Search (2319 results, page 116 of 116)

0.0024035294 = product of:
  0.012017647 = sum of:
    0.012017647 = product of:
      0.024035294 = sum of:
        0.024035294 = weight(_text_:problems in 1264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024035294 = score(doc=1264,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.15960906 = fieldWeight in 1264, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1264)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Defining metadata as "data about data" provokes more questions than it answers. What are the forms of the data and metadata? Can we be more specific about the manner in which the metadata is "about" the data? Are data and metadata distinguished only in the context of their relationship? Is the nature of the relationship between the datasets declarative or procedural? Can the metadata itself be described by other data? Over the past several years, we have been engaged in a number of efforts examining the role, format, composition, and architecture of metadata for networked resources. During this time, we have noticed the tendency to be led astray by comfortable, but somewhat inappropriate, models in the non-digital information environment. Rather than pursuing familiar models, there is the need for a new model that fully exploits the unique combination of computation and connectivity that characterizes the digital library. In this paper, we describe an extension of the Warwick Framework that we call Distributed Active Relationships (DARs). DARs provide a powerful model for representing data and metadata in digital library objects. They explicitly express the relationships between networked resources, and even allow those relationships to be dynamically downloadable and executable. The DAR model is based on the following principles, which our examination of the "data about data" definition has led us to regard as axiomatic: * There is no essential distinction between data and metadata. We can only make such a distinction in terms of a particular "about" relationship. As a result, what is metadata in the context of one "about" relationship may be data in another. * There is no single "about" relationship. There are many different and important relationships between data resources. * Resources can be related without regard for their location. The connectivity in networked information architectures makes it possible to have data in one repository describe data in another repository. * The computational power of the networked information environment makes it possible to consider active or dynamic relationships between data sets. This adds considerable power to the "data about data" definition. First, data about another data set may not physically exist, but may be automatically derived. Second, the "about" relationship may be an executable object -- in a sense interpretable metadata. As will be shown, this provides useful mechanisms for handling complex metadata problems such as rights management of digital objects. The remainder of this paper describes the development and consequences of the DAR model. Section 2 reviews the Warwick Framework, which is the basis for the model described in this paper. Section 3 examines the concept of the Warwick Framework Catalog, which provides a mechanism for expressing the relationships between the packages in a Warwick Framework container. With that background established, section 4 generalizes the Warwick Framework by removing the restriction that it only contains "metadata". This allows us to consider digital library objects that are aggregations of (possibly distributed) data sets, with the relationships between the data sets expressed using a Warwick Framework Catalog. Section 5 further extends the model by describing Distributed Active Relationships (DARs). DARs are the explicit relationships that have the potential to be executable, as alluded to earlier. Finally, section 6 describes two possible implementations of these concepts.

0.0020601682 = product of:
  0.01030084 = sum of:
    0.01030084 = product of:
      0.02060168 = sum of:
        0.02060168 = weight(_text_:problems in 3085) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02060168 = score(doc=3085,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.13680777 = fieldWeight in 3085, 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=3085)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

Mit Beiträgen von: DEREMETZ, A.: Metaphor, organization and building of knowledge in textual sciences; ALBRECHTSEN, H. u. E.K. JACOB: The role of classificatory structures as boundary objects in information ecologies; MYLOPOULOS, J. et al.: Computational mechanisms for knowledge organization; PHELAN, A.: Database and knowledge representation: the Greek legacy; POLANCO, X. et al.: An artificial neural network perspective on knowledge representation from databases: the use of a multilayer preception for data clusters cartography; SUOMINEN, V.: Linguistic / semiotic conditions of retrieval / documentation in the light of a sausurean conception of language: 'organising knowledge' or 'communication concerning documents?'; BÉGUIN, A.: Thesaurus usage and mental development; SUKIASYAN, E.: Classification systems in their historical development: problems of typology and terminology; SALLET FERREIRA NOVELLINO, M.: Information transfer considering the production and use contexts: information retrieval languages; FISCHER, D.H.: From thesauri towards ontologies?; LYKKE NIELSEN, M.: Future thesauri: what kind of conceptual knowledge do searchers need?; LACROIX, S. et al.: OK: a model of ontologies by differentiation; LEE, M. u. R. MIZOGUCHI; Ontology models for supporting exploratory information needs;

