Search (9 results, page 1 of 1)

0.005931762 = product of:
  0.02965881 = sum of:
    0.02965881 = product of:
      0.05931762 = sum of:
        0.05931762 = weight(_text_:22 in 100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05931762 = score(doc=100,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 100, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=100)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 9.2007 15:41:14

0.004943135 = product of:
  0.024715675 = sum of:
    0.024715675 = product of:
      0.04943135 = sum of:
        0.04943135 = weight(_text_:22 in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04943135 = score(doc=539,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 539, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=539)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

26.12.2011 13:22:07

0.0041203364 = product of:
  0.02060168 = sum of:
    0.02060168 = product of:
      0.04120336 = sum of:
        0.04120336 = weight(_text_:problems in 202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04120336 = score(doc=202,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.27361554 = fieldWeight in 202, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=202)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The authors present a model of information searching in thesaurus-enhanced search systems, intended as a reference model for system developers. The model focuses on user-system interaction and charts the specific stages of searching an indexed collection with a thesaurus. It was developed based on literature, findings from empirical studies, and analysis of existing systems. The model describes in detail the entities, processes, and decisions when interacting with a search system augmented with a thesaurus. A basic search scenario illustrates this process through the model. Graphical and textual depictions of the model are complemented by a concise matrix representation for evaluation purposes. Potential problems at different stages of the search process are discussed, together with possibilities for system developers. The aim is to set out a framework of processes, decisions, and risks involved in thesaurus-based search, within which system developers can consider potential avenues for support.

0.0041203364 = product of:
  0.02060168 = sum of:
    0.02060168 = product of:
      0.04120336 = sum of:
        0.04120336 = weight(_text_:problems in 4067) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04120336 = score(doc=4067,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.27361554 = fieldWeight in 4067, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4067)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Controlled terminologies such as classification schemes, name authorities, and thesauri have long been the domain of the library and information science community. Although historically there have been initiatives towards library style classification of web resources, there remain significant problems with searching and quality judgement of online content. Terminology services can play a key role in opening up access to these valuable resources. By exposing controlled terminologies via a web service, organisations maintain data integrity and version control, whilst motivating external users to design innovative ways to present and utilise their data. We introduce terminology web services and review work in the area. We describe the approaches taken in establishing application programming interfaces (API) and discuss the comparative benefits of a dedicated terminology web service versus general purpose programming languages. We discuss experiences at Glamorgan in creating terminology web services and associated client interface components, in particular for the archaeology domain in the STAR (Semantic Technologies for Archaeological Resources) Project.

0.0034336136 = product of:
  0.017168067 = sum of:
    0.017168067 = product of:
      0.034336135 = sum of:
        0.034336135 = weight(_text_:problems in 3179) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034336135 = score(doc=3179,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.22801295 = fieldWeight in 3179, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3179)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

There are many advantages for Digital Libraries in indexing with classifications or thesauri, but some current disincentive in the lack of flexible retrieval tools that deal with compound descriptors. This paper discusses a matching function for compound descriptors, or multi-concept subject headings, that does not rely an exact matching but incorporates term expansion via thesaurus semantic relationships to produce ranked results that take account of missing and partially matching terms. The matching function is based an a measure of semantic closeness between terms, which has the potential to help with recall problems. The work reported is part of the ongoing FACET project in collaboration with the National Museum of Science and Industry and its collections database. The architecture of the prototype system and its Interface are outlined. The matching problem for compound descriptors is reviewed and the FACET implementation described. Results are discussed from scenarios using the faceted Getty Art and Architecture Thesaurus. We argue that automatic traversal of thesaurus relationships can augment the user's browsing possibilities. The techniques can be applied both to unstructured multi-concept subject headings and potentially to more syntactically structured strings. The notion of a focus term is used by the matching function to model AAT modified descriptors (noun phrases). The relevance of the approach to precoordinated indexing and matching faceted strings is discussed.

