auch nicht gerade wohlfeiles) Produkt vorgelegt hat, hätte derlei unscharfe Duplizierend besser verhindert. Ungeachtet dessen empfehle ich dieses wichtige Buch ohne Vorbehalt zur Anschaffung; es sollte in keiner grösseren Bibliothek fehlen."
    Pages
    XIV, 448 S
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  3. Järvelin, K.; Kristensen, J.; Niemi, T.; Sormunen, E.; Keskustalo, H.: ¬A deductive data model for query expansion (1996) 0.04 
    0.035109468 = product of:
  0.064367354 = sum of:
    0.0054389704 = product of:
      0.010877941 = sum of:
        0.010877941 = weight(_text_:h in 2230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010877941 = score(doc=2230,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.0660481 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.026584605 = queryNorm
            0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 2230, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2230)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.0046860883 = weight(_text_:a in 2230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0046860883 = score(doc=2230,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 2230, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2230)
    0.0020832212 = weight(_text_:s in 2230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0020832212 = score(doc=2230,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 2230, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2230)
    0.018895645 = weight(_text_:u in 2230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018895645 = score(doc=2230,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08704981 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.21706703 = fieldWeight in 2230, 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=2230)
    0.022457888 = weight(_text_:k in 2230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022457888 = score(doc=2230,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.23664509 = fieldWeight in 2230, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2230)
    0.010805541 = product of:
      0.021611081 = sum of:
        0.021611081 = weight(_text_:22 in 2230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021611081 = score(doc=2230,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09309476 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.026584605 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2230, 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=2230)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.54545456 = coord(6/11)
    Abstract
    We present a deductive data model for concept-based query expansion. It is based on three abstraction levels: the conceptual, linguistic and occurrence levels. Concepts and relationships among them are represented at the conceptual level. The expression level represents natural language expressions for concepts. Each expression has one or more matching models at the occurrence level. Each model specifies the matching of the expression in database indices built in varying ways. The data model supports a concept-based query expansion and formulation tool, the ExpansionTool, for environments providing heterogeneous IR systems. Expansion is controlled by adjustable matching reliability.
    Pages
    S.235-243
    Source
    Proceedings of the 19th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (ACM SIGIR '96), Zürich, Switzerland, August 18-22, 1996. Eds.: H.P. Frei et al
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
    Type
    a
  4. Järvelin, K.; Persson, O.: ¬The DCI-index : discounted cumulated impact-based research evaluation (2008) 0.03 
    0.03473352 = product of:
  0.07641374 = sum of:
    0.007251961 = product of:
      0.014503922 = sum of:
        0.014503922 = weight(_text_:h in 2332) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014503922 = score(doc=2332,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.0660481 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.026584605 = queryNorm
            0.21959636 = fieldWeight in 2332, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2332)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.0031240587 = weight(_text_:a in 2332) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0031240587 = score(doc=2332,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 2332, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2332)
    0.020913094 = product of:
      0.08365238 = sum of:
        0.08365238 = weight(_text_:o in 2332) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08365238 = score(doc=2332,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13338262 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.017288 = idf(docFreq=795, maxDocs=44218)
              0.026584605 = queryNorm
            0.627161 = fieldWeight in 2332, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.017288 = idf(docFreq=795, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2332)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    0.0027776284 = weight(_text_:s in 2332) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0027776284 = score(doc=2332,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.09609913 = fieldWeight in 2332, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2332)
    0.042347 = weight(_text_:k in 2332) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042347 = score(doc=2332,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.44622225 = fieldWeight in 2332, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2332)
  0.45454547 = coord(5/11)
    Abstract
    The article by K. Järvelin & O. Persson published in JASIST 59(9), The DCI-Index: Discounted Cumulated Impact-Based Research Evaluation, (pp. 1433-1440) contains an unfortunate error in one of its formulas, Equation 3. The present paper gives the correction and an example of impact analysis based on the corrected formula.