0.0020601682 = product of:
  0.01030084 = sum of:
    0.01030084 = product of:
      0.02060168 = sum of:
        0.02060168 = weight(_text_:problems in 921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02060168 = score(doc=921,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.13680777 = fieldWeight in 921, 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=921)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

Enthält u.a. die Beiträge: INTRONA, L.D.: Context, power, bodies and information: exploring the 'entangled' contexts of information; JACOB, E.K. u.a.: When essence becomes function: post-structuralist implications for an ecological theory of organizational classification systems; MALMSJO, A.: Conditions for designing different kinds of information systems; JULIEN, H.: Where to from here? Results of an emprical study and user-centred implications for system design; VAKKARI, P.: Task complexity, information types, search strategies and relevance: integrating studies on information seeking and retrieval; SPINK, A.: Towards a theoretical framework for information retrieval in an information seeking context; KUHLTHAU, C.C.: Investigating patterns in information seeking; concepts in context; BREZILLON, P. u.a.: Modeling context in information seeking; BYSTROM, K.: Information seekers in context: an analysis of the 'doer' in INSU studies; AUDUNSON, R.: Can institutional theory contribute to our understanding of information seeking behaviour?; SONNENWALD, D.H.: Evolving perspectives of human information behaviour: conexts, situations, social networks and information horizons; OLSSON, M.: Discourse: a new theoretical framework for examining information behaviour in its social context; KEANE, D.: The information behaviour of senior executives; LIMBERG, L.: Three conceptions of information seeking and use; PRESTON, H. u.a.: An evaluation of case study methodology within information system research; WILSON, T.D.: Exploring models of information behaviour: the 'uncertainty' project; ENNIS, M. u.a.: Towards a predictive model of information seeking: empirical studies of end-user searching; SOLOMON, P.: Information mosaics: patterns of action that structure; TOMS, E.G.: What motivates the browser? ABAD-GARCIA, M.F.: Information needs of physicians at the University Clinic Hospital in Valencia-Spain: GORMAN, P.: Information seeking of primary care physicians: conceptual models and empirical studies; LOMAX, E.C. u.a.: An investigation of the information seeking behavior of medical oncologists in Metropolitan Pittsburgh using a multi-method approach; PETTIGREW, K.E.: Agents of information: the role of community health nurses in linking the elderly with local resources by providing human services information; URQUHART, C.J.: Using vignettes to diagnose information strategies: opportunities and possible problems for information use studies of health professionals; WILDEMUTH, B.M. u.a.: The transition from formalized need to compromised need in the context of clinical problem solving; MARCELLA, R. u. G. BAXTER: The transition from formalized need to compromised need in the context of clinical problem solving; COLES, C.: Information seeking behaviour of public library users: use and non-use of electronic media; GREEN, A.-M. u. E. DAVENPORT: Putting new media in its place: the Edinburgh experience; ROSS, C.S.: Finding without seeking: what readers say about the role of pleasure-reading as a source of information; SAVOLAINEN, R.: Seeking and using information from the Internet: the context of non-work use; SPINK, A. u.a.: Everyday life information-seeking by low-income African American households: Wynnewood Healthy Neighbourhood Project; DIXON, P. u. L. BANWELL: School governors and effective dicision making; COOPER, L. u. C.C. KUHLTHAU: Imagery for constructing meaning in the information search process: a study of middle school students; FABRITIUS, H.: Triangulation as a multiperspective strategy in a qualitative study of information seeking behaviour of journalists; JOHINSTON, S.: Training for the information economy: a study of the information culture of a graduate business school; NICHOLAS, D. u. P. WILLIAMS: The changing information environment: the impact of the Internet on information seeking behaviour in the media; WIJNGAERT, L. van de: A policy capturing study of media choice: the effect information of needs and user characteristics on media choices; FETZER, A.: Validity claims: assigning contextual information; FOSTER, A.: On the interpretative authority of information systems; MUTCH, A.: Information: a critical realist approach; PERRY, M.: Process, representation and taskworld: distributed cognition and the organisation of information; HUOTARI, M.-L.: Social network analysis as a tool to evaluate IM in the public sector: a pilot study at the University of Tampere

