Search (20 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Theorie verbaler Dokumentationssprachen"
  1. Degez, D.: Compatibilité des langages d'indexation mariage, cohabitation ou fusion? : Quelques examples concrèts (1998) 0.02
    0.016534507 = product of:
      0.04133627 = sum of:
        0.024035294 = product of:
          0.048070587 = sum of:
            0.048070587 = weight(_text_:problems in 2245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048070587 = score(doc=2245,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.31921813 = fieldWeight in 2245, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2245)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.017300973 = product of:
          0.034601945 = sum of:
            0.034601945 = weight(_text_:22 in 2245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034601945 = score(doc=2245,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2245, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2245)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    To illustrate the theoretical analysis presented by J. Maniez published in Documentaliste 34(1997) nos.4/5 presents some concrete examples drawn for experience of the difficulties increasingly faced in trying to make different indexing languages compatible. Various types of problems may be considered: comparing semantic terms and relationships that compose indexing languages, setting standards for writing and vocabulary, and opposing pre and post coordinated descriptors. Proposes several solutions and discusses the need for further applied research in this area
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
  2. Engerer, V.: Control and syntagmatization : vocabulary requirements in information retrieval thesauri and natural language lexicons (2017) 0.01
    0.01003494 = product of:
      0.050174702 = sum of:
        0.050174702 = product of:
          0.100349404 = sum of:
            0.100349404 = weight(_text_:etc in 3678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.100349404 = score(doc=3678,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.19761753 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.50779605 = fieldWeight in 3678, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3678)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    This paper explores the relationships between natural language lexicons in lexical semantics and thesauri in information retrieval research. These different areas of knowledge have different restrictions on use of vocabulary; thesauri are used only in information search and retrieval contexts, whereas lexicons are mental systems and generally applicable in all domains of life. A set of vocabulary requirements that defines the more concrete characteristics of vocabulary items in the 2 contexts can be derived from this framework: lexicon items have to be learnable, complex, transparent, etc., whereas thesaurus terms must be effective, current and relevant, searchable, etc. The differences in vocabulary properties correlate with 2 other factors, the well-known dimension of Control (deliberate, social activities of building and maintaining vocabularies), and Syntagmatization, which is less known and describes vocabulary items' varying formal preparedness to exit the thesaurus/lexicon, enter into linear syntactic constructions, and, finally, acquire communicative functionality. It is proposed that there is an inverse relationship between Control and Syntagmatization.
  3. Melton, J.S.: ¬A use for the techniques of structural linguistics in documentation research (1965) 0.01
    0.009461033 = product of:
      0.047305163 = sum of:
        0.047305163 = product of:
          0.094610326 = sum of:
            0.094610326 = weight(_text_:etc in 834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.094610326 = score(doc=834,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19761753 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.47875473 = fieldWeight in 834, 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=834)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    Index language (the system of symbols for representing subject content after analysis) is considered as a separate component and a variable in an information retrieval system. It is suggested that for purposes of testing, comparing and evaluating index language, the techniques of structural linguistics may provide a descriptive methodology by which all such languages (hierarchical and faceted classification, analytico-synthetic indexing, traditional subject indexing, indexes and classifications based on automatic text analysis, etc.) could be described in term of a linguistic model, and compared on a common basis
  4. Ruge, G.: ¬A spreading activation network for automatic generation of thesaurus relationships (1991) 0.01
    0.0069203894 = product of:
      0.034601945 = sum of:
        0.034601945 = product of:
          0.06920389 = sum of:
            0.06920389 = weight(_text_:22 in 4506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06920389 = score(doc=4506,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4506, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4506)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    8.10.2000 11:52:22
  5. Broughton, V.: Language related problems in the construction of faceted terminologies and their automatic management (2008) 0.01
    0.0059471927 = product of:
      0.029735964 = sum of:
        0.029735964 = product of:
          0.059471928 = sum of:
            0.059471928 = weight(_text_:problems in 2497) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.059471928 = score(doc=2497,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.39493 = fieldWeight in 2497, 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=2497)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Content
    The paper describes current work on the generation of a thesaurus format from the schedules of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification 2nd edition (BC2). The practical problems that occur in moving from a concept based approach to a terminological approach cluster around issues of vocabulary control that are not fully addressed in a systematic structure. These difficulties can be exacerbated within domains in the humanities because large numbers of culture specific terms may need to be accommodated in any thesaurus. The ways in which these problems can be resolved within the context of a semi-automated approach to the thesaurus generation have consequences for the management of classification data in the source vocabulary. The way in which the vocabulary is marked up for the purpose of machine manipulation is described, and some of the implications for editorial policy are discussed and examples given. The value of the classification notation as a language independent representation and mapping tool should not be sacrificed in such an exercise.