    Object
    h-index
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.14, S.2350-2352
    Type
    a
  5. Pirkola, A.; Hedlund, T.; Keskustalo, H.; Järvelin, K.: Dictionary-based cross-language information retrieval : problems, methods, and research findings (2001) 0.03 
    0.028249156 = product of:
  0.07768518 = sum of:
    0.012690932 = product of:
      0.025381863 = sum of:
        0.025381863 = weight(_text_:h in 3908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025381863 = score(doc=3908,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.0660481 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.026584605 = queryNorm
            0.38429362 = fieldWeight in 3908, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3908)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.007731652 = weight(_text_:a in 3908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007731652 = score(doc=3908,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.25222903 = fieldWeight in 3908, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3908)
    0.0048608496 = weight(_text_:s in 3908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0048608496 = score(doc=3908,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.16817348 = fieldWeight in 3908, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3908)
    0.05240174 = weight(_text_:k in 3908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05240174 = score(doc=3908,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.5521719 = fieldWeight in 3908, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3908)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Source
    Information retrieval. 4(2001), S.209-230
    Type
    a
  6. Järvelin, K.; Persson, O.: ¬The DCI index : discounted cumulated impact-based research evaluation (2008) 0.03 
    0.025599532 = product of:
  0.05631897 = sum of:
    0.007850478 = product of:
      0.015700957 = sum of:
        0.015700957 = weight(_text_:h in 2694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015700957 = score(doc=2694,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.0660481 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.026584605 = queryNorm
            0.23772003 = fieldWeight in 2694, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2694)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.0064758323 = weight(_text_:a in 2694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0064758323 = score(doc=2694,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.21126054 = fieldWeight in 2694, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2694)
    0.013070684 = product of:
      0.052282736 = sum of:
        0.052282736 = weight(_text_:o in 2694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.052282736 = score(doc=2694,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13338262 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.017288 = idf(docFreq=795, maxDocs=44218)
              0.026584605 = queryNorm
            0.39197564 = fieldWeight in 2694, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.017288 = idf(docFreq=795, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2694)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    0.0024550997 = weight(_text_:s in 2694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0024550997 = score(doc=2694,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.08494043 = fieldWeight in 2694, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2694)
    0.026466874 = weight(_text_:k in 2694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026466874 = score(doc=2694,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.2788889 = fieldWeight in 2694, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2694)
  0.45454547 = coord(5/11)
    Abstract
    Research evaluation is increasingly popular and important among research funding bodies and science policy makers. Various indicators have been proposed to evaluate the standing of individual scientists, institutions, journals, or countries. A simple and popular one among the indicators is the h-index, the Hirsch index (Hirsch 2005), which is an indicator for lifetime achievement of a scholar. Several other indicators have been proposed to complement or balance the h-index. However, these indicators have no conception of aging. The AR-index (Jin et al. 2007) incorporates aging but divides the received citation counts by the raw age of the publication. Consequently, the decay of a publication is very steep and insensitive to disciplinary differences. In addition, we believe that a publication becomes outdated only when it is no longer cited, not because of its age. Finally, all indicators treat citations as equally material when one might reasonably think that a citation from a heavily cited publication should weigh more than a citation froma non-cited or little-cited publication.We propose a new indicator, the Discounted Cumulated Impact (DCI) index, which devalues old citations in a smooth way. It rewards an author for receiving new citations even if the publication is old. Further, it allows weighting of the citations by the citation weight of the citing publication. DCI can be used to calculate research performance on the basis of the h-core of a scholar or any other publication data.
    Content
    Erratum in: Järvelin, K., O. Persson: The DCI-index: discounted cumulated impact-based research evaluation. Erratum re. In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.14, S.2350-2352.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.9, S.1433-1440
    Type
    a
  7. Lehtokangas, R.; Järvelin, K.: Consistency of textual expression in newspaper articles : an argument for semantically based query expansion (2001) 0.03 
    0.025305407 = product of:
  0.055671893 = sum of:
    0.0033818933 = weight(_text_:a in 4485) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0033818933 = score(doc=4485,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.11032722 = fieldWeight in 4485, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4485)
    0.016092705 = weight(_text_:r in 4485) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016092705 = score(doc=4485,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.088001914 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.18286766 = fieldWeight in 4485, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4485)
    0.0017360178 = weight(_text_:s in 4485) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0017360178 = score(doc=4485,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 4485, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4485)
    0.015746372 = weight(_text_:u in 4485) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015746372 = score(doc=4485,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08704981 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.1808892 = fieldWeight in 4485, 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=4485)
    0.018714907 = weight(_text_:k in 4485) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018714907 = score(doc=4485,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.19720423 = fieldWeight in 4485, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4485)
  0.45454547 = coord(5/11)
    Abstract
    This article investigates how consistent different newspapers are in their choice of words when writing about the same news events. News articles on the same news events were taken from three Finnish newspapers and compared in regard to their central concepts and words representing the concepts in the news texts. Consistency figures were calculated for each set of three articles (the total number of sets was sixty). Inconsistency in words and concepts was found between news articles from different newspapers. The mean value of consistency calculated on the basis of words was 65 per cent; this however depended on the article length. For short news wires consistency was 83 per cent while for long articles it was only 47 per cent. At the concept level, consistency was considerably higher, ranging from 92 per cent to 97 per cent between short and long articles. The articles also represented three categories of topic (event, process and opinion). Statistically significant differences in consistency were found in regard to length but not in regard to the categories of topic. We argue that the expression inconsistency is a clear sign of a retrieval problem and that query expansion based on semantic relationships can significantly improve retrieval performance on free-text sources.