0.0020601682 = product of:
  0.01030084 = sum of:
    0.01030084 = product of:
      0.02060168 = sum of:
        0.02060168 = weight(_text_:problems in 849) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02060168 = score(doc=849,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.13680777 = fieldWeight in 849, 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=849)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.0020601682 = product of:
  0.01030084 = sum of:
    0.01030084 = product of:
      0.02060168 = sum of:
        0.02060168 = weight(_text_:problems in 1262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02060168 = score(doc=1262,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.13680777 = fieldWeight in 1262, 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=1262)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The Z39.50 standard for information retrieval is important from a number of perspectives. While still not widely known within the computer networking community, it is a mature standard that represents the culmination of two decades of thinking and debate about how information retrieval functions can be modeled, standardized, and implemented in a distributed systems environment. And - importantly -- it has been tested through substantial deployment experience. Z39.50 is one of the few examples we have to date of a protocol that actually goes beyond codifying mechanism and moves into the area of standardizing shared semantic knowledge. The extent to which this should be a goal of the protocol has been an ongoing source of controversy and tension within the developer community, and differing views on this issue can be seen both in the standard itself and the way that it is used in practice. Given the growing emphasis on issues such as "semantic interoperability" as part of the research agenda for digital libraries (see Clifford A. Lynch and Hector Garcia-Molina. Interoperability, Scaling, and the Digital Libraries Research Agenda, Report on the May 18-19, 1995 IITA Libraries Workshop, <http://www- diglib.stanford.edu/diglib/pub/reports/iita-dlw/main.html>), the insights gained by the Z39.50 community into the complex interactions among various definitions of semantics and interoperability are particularly relevant. The development process for the Z39.50 standard is also of interest in its own right. Its history, dating back to the 1970s, spans a period that saw the eclipse of formal standards-making agencies by groups such as the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and informal standards development consortia. Moreover, in order to achieve meaningful implementation, Z39.50 had to move beyond its origins in the OSI debacle of the 1980s. Z39.50 has also been, to some extent, a victim of its own success -- or at least promise. Recent versions of the standard are highly extensible, and the consensus process of standards development has made it hospitable to an ever-growing set of new communities and requirements. As this process of extension has proceeded, it has become ever less clear what the appropriate scope and boundaries of the protocol should be, and what expectations one should have of practical interoperability among implementations of the standard. Z39.50 thus offers an excellent case study of the problems involved in managing the evolution of a standard over time. It may well offer useful lessons for the future of other standards such as HTTP and HTML, which seem to be facing some of the same issues.

0.001977254 = product of:
  0.009886269 = sum of:
    0.009886269 = product of:
      0.019772539 = sum of:
        0.019772539 = weight(_text_:22 in 2317) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019772539 = score(doc=2317,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2317, 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=2317)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

15.10.1995 11:44:22

0.001977254 = product of:
  0.009886269 = sum of:
    0.009886269 = product of:
      0.019772539 = sum of:
        0.019772539 = weight(_text_:22 in 5889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019772539 = score(doc=5889,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5889, 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=5889)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

