Search (59 results, page 1 of 3)

0.022432221 = product of:
  0.05608055 = sum of:
    0.02060168 = product of:
      0.04120336 = sum of:
        0.04120336 = weight(_text_:problems in 982) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04120336 = score(doc=982,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.27361554 = fieldWeight in 982, 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=982)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.03547887 = product of:
      0.07095774 = sum of:
        0.07095774 = weight(_text_:etc in 982) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07095774 = score(doc=982,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19761753 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.35906604 = fieldWeight in 982, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=982)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

This fourth paper in the series on PRECIS will consider the theoretical model of the indexing operation proposed in an earlier paper, and extend its application to one of the Romance languages, namely French. The present author has noted, throughout the publication of this series, how closely these logico-linguistic explanations could be applied to indexing in the French language. It is realised that experiments into PRECIS as a multilingual system are not complete, and that a new phase has undoubtedly started with the current British Library investigation of its translingual potential. Nevertheless, it would appear that the major problems still facing the researchers, such as the treatment of inflections, infixes, etc., are mostly related to the Germanic languages. As far as French is concerned, it is a relatively simple matter to give a positive answer to the question posed in the first paper: " . . . Do the codes and procedures developed so far (including the specified additions) amount to a general system which is capable of operating in any of the major European (and other) languages?"

0.02012331 = product of:
  0.10061655 = sum of:
    0.10061655 = sum of:
      0.07095774 = weight(_text_:etc in 2465) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07095774 = score(doc=2465,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19761753 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
            0.036484417 = queryNorm
          0.35906604 = fieldWeight in 2465, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2465)
      0.02965881 = weight(_text_:22 in 2465) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02965881 = score(doc=2465,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.036484417 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2465, 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=2465)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Alexandria is an innovation of international impact. It is the only multilingual dictionary for websites and PCs. A double click on a word opens a small window that gives interactive translations between 22 languages and includes meaning, synonyms and associated expressions. It is an ASP application grounded on a semantic network that is portable on any operating system or platform. Behind the application is the Integral Dictionary is the semantic network created by Memodata. Alexandria can be customized with specific vocabulary, descriptive articles, images, sounds, videos, etc. Its domains of application are considerable: e-tourism, online medias, language learning, international websites. Alexandria has also proved to be a basic tool for knowledge management purposes. The application can be customized according to a user or an organization needs. An application dedicated to mobile devices is currently being developed. Future developments are planned in the field of e-tourism in relation with French "pôles de compétitivité".

0.018896578 = product of:
  0.047241446 = sum of:
    0.027468907 = product of:
      0.054937813 = sum of:
        0.054937813 = weight(_text_:problems in 255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054937813 = score(doc=255,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.36482072 = fieldWeight in 255, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=255)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.019772539 = product of:
      0.039545078 = sum of:
        0.039545078 = weight(_text_:22 in 255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039545078 = score(doc=255,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 255, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=255)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

This paper considers issues surrounding name and subject access across languages and cultures, particularly mechanisms and knowledge organization tools (e.g., cataloging, metadata) for cross-lingual information access. The author examines current mechanisms for cross-lingual name and subject access and identifies major factors that hinder cross-lingual information access. The author provides examples from the Korean language that demonstrate the problems with cross-language name and subject access.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.016629452 = product of:
  0.04157363 = sum of:
    0.02060168 = product of:
      0.04120336 = sum of:
        0.04120336 = weight(_text_:problems in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04120336 = score(doc=1967,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.27361554 = fieldWeight in 1967, 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=1967)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.020971946 = product of:
      0.041943893 = sum of:
        0.041943893 = weight(_text_:22 in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041943893 = score(doc=1967,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

This paper reports on the second part of an initiative of the authors on researching classification systems with the conceptual model defined by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) final report. In an earlier study, the authors explored whether the FRSAD conceptual model could be extended beyond subject authority data to model classification data. The focus of the current study is to determine if classification data modeled using FRSAD can be used to solve real-world discovery problems in multicultural and multilingual contexts. The paper discusses the relationships between entities (same type or different types) in the context of classification systems that involve multiple translations and /or multicultural implementations. Results of two case studies are presented in detail: (a) two instances of the DDC (DDC 22 in English, and the Swedish-English mixed translation of DDC 22), and (b) Chinese Library Classification. The use cases of conceptual models in practice are also discussed.