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 57(2001) no.4, S.535-548
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
    Type
    a
  8. Lehtokangas, R.; Keskustalo, H.; Järvelin, K.: Experiments with transitive dictionary translation and pseudo-relevance feedback using graded relevance assessments (2008) 0.02 
    0.024535188 = product of:
  0.053977415 = sum of:
    0.0054389704 = product of:
      0.010877941 = sum of:
        0.010877941 = weight(_text_:h in 1349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010877941 = score(doc=1349,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.0660481 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.026584605 = queryNorm
            0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 1349, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1349)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.0046860883 = weight(_text_:a in 1349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0046860883 = score(doc=1349,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 1349, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1349)
    0.019311246 = weight(_text_:r in 1349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019311246 = score(doc=1349,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.088001914 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.2194412 = fieldWeight in 1349, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1349)
    0.0020832212 = weight(_text_:s in 1349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0020832212 = score(doc=1349,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 1349, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1349)
    0.022457888 = weight(_text_:k in 1349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022457888 = score(doc=1349,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.23664509 = fieldWeight in 1349, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1349)
  0.45454547 = coord(5/11)
    Abstract
    In this article, the authors present evaluation results for transitive dictionary-based cross-language information retrieval (CLIR) using graded relevance assessments in a best match retrieval environment. A text database containing newspaper articles and a related set of 35 search topics were used in the tests. Source language topics (in English, German, and Swedish) were automatically translated into the target language (Finnish) via an intermediate (or pivot) language. Effectiveness of the transitively translated queries was compared to that of the directly translated and monolingual Finnish queries. Pseudo-relevance feedback (PRF) was also used to expand the original transitive target queries. Cross-language information retrieval performance was evaluated on three relevance thresholds: stringent, regular, and liberal. The transitive translations performed well achieving, on the average, 85-93% of the direct translation performance, and 66-72% of monolingual performance. Moreover, PRF was successful in raising the performance of transitive translation routes in absolute terms as well as in relation to monolingual and direct translation performance applying PRF.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.3, S.476-488
    Type
    a
  9. Kristensen, J.; Järvelin, K.: ¬The effectiveness of a searching thesaurus in free-text searching in a full-text database (1990) 0.02 
    0.02079955 = product of:
  0.076265015 = sum of:
    0.010822058 = weight(_text_:a in 2043) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010822058 = score(doc=2043,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.3530471 = fieldWeight in 2043, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2043)
    0.0055552567 = weight(_text_:s in 2043) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0055552567 = score(doc=2043,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.19219826 = fieldWeight in 2043, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2043)
    0.0598877 = weight(_text_:k in 2043) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0598877 = score(doc=2043,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.63105357 = fieldWeight in 2043, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2043)
  0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    Source
    International classification. 17(1990), S.77-84
    Type
    a
  10. Hansen, P.; Järvelin, K.: Collaborative Information Retrieval in an information-intensive domain (2005) 0.02 
    0.020330766 = product of:
  0.055909604 = sum of:
    0.0040582716 = weight(_text_:a in 1040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0040582716 = score(doc=1040,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 1040, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1040)
    0.027310224 = weight(_text_:r in 1040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027310224 = score(doc=1040,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.088001914 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.3103367 = fieldWeight in 1040, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1040)
    0.0020832212 = weight(_text_:s in 1040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0020832212 = score(doc=1040,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 1040, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1040)
    0.022457888 = weight(_text_:k in 1040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022457888 = score(doc=1040,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.23664509 = fieldWeight in 1040, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1040)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Abstract
    In this article we investigate the expressions of collaborative activities within information seeking and retrieval processes (IS&R). Generally, information seeking and retrieval is regarded as an individual and isolated process in IR research. We assume that an IS&R situation is not merely an individual effort, but inherently involves various collaborative activities. We present empirical results from a real-life and information-intensive setting within the patent domain, showing that the patent task performance process involves highly collaborative aspects throughout the stages of the information seeking and retrieval process. Furthermore, we show that these activities may be categorised and related to different stages in an information seeking and retrieval process. Therefore, the assumption that information retrieval performance is purely individual needs to be reconsidered. Finally, we also propose a refined IR framework involving collaborative aspects.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.5, S.1101-1120
    Type
    a
  11. Kettunen, K.; Kunttu, T.; Järvelin, K.: To stem or lemmatize a highly inflectional language in a probabilistic IR environment? (2005) 0.02 