1. (A) Allgemeines, Bibliographien, Nachschlagewerke, Wissenschaftskunde, Hochschulwesen, Buchwesen, Medien- und Kommunikationswissenschaften, Umwelt 4. Aufl. 1993. - 2. (B) Theologie und Religionswissenschaften 1993 (Erg. der 4. Aufl. 1987). - 3,1. (CA-CI) Philosphie 1992 (Erg. der 4. Aufl. 1989). - 3,2. (CL-CZ) Psychologie 1990. - 4. (D) Pädagogik 1993 (Erg. der 5. Aufl. 1987). - 5. (E) Allgemeine und vergleichene Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaften. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen 1993 (Erg. der 3. Aufl. 1989). - 6. (F) Klassische Philologie. Byzantinistik. Mittellat. und neugriech. Philologie. Neulatein. 1993 (Erg. der 2. Aufl. 1984). - 7. (G) Germanistik. Niederländische Philologie. Skandinavistik 1993 (Erg. der 3. Aufl. 1987). - 8. (H) Anglistik. Amerikanistik 5. Aufl.1995. - 9,1+2. (I) Romanistik 5. Aufl. 1992. - 10,1+2. (K) Slavistik 1994 (Erg. der 3 Aufl. 1988). - 11,1. (LA-LC) Ethnologie (Volks- und Völkerkunde) 5. Aufl. 1994. - 11,2. (LD-LG) Klassische Archäologie 1993 (Erg. der 3 Aufl. 1984). - 11,3. (LH-LO) Kunstgeschichte 1992 (Erg. der 3. Aufl. 1988) . - 11,4. (LP-LY) Musikwissenschaft 1993 (Erg. der 3. Aufl. 1988). - 12,1. (MA-MM) Politologie 5. Aufl. 1993. - 12,2. (MN-MW) Soziologie 1993 (Erg. der 6. Aufl 1990). - 12,3. (MX-MZ) Militärwissenschaft 1993 (Erg. der 2. Aufl. 1982). - 13,1+2. (N) Geschichte 6. Aufl. 1993. - 14. (P) Rechtswissenschaft 7. Aufl. 1992. - 15. (Q) Wirtschaftswissenschaften 4. Aufl. 1992. - 16. (R) Geographie 7. Aufl. 1993. - 17,1. (SA-SP) Mathematik 6. Aufl. 1992. - 17,2. (SQ-SU) Informatik 6. Aufl. 1993. - 18,1. (TA-TD) Allg. Naturwissenschaften 1993 (Erg. der 4. Aufl. 1990). - 18,2. (TE-TZ) Geologie und Paläontologie 1993 (Erg. der 4. Aufl 1990). - 19. (U) Physik 6. Aufl. 1994. - 20. (V) Chemie und Pharmazie 6. Aufl. 1993. - 21. (W) Biologie und vorklinische Medizin 4. Aufl. 1991. - 22/23. (WW-YZ) Medizin 5. Aufl. 1992. - 24,1. (ZA-ZE) Land- und Forstwirtschaft. Gartenbau. Fischereiwirtschaft. Hauswirtschaft 1993 (Erg. der 3. Aufl. 1988). - 24,2. (ZG-ZS) Technik 1993 (Erg. der 3. Aufl. 1991). - 24,3. (ZX-ZY) Sport 5. Aufl. 1993. - 25. (O) Studentenbücherei 1992 (Erg. der 3. Aufl. 1988)

0.001977254 = product of:
  0.009886269 = sum of:
    0.009886269 = product of:
      0.019772539 = sum of:
        0.019772539 = weight(_text_:22 in 6868) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019772539 = score(doc=6868,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 6868, 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=6868)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Footnote

Rez. in: Journal of education for library and information science 37(1996) no.3, S.300-301 (C. Peterson); Journal of academic librarianship 22(1996) no.5, S.399-400 (P.S. Thomas)

0.001977254 = product of:
  0.009886269 = sum of:
    0.009886269 = product of:
      0.019772539 = sum of:
        0.019772539 = weight(_text_:22 in 4931) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019772539 = score(doc=4931,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 4931, 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=4931)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 7.2000 18:38:35

0.001977254 = product of:
  0.009886269 = sum of:
    0.009886269 = product of:
      0.019772539 = sum of:
        0.019772539 = weight(_text_:22 in 4939) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019772539 = score(doc=4939,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 4939, 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=4939)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 7.2000 18:57:50