0.013857874 = product of:
  0.034644686 = sum of:
    0.017168067 = product of:
      0.034336135 = sum of:
        0.034336135 = weight(_text_:problems in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034336135 = score(doc=1962,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.22801295 = fieldWeight in 1962, 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=1962)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.01747662 = product of:
      0.03495324 = sum of:
        0.03495324 = weight(_text_:22 in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03495324 = score(doc=1962,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1962, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1962)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

This article reports on the second part of an initiative of the authors on researching classification systems with the conceptual model defined by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) final report. In an earlier study, the authors explored whether the FRSAD conceptual model could be extended beyond subject authority data to model classification data. The focus of the current study is to determine if classification data modeled using FRSAD can be used to solve real-world discovery problems in multicultural and multilingual contexts. The article discusses the relationships between entities (same type or different types) in the context of classification systems that involve multiple translations and/or multicultural implementations. Results of two case studies are presented in detail: (a) two instances of the Dewey Decimal Classification [DDC] (DDC 22 in English, and the Swedish-English mixed translation of DDC 22), and (b) Chinese Library Classification. The use cases of conceptual models in practice are also discussed.

0.013415541 = product of:
  0.067077704 = sum of:
    0.067077704 = sum of:
      0.047305163 = weight(_text_:etc in 1512) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047305163 = score(doc=1512,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19761753 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
            0.036484417 = queryNorm
          0.23937736 = fieldWeight in 1512, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1512)
      0.019772539 = weight(_text_:22 in 1512) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.019772539 = score(doc=1512,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.036484417 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1512, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1512)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Das Hauptthema dieser Tagung - Multimedia - beschäftigt sich mit der Vielfalt der Medien und Quellen, mit denen wir es heute zu tun haben. Da liegt es nahe, sich auch mit einer anderen Form der Vielfalt, dem Thema Mehrsprachigkeit zu beschäftigen. Und die Veranstalter dieser Tagung waren der Meinung, dass ein Schweizer dazu mit Sicherheit etwas zu sagen habe. Das ist insofern richtig, als wir in einem mehrsprachigen Land leben und mit diesem Problem im Alltag vertraut sind, sowohl im täglichen Leben, wie auch eben im dokumentarischen Alltag. Aus dieser praktischen Sicht und nicht als Sprachwissenschafter, der ich nicht bin, möchte ich mich dem Thema nähern. Die Vielfalt der deutschen Sprache: Wenn die Schweiz ein mehrsprachiges Land ist - ist dann Deutschland im Gegensatz dazu ein einsprachiges Land? Auf den ersten Blick sicher ja - in Deutschland spricht man deutsch - aber die Sache ist doch nicht so einfach. Natürlich leben auch hier, wie überall, Menschen aus anderen Ländern mit anderen Muttersprachen - in dieser Optik gibt es wohl fast nur mehrsprachige Länder. Aber auch wenn wir nur die einheimische Bevölkerung mit deutschem Pass betrachten, ist die Sache nicht so eindeutig. Zwar haben sie das Deutsche als gemeinsame Sprache, die von allen gesprochen und verstanden wird. Aber die eigentliche Muttersprache der Deutschen oder mindestens einer grossen Mehrheit ist nicht das Hochdeutsche, sondern einer der vielen Dialekte. Diese Dialekte sind ja höchst unterschiedlich und einem Bayern oder Schwaben geht es sicher nicht anders, als es mir vor Jahren ergangen ist, als ich in Norddeutschland erstmals plattdeutsch sprechen hörte: ich hab nicht mal mehr Bahnhof verstanden und benötigte einige Wochen, bis ich der Unterhaltung wenigstens in groben Zügen folgen konnte. Das Hochdeutsche ist da der gemeinsame Nenner und ermöglichst erst die Verständigung, auch wenn es mit vielfältigen Akzenten und regional eingefärbtem Vokabular gesprochen wird. In diesem Sinne ist die Situation nicht anders als in der deutschsprachigen Schweiz, wo auch ganz unterschiedliche Dialekte gesprochen werden. Allerdings gibt es doch einen wichtigen Unterschied: Hier in Deutschland ist Hochdeutsch die allgemeine Umgangssprache sowohl in der mündlichen wie in der schriftlichen Kommunikation. Dialekte werden im privaten Bereich gesprochen, aber im öffentlichen Bereich, im Geschäftsleben, in der Wissenschaft etc. ist Hochdeutsch die Umgangssprache.