    0.018947544 = product of:
  0.052105743 = sum of:
    0.0078101465 = weight(_text_:a in 4395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0078101465 = score(doc=4395,freq=32.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.25478977 = fieldWeight in 4395, product of:
          5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
            32.0 = termFreq=32.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4395)
    0.016092705 = weight(_text_:r in 4395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016092705 = score(doc=4395,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.088001914 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.18286766 = fieldWeight in 4395, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4395)
    0.0017360178 = weight(_text_:s in 4395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0017360178 = score(doc=4395,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 4395, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4395)
    0.026466874 = weight(_text_:k in 4395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026466874 = score(doc=4395,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.2788889 = fieldWeight in 4395, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4395)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Abstract
    Purpose - To show that stem generation compares well with lemmatization as a morphological tool for a highly inflectional language for IR purposes in a best-match retrieval system. Design/methodology/approach - Effects of three different morphological methods - lemmatization, stemming and stem production - for Finnish are compared in a probabilistic IR environment (INQUERY). Evaluation is done using a four-point relevance scale which is partitioned differently in different test settings. Findings - Results show that stem production, a lighter method than morphological lemmatization, compares well with lemmatization in a best-match IR environment. Differences in performance between stem production and lemmatization are small and they are not statistically significant in most of the tested settings. It is also shown that hitherto a rather neglected method of morphological processing for Finnish, stemming, performs reasonably well although the stemmer used - a Porter stemmer implementation - is far from optimal for a morphologically complex language like Finnish. In another series of tests, the effects of compound splitting and derivational expansion of queries are tested. Practical implications - Usefulness of morphological lemmatization and stem generation for IR purposes can be estimated with many factors. On the average P-R level they seem to behave very close to each other in a probabilistic IR system. Thus, the choice of the used method with highly inflectional languages needs to be estimated along other dimensions too. Originality/value - Results are achieved using Finnish as an example of a highly inflectional language. The results are of interest for anyone who is interested in processing of morphological variation of a highly inflected language for IR purposes.
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 61(2005) no.4, S.476-496
    Type
    a
  12. Vakkari, P.; Järvelin, K.: Explanation in information seeking and retrieval (2005) 0.02 
    0.018213753 = product of:
  0.050087817 = sum of:
    0.004939571 = weight(_text_:a in 643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004939571 = score(doc=643,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.16114321 = fieldWeight in 643, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=643)
    0.028787507 = weight(_text_:r in 643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028787507 = score(doc=643,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.088001914 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.32712364 = fieldWeight in 643, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=643)
    0.0013888142 = weight(_text_:s in 643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0013888142 = score(doc=643,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.048049565 = fieldWeight in 643, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=643)
    0.014971925 = weight(_text_:k in 643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014971925 = score(doc=643,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.15776339 = fieldWeight in 643, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=643)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Abstract
    Information Retrieval (IR) is a research area both within Computer Science and Information Science. It has by and large two communities: a Computer Science oriented experimental approach and a user-oriented Information Science approach with a Social Science background. The communities hold a critical stance towards each other (e.g., Ingwersen, 1996), the latter suspecting the realism of the former, and the former suspecting the usefulness of the latter. Within Information Science the study of information seeking (IS) also has a Social Science background. There is a lot of research in each of these particular areas of information seeking and retrieval (IS&R). However, the three communities do not really communicate with each other. Why is this, and could the relationships be otherwise? Do the communities in fact belong together? Or perhaps each community is better off forgetting about the existence of the other two? We feel that the relationships between the research areas have not been properly analyzed. One way to analyze the relationships is to examine what each research area is trying to find out: which phenomena are being explained and how. We believe that IS&R research would benefit from being analytic about its frameworks, models and theories, not just at the level of meta-theories, but also much more concretely at the level of study designs. Over the years there have been calls for more context in the study of IS&R. Work tasks as well as cultural activities/interests have been proposed as the proper context for information access. For example, Wersig (1973) conceptualized information needs from the tasks perspective. He argued that in order to learn about information needs and seeking, one needs to take into account the whole active professional role of the individuals being investigated. Byström and Järvelin (1995) analysed IS processes in the light of tasks of varying complexity. Ingwersen (1996) discussed the role of tasks and their descriptions and problematic situations from a cognitive perspective on IR. Most recently, Vakkari (2003) reviewed task-based IR and Järvelin and Ingwersen (2004) proposed the extension of IS&R research toward the task context. Therefore there is much support to the task context, but how should it be applied in IS&R?