  6. Wu, Y.; Yang, L.: Construction and evaluation of an oil spill semantic relation taxonomy for supporting knowledge discovery (2015) 0.01
    0.0058270353 = product of:
      0.029135175 = sum of:
        0.029135175 = product of:
          0.05827035 = sum of:
            0.05827035 = weight(_text_:problems in 2202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05827035 = score(doc=2202,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.3869508 = fieldWeight in 2202, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2202)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    The paper presents the rationale, significance, method and procedure of building a taxonomy of semantic relations in the oil spill domain for supporting knowledge discovery through inference. Difficult problems during the development of the taxonomy are discussed and partial solutions are proposed. A preliminary functional evaluation of the taxonomy for supporting knowledge discovery was performed. Durability an expansibility of the taxonomy were evaluated by using the taxonomy to classifying the terms in a biomedical relation ontology. The taxonomy was found to have full expansibility and high degree of durability. The study proposes more research problems than solutions.
  7. Mikacic, M.: Statistical system for subject designation (SSSD) for libraries in Croatia (1996) 0.01
    0.005592519 = product of:
      0.027962593 = sum of:
        0.027962593 = product of:
          0.055925187 = sum of:
            0.055925187 = weight(_text_:22 in 2943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.055925187 = score(doc=2943,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2943, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2943)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    31. 7.2006 14:22:21
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) no.1, S.77-93
  8. Takeda, N.: Problems in hierarchical structures in thesauri : their influences on the results of information retrieval (1994) 0.01
    0.0054937815 = product of:
      0.027468907 = sum of:
        0.027468907 = product of:
          0.054937813 = sum of:
            0.054937813 = weight(_text_:problems in 2642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054937813 = score(doc=2642,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.36482072 = fieldWeight in 2642, 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=2642)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
  9. Schmitz-Esser, W.: Language of general communication and concept compatibility (1996) 0.00
    0.004943135 = product of:
      0.024715675 = sum of:
        0.024715675 = product of:
          0.04943135 = sum of:
            0.04943135 = weight(_text_:22 in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04943135 = score(doc=6089,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 6089, 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=6089)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Pages
    S.11-22
  10. Hjoerland, B.: Semantics and knowledge organization (2007) 0.00
    0.004855863 = product of:
      0.024279313 = sum of:
        0.024279313 = product of:
          0.048558626 = sum of:
            0.048558626 = weight(_text_:problems in 1980) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048558626 = score(doc=1980,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.322459 = fieldWeight in 1980, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1980)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    The aim of this chapter is to demonstrate that semantic issues underlie all research questions within Library and Information Science (LIS, or, as hereafter, IS) and, in particular, the subfield known as Knowledge Organization (KO). Further, it seeks to show that semantics is a field influenced by conflicting views and discusses why it is important to argue for the most fruitful one of these. Moreover, the chapter demonstrates that IS has not yet addressed semantic problems in systematic fashion and examines why the field is very fragmented and without a proper theoretical basis. The focus here is on broad interdisciplinary issues and the long-term perspective. The theoretical problems involving semantics and concepts are very complicated. Therefore, this chapter starts by considering tools developed in KO for information retrieval (IR) as basically semantic tools. In this way, it establishes a specific IS focus on the relation between KO and semantics. It is well known that thesauri consist of a selection of concepts supplemented with information about their semantic relations (such as generic relations or "associative relations"). Some words in thesauri are "preferred terms" (descriptors), whereas others are "lead-in terms." The descriptors represent concepts. The difference between "a word" and "a concept" is that different words may have the same meaning and similar words may have different meanings, whereas one concept expresses one meaning.