0.001977254 = product of:
  0.009886269 = sum of:
    0.009886269 = product of:
      0.019772539 = sum of:
        0.019772539 = weight(_text_:22 in 5976) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019772539 = score(doc=5976,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5976, 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=5976)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 3.2008 16:17:15

0.001977254 = product of:
  0.009886269 = sum of:
    0.009886269 = product of:
      0.019772539 = sum of:
        0.019772539 = weight(_text_:22 in 292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019772539 = score(doc=292,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 292, 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=292)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 3.2002 9:44:47

0.001977254 = product of:
  0.009886269 = sum of:
    0.009886269 = product of:
      0.019772539 = sum of:
        0.019772539 = weight(_text_:22 in 520) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019772539 = score(doc=520,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 520, 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=520)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

8. 1.2007 17:22:25

0.001977254 = product of:
  0.009886269 = sum of:
    0.009886269 = product of:
      0.019772539 = sum of:
        0.019772539 = weight(_text_:22 in 1623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019772539 = score(doc=1623,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1623, 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=1623)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 6.2015 14:35:37

0.0017300973 = product of:
  0.008650486 = sum of:
    0.008650486 = product of:
      0.017300973 = sum of:
        0.017300973 = weight(_text_:22 in 5606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017300973 = score(doc=5606,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 5606, 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=5606)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

1. 8.2006 12:22:06

0.0017300973 = product of:
  0.008650486 = sum of:
    0.008650486 = product of:
      0.017300973 = sum of:
        0.017300973 = weight(_text_:22 in 1705) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017300973 = score(doc=1705,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 1705, 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=1705)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

20. 3.2008 14:22:43

0.0017168068 = product of:
  0.008584034 = sum of:
    0.008584034 = product of:
      0.017168067 = sum of:
        0.017168067 = weight(_text_:problems in 6299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017168067 = score(doc=6299,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.114006475 = fieldWeight in 6299, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=6299)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Footnote

Rez. in: Machine translation review: 1999, no.10, S.26-27 (D. Lewis): "Cross Language Information Retrieval (CLIR) addresses the growing need to access large volumes of data across language boundaries. The typical requirement is for the user to input a free form query, usually a brief description of a topic, into a search or retrieval engine which returns a list, in ranked order, of documents or web pages that are relevant to the topic. The search engine matches the terms in the query to indexed terms, usually keywords previously derived from the target documents. Unlike monolingual information retrieval, CLIR requires query terms in one language to be matched to indexed terms in another. Matching can be done by bilingual dictionary lookup, full machine translation, or by applying statistical methods. A query's success is measured in terms of recall (how many potentially relevant target documents are found) and precision (what proportion of documents found are relevant). Issues in CLIR are how to translate query terms into index terms, how to eliminate alternative translations (e.g. to decide that French 'traitement' in a query means 'treatment' and not 'salary'), and how to rank or weight translation alternatives that are retained (e.g. how to order the French terms 'aventure', 'business', 'affaire', and 'liaison' as relevant translations of English 'affair'). Grefenstette provides a lucid and useful overview of the field and the problems. The volume brings together a number of experiments and projects in CLIR. Mark Davies (New Mexico State University) describes Recuerdo, a Spanish retrieval engine which reduces translation ambiguities by scanning indexes for parallel texts; it also uses either a bilingual dictionary or direct equivalents from a parallel corpus in order to compare results for queries on parallel texts. Lisa Ballesteros and Bruce Croft (University of Massachusetts) use a 'local feedback' technique which automatically enhances a query by adding extra terms to it both before and after translation; such terms can be derived from documents known to be relevant to the query.