    Pages
    S.113-138
    Source
    New directions in cognitive information retrieval. Eds.: A. Spink, C. Cole
    Type
    a
  13. Järvelin, K.; Vakkari, P.: ¬The evolution of library and information science 1965-1985 : a content analysis of journal titles (1993) 0.02 
    0.017725704 = product of:
  0.064994246 = sum of:
    0.007731652 = weight(_text_:a in 4649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007731652 = score(doc=4649,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.25222903 = fieldWeight in 4649, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4649)
    0.0048608496 = weight(_text_:s in 4649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0048608496 = score(doc=4649,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.16817348 = fieldWeight in 4649, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4649)
    0.05240174 = weight(_text_:k in 4649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05240174 = score(doc=4649,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.5521719 = fieldWeight in 4649, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4649)
  0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 29(1993) no.1, S.129-144
    Type
    a
  14. Niemi, T.; Junkkari, M.; Järvelin, K.; Viita, S.: Advanced query language for manipulating complex entities (2004) 0.02 
    0.017657217 = product of:
  0.064743124 = sum of:
    0.005467103 = weight(_text_:a in 4218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005467103 = score(doc=4218,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 4218, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4218)
    0.00687428 = weight(_text_:s in 4218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00687428 = score(doc=4218,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.23783323 = fieldWeight in 4218, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4218)
    0.05240174 = weight(_text_:k in 4218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05240174 = score(doc=4218,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.5521719 = fieldWeight in 4218, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4218)
  0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 40(2004) no.6, S.869-
    Type
    a
  15. Järvelin, K.; Niemi, T.: Deductive information retrieval based on classifications (1993) 0.02 
    0.017270919 = product of:
  0.047495026 = sum of:
    0.0040582716 = weight(_text_:a in 2229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0040582716 = score(doc=2229,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 2229, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2229)
    0.0020832212 = weight(_text_:s in 2229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0020832212 = score(doc=2229,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 2229, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2229)
    0.018895645 = weight(_text_:u in 2229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018895645 = score(doc=2229,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08704981 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.21706703 = fieldWeight in 2229, 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=2229)
    0.022457888 = weight(_text_:k in 2229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022457888 = score(doc=2229,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.23664509 = fieldWeight in 2229, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2229)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Abstract
    Modern fact databses contain abundant data classified through several classifications. Typically, users msut consult these classifications in separate manuals or files, thus making their effective use difficult. Contemporary database systems do little support deductive use of classifications. In this study we show how deductive data management techniques can be applied to the utilization of data value classifications. Computation of transitive class relationships is of primary importance here. We define a representation of classifications which supports transitive computation and present an operation-oriented deductive query language tailored for classification-based deductive information retrieval. The operations of this language are on the same abstraction level as relational algebra operations and can be integrated with these to form a powerful and flexible query language for deductive information retrieval. We define the integration of these operations and demonstrate the usefulness of the language in terms of several sample queries
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 44(1993) no.10, S.557-578
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
    Type
    a
  16. Toivonen, J.; Pirkola, A.; Keskustalo, H.; Visala, K.; Järvelin, K.: Translating cross-lingual spelling variants using transformation rules (2005) 0.02 
    0.01637153 = product of:
  0.045021705 = sum of:
    0.0054389704 = product of:
      0.010877941 = sum of:
        0.010877941 = weight(_text_:h in 1052) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010877941 = score(doc=1052,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.0660481 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.026584605 = queryNorm
            0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 1052, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1052)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.0057392623 = weight(_text_:a in 1052) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0057392623 = score(doc=1052,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 1052, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1052)
    0.0020832212 = weight(_text_:s in 1052) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0020832212 = score(doc=1052,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 1052, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1052)
    0.03176025 = weight(_text_:k in 1052) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03176025 = score(doc=1052,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.33466667 = fieldWeight in 1052, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1052)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Abstract