  11. Lopes, M.I.: Principles underlying subject heading languages : an international approach (1996) 0.00
    0.0048070587 = product of:
      0.024035294 = sum of:
        0.024035294 = product of:
          0.048070587 = sum of:
            0.048070587 = weight(_text_:problems in 5608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048070587 = score(doc=5608,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.31921813 = fieldWeight in 5608, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5608)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    Discusses the problems in establishing commonly accepted principles for subject retrieval between different bibliographic systems. The Working Group on Principles Underlying Subject Heading Languages was established to devise general principles for any subject retrieval system and to review existing real systems in the light of such principles and compare them in order to evaluate the extent of their coverage and their application in current practices. Provides a background and history of the Working Group. Discusses the principles underlying subject headings and their purposes and the state of the work and major findings
  12. ALA / Subcommittee on Subject Relationships/Reference Structures: Final Report to the ALCTS/CCS Subject Analysis Committee (1997) 0.00
    0.0041392017 = product of:
      0.020696009 = sum of:
        0.020696009 = product of:
          0.041392017 = sum of:
            0.041392017 = weight(_text_:etc in 1800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.041392017 = score(doc=1800,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19761753 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.20945519 = fieldWeight in 1800, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1800)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    The SAC Subcommittee on Subject Relationships/Reference Structures was authorized at the 1995 Midwinter Meeting and appointed shortly before Annual Conference. Its creation was one result of a discussion of how (and why) to promote the display and use of broader-term subject heading references, and its charge reads as follows: To investigate: (1) the kinds of relationships that exist between subjects, the display of which are likely to be useful to catalog users; (2) how these relationships are or could be recorded in authorities and classification formats; (3) options for how these relationships should be presented to users of online and print catalogs, indexes, lists, etc. By the summer 1996 Annual Conference, make some recommendations to SAC about how to disseminate the information and/or implement changes. At that time assess the need for additional time to investigate these issues. The Subcommittee's work on each of the imperatives in the charge was summarized in a report issued at the 1996 Annual Conference (Appendix A). Highlights of this work included the development of a taxonomy of 165 subject relationships; a demonstration that, using existing MARC coding, catalog systems could be programmed to generate references they do not currently support; and an examination of reference displays in several CD-ROM database products. Since that time, work has continued on identifying term relationships and display options; on tracking research, discussion, and implementation of subject relationships in information systems; and on compiling a list of further research needs.
  13. Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Thesaural relationships (2001) 0.00
    0.0034601947 = product of:
      0.017300973 = sum of:
        0.017300973 = product of:
          0.034601945 = sum of:
            0.034601945 = weight(_text_:22 in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034601945 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1149, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1149)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    22. 9.2007 15:45:57
  14. Boteram, F.: Semantische Relationen in Dokumentationssprachen : vom Thesaurus zum semantischen Netz (2010) 0.00
    0.0034601947 = product of:
      0.017300973 = sum of:
        0.017300973 = product of:
          0.034601945 = sum of:
            0.034601945 = weight(_text_:22 in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034601945 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4792, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4792)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Source
    Wissensspeicher in digitalen Räumen: Nachhaltigkeit - Verfügbarkeit - semantische Interoperabilität. Proceedings der 11. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Konstanz, 20. bis 22. Februar 2008. Hrsg.: J. Sieglerschmidt u. H.P.Ohly
  15. Compatibility and integration of order systems : Research Seminar Proceedings of the TIP/ISKO Meeting, Warsaw, 13-15 September 1995 (1996) 0.00
    0.0034336136 = product of:
      0.017168067 = sum of:
        0.017168067 = product of:
          0.034336135 = sum of:
            0.034336135 = weight(_text_:problems in 6050) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034336135 = score(doc=6050,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.22801295 = fieldWeight in 6050, 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=6050)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Content