0.0017168068 = product of:
  0.008584034 = sum of:
    0.008584034 = product of:
      0.017168067 = sum of:
        0.017168067 = weight(_text_:problems in 3364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017168067 = score(doc=3364,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.114006475 = fieldWeight in 3364, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3364)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

The ten chapters in Volume 11 are divided into 3 parts: Part One, "Information and the Community," contains two chapters to familiarize readers with various groups in the community, their information and reference needs, and how professionals attempt to serve those needs. Part Two, "Interview and Search," devotes Chapters 3 through 6 to the vital task of explaining how to isolate and understand the questions readers put to librarians as well as basic methods of finding the correct answer(s). The emphasis is an practical application of tried and true methods of interviewing and searching. Attention is given to both manual and computer searches. Chapter 6 is a guide to basic information about databases, including CD-ROMS. Part Three, "Library Instruction, Networks, Policies, and Evaluation," is comprised of the last four chapters and covers the activities of reference librarians when not responding to direct questions. This part includes hints an teaching people how to find information as well as the networks that help both librarian and user to discover what is needed. Chapter 10 discusses methods of deciding how well the individual has fulfilled the task of being a reference librarian. Only space and the fact that this text is for beginners limits what information it contains. First, many new developments and potentially important technological changes in the field of information are impossible to cover without turning to technical language and jargon quite beyond the average reader of an introductory textbook. However, basic developments are covered and explained, and there is a guide (via the footnotes and suggested readings) for those who wish to explore the future. Second, this volume is for students and working reference librarians and is intended first, foremost, and always as a pragmatic, practical approach. This is not to discount the importance of research and information science. Leaders and followers in those fields are responsible for much of what is revolutionary in references services today. There are other courses, other places where information science can be considered in depth; all that can be done here is to hint at the joy of the intellectual fields that open up to the information scientist and researcher. Students and teachers alike should be aware that much of the material covered in this book is updated, argued, and dutifully considered in several basic journals. RQ, the official voice of reference librarians of the American Library Association, excels in its coverage of the topics considered in this text. Library Journal, while more general, now offers excellent and timely articles an the new technology and its influence an librarians. The Reference Librarian, edited by the author of this text, offers specific discussions of single topics in each issue, and these have ranged from online reference services, to personnel, to problems of evaluation. And, not to be missed, is the nicely edited, always useful, and sometimes downright inspirational, References Services Review.

0.0017168068 = product of:
  0.008584034 = sum of:
    0.008584034 = product of:
      0.017168067 = sum of:
        0.017168067 = weight(_text_:problems in 209) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017168067 = score(doc=209,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.114006475 = fieldWeight in 209, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=209)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Neuere Entwicklungen auf kognitionswissenschaftlichem Gebiet zeigen jedoch, daß eine empirisch ausgerichtete computerlinguistische Semantikforschung einzelwissenschaftliche Ansätze auf diesem Gebiet integrieren und Lösungen gerade in bezug auf solche Probleme anbieten kann, die sich aus einer der augenfälligsten Besonderheiten natürlichsprachlicher Bedeutungen als dem Resultat regelgeleiteter Verwendung von Sprachzeichen in Kommunikationssituationen ergeben: der Vagheit. Nach der einleitenden, aus semiotischer Sicht formulierten Kritik an der strukturalistischen Statik linguistischer Theorien und Bechreibungsmodelle (Kapitel I) werden vor diesem Hintergrund im ersten Teil der Arbeit die zusätzlichen Begründungszusammenhänge für eine den Prozeß der Sprachverwendung einbeziehende empirische Modellbildung in der Semantik entwickelt, die sich aus den bisherigen Ergebnissen Kognitions-theoretischer und Informations-verarbeitender Forschungsansätze ergeben. In einem Überblick über die bisherige sprachphilosophische, sprachlogische und sprachwissenschaftliche Auseinandersetzung mit dem Phänomen semantischer Unschärfe (Kapitel II und III) und einer methodologischen Grundlegung Performanz-linguistischer Untersuchungen anhand statistischer Corpusanalyse, des Problems der Repräsentativität und des Computereinsatzes (Kapitel IV) wird nachfolgend eine kritische Bewertung der bisher einschlägigen Ergebnisse versucht (Kapitel V) die im Umkreis vornehmlich der experimentellen Psychologie mit ihrer Kognitions- und Verstehens-Forschung sowie der künstlichen Intelligenz mit ihren natürlichsprachlichen Systemen und Modellen zur Wissensrepräsentation entstanden.