0.0034336136 = product of:
  0.017168067 = sum of:
    0.017168067 = product of:
      0.034336135 = sum of:
        0.034336135 = weight(_text_:problems in 5913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034336135 = score(doc=5913,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.22801295 = fieldWeight in 5913, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5913)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

In a very real sense, this special issue on Knowledge Organization Systems and Services is concerned with new applications, new contexts and new twists of old themes and problems. We are concerned with diverse attempts to apply the outcomes of much work over the years in artificial subject languages and their intellectual structures to facilitate access to digital information in various settings. This issue has its origins in NKOS workshops, held over the last two years in Bath, Vienna, Madrid and Denver, although the majority of contributions resulted from an open call for papers, disseminated in October 2005. NKOS (http://nkos.slis.kent.edu/) is an informal network whose general aim is to enable knowledge organization systems (KOS) to act as networked information services (both machine-to-machine and human facing), supporting the description and retrieval of information resources on the Internet. Since 1997, there has been an NKOS workshop each year, at either the JCDL or ECDL conference (2005 saw an NKOS workshop at both conferences and also at Dublin Core). Previous NKOS-related special issues have appeared in the online Journal of Digital Information in 2001 and 2004 (Hill and Koch 2001, Tudhope and Koch 2004).

0.0034336136 = product of:
  0.017168067 = sum of:
    0.017168067 = product of:
      0.034336135 = sum of:
        0.034336135 = weight(_text_:problems in 2300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034336135 = score(doc=2300,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.22801295 = fieldWeight in 2300, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2300)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Subject terms play a crucial role in resource discovery but require substantial effort to produce. Automatic subject classification and indexing address problems of scale and sustainability and can be used to enrich existing bibliographic records, establish more connections across and between resources and enhance consistency of bibliographic data. The paper aims to put forward a complex methodological framework to evaluate automatic classification tools of Swedish textual documents based on the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) recently introduced to Swedish libraries. Three major complementary approaches are suggested: a quality-built gold standard, retrieval effects, domain analysis. The gold standard is built based on input from at least two catalogue librarians, end-users expert in the subject, end users inexperienced in the subject and automated tools. Retrieval effects are studied through a combination of assigned and free tasks, including factual and comprehensive types. The study also takes into consideration the different role and character of subject terms in various knowledge domains, such as scientific disciplines. As a theoretical framework, domain analysis is used and applied in relation to the implementation of DDC in Swedish libraries and chosen domains of knowledge within the DDC itself.

0.0034336136 = product of:
  0.017168067 = sum of:
    0.017168067 = product of:
      0.034336135 = sum of:
        0.034336135 = weight(_text_:problems in 3311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034336135 = score(doc=3311,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.22801295 = fieldWeight in 3311, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3311)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Tools for automatic subject assignment help deal with scale and sustainability in creating and enriching metadata, establishing more connections across and between resources and enhancing consistency. Although some software vendors and experimental researchers claim the tools can replace manual subject indexing, hard scientific evidence of their performance in operating information environments is scarce. A major reason for this is that research is usually conducted in laboratory conditions, excluding the complexities of real-life systems and situations. The article reviews and discusses issues with existing evaluation approaches such as problems of aboutness and relevance assessments, implying the need to use more than a single "gold standard" method when evaluating indexing and retrieval, and proposes a comprehensive evaluation framework. The framework is informed by a systematic review of the literature on evaluation approaches: evaluating indexing quality directly through assessment by an evaluator or through comparison with a gold standard, evaluating the quality of computer-assisted indexing directly in the context of an indexing workflow, and evaluating indexing quality indirectly through analyzing retrieval performance.

0.002965881 = product of:
  0.014829405 = sum of:
    0.014829405 = product of:
      0.02965881 = sum of:
        0.02965881 = weight(_text_:22 in 1347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02965881 = score(doc=1347,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1347, 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=1347)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 8.2014 17:12:54