    Enthält die Beiträge: SCHMITZ-ESSER, W.: Language of general communication and concept compatibility; RIESTHUIS, G.: Theory of compatibility of information languages; DAHLBERG, I.: The compatibility guidelines - a re-evaluation; SOERGEL, D.: Data structure and software support for integrated thesauri; MURASZKIEWICZ, M., H. RYBINSKI u. W. STRUK: Software problems of merging multilingual thesauri; CHMIELEWSKA-GORCZYCA, E.: Compatibility of indexing tools in multidatabase environment; NEGRINI, G.: Towards structural compatibility between concept systems; SCIBOR, E.: Some remarks on the establishment of concordances between a universal classification system and an interdisciplinary thesaurus; HOPPE, S.: The UMLS - a model for knowledge integration in a subject field; DEXTRE-CLARKE, S.: Integrating thesauri in the agricultural sciences; ROULIN, C.: Bringing multilingual thesauri together: a feasibility study; ZIMMERMANN, H.: Conception and application possibilities of classification concordances in an OPAC environment; SOSINSKA-KALATA, B.: The Universal Decimal Classification as an international standard for knowledge organization in bibliographic databases and library catalogues; WOZNIAK, J. u. T. GLOWACKA: KABA Subject Authority File - an example of an integrated Polish-French-English subject headings system; BABIK, W.: Terminology as a level for the compatibility of indexing languages - some remarks; STANCIKOVA, P.: International integrated database systems linked to multilingual thesauri covering the field of environment and agriculture; SAMEK, T.: Indexing languages integration and the EUROVOC Thesaurus in the Czech Republic; SIWEK, K.: Compatibility discrepancies between Polish and foreign databases; GLINSKI, W. u. M. MURASZKIEWICZ: An intelligent front-end processor for accessing information systems
  16. Maniez, J.: Fusion de banques de donnees documentaires at compatibilite des languages d'indexation (1997) 0.00
    0.002965881 = product of:
      0.014829405 = sum of:
        0.014829405 = product of:
          0.02965881 = sum of:
            0.02965881 = weight(_text_:22 in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02965881 = score(doc=2246,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2246, 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=2246)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
  17. Coates, E.J.: Significance and term relationship in compound headings (1985) 0.00
    0.0027468908 = product of:
      0.013734453 = sum of:
        0.013734453 = product of:
          0.027468907 = sum of:
            0.027468907 = weight(_text_:problems in 3634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027468907 = score(doc=3634,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.18241036 = fieldWeight in 3634, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3634)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    In the continuing search for criteria for determining the form of compound headings (i.e., headings containing more than one word), many authors have attempted to deal with the problem of entry element and citation order. Among the proposed criteria are Cutter's concept of "significance," Kaiser's formula of "concrete/process," Prevost's "noun rule," and Farradane's categories of relationships*' (q.v.). One of the problems in applying the criteria has been the difficulty in determining what is "significant," particularly when two or more words in the heading all refer to concrete objects. In the following excerpt from Subject Catalogues: Headings and Structure, a widely cited book an the alphabetical subject catalog, E. J. Coates proposes the concept of "term significance," that is, "the word which evokes the clearest mental image," as the criterion for determining the entry element in a compound heading. Since a concrete object generally evokes a clearer mental image than an action or process, Coates' theory is in line with Kaiser's theory of "concrete/process" (q.v.) which Coates renamed "thing/action." For determining the citation order of component elements in a compound heading where the elements are equally "significant" (i.e., both or all evoking clear mental images), Coates proposes the use of "term relationship" as the determining factor. He has identified twenty different kinds of relationships among terms and set down the citation order for each. Another frequently encountered problem related to citation order is the determination of the entry element for a compound heading which contains a topic and a locality. Entering such headings uniformly under either the topic or the locality has proven to be infeasible in practice. Many headings of this type have the topic as the main heading, subdivided by the locality; others are entered under the locality as the main heading with the topic as the subdivision. No criteria or rules have been proposed that ensure consistency or predictability. In the following selection, Coates attempts to deal with this problem by ranking the "main areas of knowledge according to the extent to which they appear to be significantly conditioned by locality." The theory Coates expounded in his book was put into practice in compiling the British Technology Index for which Coates served as the editor from 1961 to 1977.