Date

22. 4.2003 12:09:10

0.011810362 = product of:
  0.029525906 = sum of:
    0.017168067 = product of:
      0.034336135 = sum of:
        0.034336135 = weight(_text_:problems in 5282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034336135 = score(doc=5282,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.22801295 = fieldWeight in 5282, 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=5282)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.0123578375 = product of:
      0.024715675 = sum of:
        0.024715675 = weight(_text_:22 in 5282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024715675 = score(doc=5282,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5282, 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=5282)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

The Web has become a large repository of documents (or pages) written in many different languages. In this context, traditional information retrieval (IR) techniques cannot be used whenever the user query and the documents being retrieved are in different languages. To address this problem, new cross-language information retrieval (CLIR) techniques have been proposed. In this work, we describe a method for cross-language retrieval of medical information. This method combines query terms and related medical concepts obtained automatically through a categorization procedure. The medical concepts are used to create a linguistic abstraction that allows retrieval of information in a language-independent way, minimizing linguistic problems such as polysemy. To evaluate our method, we carried out experiments using the OHSUMED test collection, whose documents are written in English, with queries expressed in Portuguese, Spanish, and French. The results indicate that our cross-language retrieval method is as effective as a standard vector space model algorithm operating on queries and documents in the same language. Further, our results are better than previous results in the literature.

Date

22. 7.2006 16:46:36

0.009614117 = product of:
  0.048070587 = sum of:
    0.048070587 = product of:
      0.096141174 = sum of:
        0.096141174 = weight(_text_:problems in 6485) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.096141174 = score(doc=6485,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.63843626 = fieldWeight in 6485, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6485)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.009461033 = product of:
  0.047305163 = sum of:
    0.047305163 = product of:
      0.094610326 = sum of:
        0.094610326 = weight(_text_:etc in 1019) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.094610326 = score(doc=1019,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19761753 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.47875473 = fieldWeight in 1019, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1019)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This paper reviews state-of-the-art techniques and methods for enhancing effectiveness of cross-language information retrieval (CLIR). The following research issues are covered: (1) matching strategies and translation techniques, (2) methods for solving the problem of translation ambiguity, (3) formal models for CLIR such as application of the language model, (4) the pivot language approach, (5) methods for searching multilingual document collection, (6) techniques for combining multiple language resources, etc.

0.008240673 = product of:
  0.04120336 = sum of:
    0.04120336 = product of:
      0.08240672 = sum of:
        0.08240672 = weight(_text_:problems in 4548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08240672 = score(doc=4548,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.5472311 = fieldWeight in 4548, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4548)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Footnote

Übers. d. Titels: Terminology and multilingual information: ovberview of problems and search for solutions

0.007909016 = product of:
  0.039545078 = sum of:
    0.039545078 = product of:
      0.079090156 = sum of:
        0.079090156 = weight(_text_:22 in 6063) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.079090156 = score(doc=6063,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 6063, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6063)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

2. 8.2001 8:55:22

0.007095774 = product of:
  0.03547887 = sum of:
    0.03547887 = product of:
      0.07095774 = sum of:
        0.07095774 = weight(_text_:etc in 4224) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07095774 = score(doc=4224,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19761753 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.35906604 = fieldWeight in 4224, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4224)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Many operational IR indexes are non-normalized, i.e. no lemmatization or stemming techniques, etc. have been employed in indexing. This poses a challenge for dictionary-based cross-language retrieval (CLIR), because translations are mostly lemmas. In this study, we face the challenge of dictionary-based CLIR in a non-normalized index. We test two optional approaches: FCG (Frequent Case Generation) and s-gramming. The idea of FCG is to automatically generate the most frequent inflected forms for a given lemma. FCG has been tested in monolingual retrieval and has been shown to be a good method for inflected retrieval, especially for highly inflected languages. S-gramming is an approximate string matching technique (an extension of n-gramming). The language pairs in our tests were English-Finnish, English-Swedish, Swedish-Finnish and Finnish-Swedish. Both our approaches performed quite well, but the results varied depending on the language pair. S-gramming and FCG performed quite equally in all the other language pairs except Finnish-Swedish, where s-gramming outperformed FCG.