    Technical terms and proper names constitute a major problem in dictionary-based cross-language information retrieval (CLIR). However, technical terms and proper names in different languages often share the same Latin or Greek origin, being thus spelling variants of each other. In this paper we present a novel two-step fuzzy translation technique for cross-lingual spelling variants. In the first step, transformation rules are applied to source words to render them more similar to their target language equivalents. The rules are generated automatically using translation dictionaries as source data. In the second step, the intermediate forms obtained in the first step are translated into a target language using fuzzy matching. The effectiveness of the technique was evaluated empirically using five source languages and English as a target language. The two-step technique performed better, in some cases considerably better, than fuzzy matching alone. Even using the first step as such showed promising results.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.4, S.859-872
    Type
    a
  17. Saastamoinen, M.; Järvelin, K.: Search task features in work tasks of varying types and complexity (2017) 0.01 
    0.01405826 = product of:
  0.038660213 = sum of:
    0.0033135647 = weight(_text_:a in 3589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0033135647 = score(doc=3589,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 3589, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3589)
    0.0020832212 = weight(_text_:s in 3589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0020832212 = score(doc=3589,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 3589, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3589)
    0.022457888 = weight(_text_:k in 3589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022457888 = score(doc=3589,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.23664509 = fieldWeight in 3589, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3589)
    0.010805541 = product of:
      0.021611081 = sum of:
        0.021611081 = weight(_text_:22 in 3589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021611081 = score(doc=3589,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09309476 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.026584605 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3589, 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=3589)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Abstract
    Information searching in practice seldom is an end in itself. In work, work task (WT) performance forms the context, which information searching should serve. Therefore, information retrieval (IR) systems development/evaluation should take the WT context into account. The present paper analyzes how WT features: task complexity and task types, affect information searching in authentic work: the types of information needs, search processes, and search media. We collected data on 22 information professionals in authentic work situations in three organization types: city administration, universities, and companies. The data comprise 286 WTs and 420 search tasks (STs). The data include transaction logs, video recordings, daily questionnaires, interviews. and observation. The data were analyzed quantitatively. Even if the participants used a range of search media, most STs were simple throughout the data, and up to 42% of WTs did not include searching. WT's effects on STs are not straightforward: different WT types react differently to WT complexity. Due to the simplicity of authentic searching, the WT/ST types in interactive IR experiments should be reconsidered.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.5, S.1111-1123
    Type
    a
  18. Näppilä, T.; Järvelin, K.; Niemi, T.: ¬A tool for data cube construction from structurally heterogeneous XML documents (2008) 0.01 
    0.012589626 = product of:
  0.03462147 = sum of:
    0.0051659266 = weight(_text_:a in 1369) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0051659266 = score(doc=1369,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 1369, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1369)
    0.0017360178 = weight(_text_:s in 1369) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0017360178 = score(doc=1369,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 1369, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1369)
    0.018714907 = weight(_text_:k in 1369) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018714907 = score(doc=1369,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.19720423 = fieldWeight in 1369, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1369)
    0.009004618 = product of:
      0.018009236 = sum of:
        0.018009236 = weight(_text_:22 in 1369) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018009236 = score(doc=1369,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09309476 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.026584605 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1369, 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=1369)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Abstract
    Data cubes for OLAP (On-Line Analytical Processing) often need to be constructed from data located in several distributed and autonomous information sources. Such a data integration process is challenging due to semantic, syntactic, and structural heterogeneity among the data. While XML (extensible markup language) is the de facto standard for data exchange, the three types of heterogeneity remain. Moreover, popular path-oriented XML query languages, such as XQuery, require the user to know in much detail the structure of the documents to be processed and are, thus, effectively impractical in many real-world data integration tasks. Several Lowest Common Ancestor (LCA)-based XML query evaluation strategies have recently been introduced to provide a more structure-independent way to access XML documents. We shall, however, show that this approach leads in the context of certain - not uncommon - types of XML documents to undesirable results. This article introduces a novel high-level data extraction primitive that utilizes the purpose-built Smallest Possible Context (SPC) query evaluation strategy. We demonstrate, through a system prototype for OLAP data cube construction and a sample application in informetrics, that our approach has real advantages in data integration.