  18. Jia, J.: From data to knowledge : the relationships between vocabularies, linked data and knowledge graphs (2021) 0.00
    0.0024715676 = product of:
      0.0123578375 = sum of:
        0.0123578375 = product of:
          0.024715675 = sum of:
            0.024715675 = weight(_text_:22 in 106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.024715675 = score(doc=106,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 106, 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=106)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    22. 1.2021 14:24:32
  19. Farradane, J.E.L.: Fundamental fallacies and new needs in classification (1985) 0.00
    0.0020601682 = product of:
      0.01030084 = sum of:
        0.01030084 = product of:
          0.02060168 = sum of:
            0.02060168 = weight(_text_:problems in 3642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02060168 = score(doc=3642,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.13680777 = fieldWeight in 3642, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3642)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    This chapter from The Sayers Memorial Volume summarizes Farradane's earlier work in which he developed his major themes by drawing in part upon research in psychology, and particularly those discoveries called "cognitive" which now form part of cognitive science. Farradane, a chemist by training who later became an information scientist and Director of the Center for Information Science, City University, London, from 1958 to 1973, defines the various types of methods used to achieve classification systems-philosophic, scientific, and synthetic. Early an he distinguishes the view that classification is "some part of external 'reality' waiting to be discovered" from that view which considers it "an intellectual operation upon mental entities and concepts." Classification, therefore, is to be treated as a mental construct and not as something "out there" to be discovered as, say, in astronomy or botany. His approach could be termed, somewhat facetiously, as an "in there" one, meaning found by utilizing the human brain as the key tool. This is not to say that discoveries in astronomy or botany do not require the use of the brain as a key tool. It is merely that the "material" worked upon by this tool is presented to it for observation by "that inward eye," by memory and by inference rather than by planned physical observation, memory, and inference. This distinction could be refined or clarified by considering the initial "observation" as a specific kind of mental set required in each case. Farradane then proceeds to demolish the notion of main classes as "fictitious," partly because the various category-defining methodologies used in library classification are "randomly mixed." The implication, probably correct, is that this results in mixed metaphorical concepts. It is an interesting contrast to the approach of Julia Pettee (q.v.), who began with indexing terms and, in studying relationships between terms, discovered hidden hierarchies both between the terms themselves and between the cross-references leading from one term or set of terms to another. One is tempted to ask two questions: "Is hierarchy innate but misinterpreted?" and "ls it possible to have meaningful terms which have only categorical relationships (that have no see also or equivalent relationships to other, out-of-category terms)?" Partly as a result of the rejection of existing general library classification systems, the Classification Research Group-of which Farradane was a charter member decided to adopt the principles of Ranganathan's faceted classification system, while rejecting his limit an the number of fundamental categories. The advantage of the faceted method is that it is created by inductive, rather than deductive, methods. It can be altered more readily to keep up with changes in and additions to the knowledge base in a subject without having to re-do the major schedules. In 1961, when Farradane's paper appeared, the computer was beginning to be viewed as a tool for solving all information retrieval problems. He tartly remarks:
  20. Mooers, C.N.: ¬The indexing language of an information retrieval system (1985) 0.00
    0.0017300973 = product of:
      0.008650486 = sum of:
        0.008650486 = product of:
          0.017300973 = sum of:
            0.017300973 = weight(_text_:22 in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017300973 = score(doc=3644,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036484417 = queryNorm
                0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Footnote
    Original in: Information retrieval today: papers presented at an Institute conducted by the Library School and the Center for Continuation Study, University of Minnesota, Sept. 19-22, 1962. Ed. by Wesley Simonton. Minneapolis, Minn.: The Center, 1963. S.21-36.