0.006867227 = product of:
  0.034336135 = sum of:
    0.034336135 = product of:
      0.06867227 = sum of:
        0.06867227 = weight(_text_:problems in 1130) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06867227 = score(doc=1130,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.4560259 = fieldWeight in 1130, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1130)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.0059471927 = product of:
  0.029735964 = sum of:
    0.029735964 = product of:
      0.059471928 = sum of:
        0.059471928 = weight(_text_:problems in 108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059471928 = score(doc=108,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.39493 = fieldWeight in 108, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=108)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The case under consideration is a project of building an interdisciplinary multilingual thesaurus (Romanian-English-French) starting from a list of indexing terms based on an abridged version of the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC). The resulting thesaurus is intended for public libraries for both indexing and searching purposes in bibliographic databases covering a wide range of topics but with a fairly low level of specificity. The problems encountered in such an approach fall into two groups: 1) concordance or compatibility problems in terms of the indexing languages considered (between a classification system and a thesaurus); 2) equivalence and, hence, translatability problems in terms of the natural languages involved. Additionally, the question of ambiguity given the co-occurrence of terms in more than one class, will be discussed with reference to homographs and polysemantic words. In a thesaurus with such a wide coverage yet with a low specificity level, the method adopted in the thesaurus construction was to provide as many lead-in terms as possible and post them up to the closest in meaning broader term in order to improve the recall ratio

0.005931762 = product of:
  0.02965881 = sum of:
    0.02965881 = product of:
      0.05931762 = sum of:
        0.05931762 = weight(_text_:22 in 126) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05931762 = score(doc=126,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 126, 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=126)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".

0.0054937815 = product of:
  0.027468907 = sum of:
    0.027468907 = product of:
      0.054937813 = sum of:
        0.054937813 = weight(_text_:problems in 7481) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054937813 = score(doc=7481,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.36482072 = fieldWeight in 7481, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7481)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Working with a foreign vendor and creating a network among three multilingual libraries was a challenging experience for the Library of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America. After four years investigating library systems offering integrated capabilities for English/Hebrew, the library selected the ALEPH system. The intricacies of the Hebrew language posed unexpected problems. Gratz College and the Annenberg Research Institute became key players in the establishment of the network. Several technical difficulties had to bes resolved before interfacing aspects among the three multilingual libraries became functional

0.004943135 = product of:
  0.024715675 = sum of:
    0.024715675 = product of:
      0.04943135 = sum of:
        0.04943135 = weight(_text_:22 in 4157) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04943135 = score(doc=4157,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4157, 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=4157)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Information und Märkte: 50. Deutscher Dokumentartag 1998, Kongreß der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Dokumentation e.V. (DGD), Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn, 22.-24. September 1998. Hrsg. von Marlies Ockenfeld u. Gerhard J. Mantwill

0.004943135 = product of:
  0.024715675 = sum of:
    0.024715675 = product of:
      0.04943135 = sum of:
        0.04943135 = weight(_text_:22 in 1287) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04943135 = score(doc=1287,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1287, 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=1287)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".

0.004943135 = product of:
  0.024715675 = sum of:
    0.024715675 = product of:
      0.04943135 = sum of:
        0.04943135 = weight(_text_:22 in 2758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04943135 = score(doc=2758,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2758, 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=2758)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

1. 2.2016 18:25:22

0.004943135 = product of:
  0.024715675 = sum of:
    0.024715675 = product of:
      0.04943135 = sum of:
        0.04943135 = weight(_text_:22 in 3278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04943135 = score(doc=3278,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3278, 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=3278)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Metadata and semantics research: 10th International Conference, MTSR 2016, Göttingen, Germany, November 22-25, 2016, Proceedings. Eds.: E. Garoufallou