    Date
    9. 2.2008 17:22:42
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.3, S.435-449
    Type
    a
  19. Vakkari, P.; Järvelin, K.; Chang, Y.-W.: ¬The association of disciplinary background with the evolution of topics and methods in Library and Information Science research 1995-2015 (2023) 0.01 
    0.012450277 = product of:
  0.03423826 = sum of:
    0.004782719 = weight(_text_:a in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004782719 = score(doc=998,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 998, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=998)
    0.0017360178 = weight(_text_:s in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0017360178 = score(doc=998,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 998, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=998)
    0.018714907 = weight(_text_:k in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018714907 = score(doc=998,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.19720423 = fieldWeight in 998, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=998)
    0.009004618 = product of:
      0.018009236 = sum of:
        0.018009236 = weight(_text_:22 in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018009236 = score(doc=998,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09309476 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.026584605 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 998, 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=998)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Abstract
    The paper reports a longitudinal analysis of the topical and methodological development of Library and Information Science (LIS). Its focus is on the effects of researchers' disciplines on these developments. The study extends an earlier cross-sectional study (Vakkari et al., Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2022a, 73, 1706-1722) by a coordinated dataset representing a content analysis of articles published in 31 scholarly LIS journals in 1995, 2005, and 2015. It is novel in its coverage of authors' disciplines, topical and methodological aspects in a coordinated dataset spanning two decades thus allowing trend analysis. The findings include a shrinking trend in the share of LIS from 67 to 36% while Computer Science, and Business and Economics increase their share from 9 and 6% to 21 and 16%, respectively. The earlier cross-sectional study (Vakkari et al., Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2022a, 73, 1706-1722) for the year 2015 identified three topical clusters of LIS research, focusing on topical subfields, methodologies, and contributing disciplines. Correspondence analysis confirms their existence already in 1995 and traces their development through the decades. The contributing disciplines infuse their concepts, research questions, and approaches to LIS and may also subsume vital parts of LIS in their own structures of knowledge production.
    Date
    22. 6.2023 18:15:06
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 74(2023) no.7, S.811-827
    Type
    a
  20. Tuomaala, O.; Järvelin, K.; Vakkari, P.: Evolution of library and information science, 1965-2005 : content analysis of journal articles (2014) 0.01 
    0.011801672 = product of:
  0.0324546 = sum of:
    0.0027613041 = weight(_text_:a in 1309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0027613041 = score(doc=1309,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.030653298 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.090081796 = fieldWeight in 1309, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1309)
    0.00924237 = product of:
      0.03696948 = sum of:
        0.03696948 = weight(_text_:o in 1309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03696948 = score(doc=1309,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13338262 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.017288 = idf(docFreq=795, maxDocs=44218)
              0.026584605 = queryNorm
            0.27716863 = fieldWeight in 1309, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.017288 = idf(docFreq=795, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1309)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    0.0017360178 = weight(_text_:s in 1309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0017360178 = score(doc=1309,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.028903782 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 1309, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1309)
    0.018714907 = weight(_text_:k in 1309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018714907 = score(doc=1309,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09490114 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.026584605 = queryNorm
        0.19720423 = fieldWeight in 1309, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1309)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Abstract
    This article first analyzes library and information science (LIS) research articles published in core LIS journals in 2005. It also examines the development of LIS from 1965 to 2005 in light of comparable data sets for 1965, 1985, and 2005. In both cases, the authors report (a) how the research articles are distributed by topic and (b) what approaches, research strategies, and methods were applied in the articles. In 2005, the largest research areas in LIS by this measure were information storage and retrieval, scientific communication, library and information-service activities, and information seeking. The same research areas constituted the quantitative core of LIS in the previous years since 1965. Information retrieval has been the most popular area of research over the years. The proportion of research on library and information-service activities decreased after 1985, but the popularity of information seeking and of scientific communication grew during the period studied. The viewpoint of research has shifted from library and information organizations to end users and development of systems for the latter. The proportion of empirical research strategies was high and rose over time, with the survey method being the single most important method. However, attention to evaluation and experiments increased considerably after 1985. Conceptual research strategies and system analysis, description, and design were quite popular, but declining. The most significant changes from 1965 to 2005 are the decreasing interest in library and information-service activities and the growth of research into information seeking and scientific communication.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.7, S.1446-1462
    Type
    a

Authors

Years

Types

  • a 38
  • m 1
  • More… Less…

Themes