Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.003606434 = product of:
  0.014425736 = sum of:
    0.014425736 = weight(_text_:information in 2133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014425736 = score(doc=2133,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 2133, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2133)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The relevance of retrieved documents or document descriptions has been a central measurement in the evaluation of information retrieval (IR) systems. Online public access catalogues (OPACs) are similar in many ways and so relevance should be an appropriate evaluation tool in measuring their performance. The development of relevance in evaluating IR systems is described and also the important differences between such systems and OPACs. Characteristics of the end-users of both systems are discussed with the conclusion that end-users' motivation and behaviour are as yet not fully understood. The implcations of this is that relevance is a central feature, but only one, of an OPAC user's overall information need

Source

Journal of information science. 16(1990), S.265-271

0.002379629 = product of:
  0.009518516 = sum of:
    0.009518516 = weight(_text_:information in 8185) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009518516 = score(doc=8185,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 8185, 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=8185)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

International information and library review. 26(1994) no.1, S.31-50

0.0017847219 = product of:
  0.0071388874 = sum of:
    0.0071388874 = weight(_text_:information in 2373) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0071388874 = score(doc=2373,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2373, 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=2373)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Research conducted in the early 80's has shown that subject access is still one of the most dominant approaches in OPACs. However, while some of the subject searches result in no recall, others often retrieve so much that users are discouraged to proceed further. These and other problems were investigated and solutions were found in improving search methods (such as word stemming, extending search to full bibliographical record and providing end user thesaurus) and indexing techniques (such as ny enhancing subject headings with table of contents and back of the book indexes or by traditional systems). More recent research indicates that the real answer to the question of 'precision without sacrificing recall' lies in the developing 'user friendly novel interfaces' and also in designing 'knowledge based systems', wherein sers would not be expected to learn query formulation or even to be familiar with the indexing language of the system. Several interesting studies and research projects on the subject have produced a whole gamut of information, but one can still visualise the evolving trends of research vis-a-vis their future prospects as possible solutions

0.0011898145 = product of:
  0.004759258 = sum of:
    0.004759258 = weight(_text_:information in 4468) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004759258 = score(doc=4468,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 4468, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4468)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The physical organisation of items on library shelves using any classification scheme is inevitable a compromise. The best efforts to achieve an arrangement that is helpful to users will be thwarted by the multifaceted nature of these items and the specific needs of the user and the library. Items on a particular subject will be scattered throughout the library building(s) across disciplines, by physical form, by frequency of use and whether and for how long they may be borrowed. Even thought he rich information content of multifaceted items may be represented in the notation, the items required by a user will be scattered across library shelves when the item is placed in a single relative location. This paper explores these issues uisng examples from a University Library classified using the DDC. The electronic context of the library OPAC can transcend the constraints imposed by the predominantly physical nature of library collections, yet the current use of classification schemes in on-line systems retains many of these limitations. Examples of such systems applying DDC on the WWW are discussed and compared with a system that seeks to use DDC in what is called view-based searching. The interface and the resulting browsing and searching capability of a view-based OPAC are described. Ways in which subject access to library collections can be improved and disciplinary scatter resolved by assigning multiple class number to items and exploiting the rich Dewey structure in a faceted form are discussed. It is suggested that the informative power of visual classificatory structures at the search interface will be beneficial to the broader learning experience of the user. The paper concludes that the application of classification schemes in electronic interfaces should not be bound by the the physical constraints that no longer apply in an electronic context but be exploited to provide a complete, flexible and individual interface as determined by the needs of each user