-
Cleverdon, C.W.: ASLIB Cranfield Research Project : Report on the first stage of an investigation into the comparative efficiency of indexing systems (1960)
0.01
0.013186343 = product of:
0.03955903 = sum of:
0.03955903 = product of:
0.07911806 = sum of:
0.07911806 = weight(_text_:22 in 6158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07911806 = score(doc=6158,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6158, 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=6158)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Footnote
- Rez. in: College and research libraries 22(1961) no.3, S.228 (G. Jahoda)
-
Morris, L.R.: ¬The frequency of use of Library of Congress Classification numbers and Dewey Decimal Classification numbers in the MARC file in the field of library science (1991)
0.01
0.012586337 = product of:
0.03775901 = sum of:
0.03775901 = product of:
0.07551802 = sum of:
0.07551802 = weight(_text_:librarians in 2308) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07551802 = score(doc=2308,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.3464393 = fieldWeight in 2308, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2308)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- The LCC and DDC systems were devised and updated by librarians who had and have no access to the eventual frequency of use of each number in those classification systems. 80% of the monographs in a MARC file of over 1.000.000 records are classified into 20% of the classification numbers in the field of library science and only 20% of the mongraphs are classified into 80% of the classification numbers in the field of library science. Classification of monographs coulld be made easier and performed more accurately if many of the little used and unused numbers were eliminated and many of the most crowded numbers were expanded. A number of examples are included
-
Bade, D.: ¬The creation and persistence of misinformation in shared library catalogs : language and subject knowledge in a technological era (2002)
0.01
0.01158764 = product of:
0.03476292 = sum of:
0.03476292 = sum of:
0.021576578 = weight(_text_:librarians in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021576578 = score(doc=1858,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.09898266 = fieldWeight in 1858, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1858)
0.013186343 = weight(_text_:22 in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013186343 = score(doc=1858,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 1858, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1858)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 22. 9.1997 19:16:05
- Footnote
- Bade begins his discussion of errors in subject analysis by summarizing the contents of seven records containing what he considers to be egregious errors. The examples were drawn only from items that he has encountered in the course of his work. Five of the seven records were full-level ("I" level) records for Eastern European materials created between 1996 and 2000 in the OCLC WorldCat database. The final two examples were taken from records created by Bade himself over an unspecified period of time. Although he is to be commended for examining the actual items cataloged and for examining mostly items that he claims to have adequate linguistic and subject expertise to evaluate reliably, Bade's methodology has major flaws. First and foremost, the number of examples provided is completely inadequate to draw any conclusions about the extent of the problem. Although an in-depth qualitative analysis of a small number of records might have yielded some valuable insight into factors that contribute to errors in subject analysis, Bade provides no Information about the circumstances under which the live OCLC records he critiques were created. Instead, he offers simplistic explanations for the errors based solely an his own assumptions. He supplements his analysis of examples with an extremely brief survey of other studies regarding errors in subject analysis, which consists primarily of criticism of work done by Sheila Intner. In the end, it is impossible to draw any reliable conclusions about the nature or extent of errors in subject analysis found in records in shared bibliographic databases based an Bade's analysis. In the final third of the essay, Bade finally reveals his true concern: the deintellectualization of cataloging. It would strengthen the essay tremendously to present this as the primary premise from the very beginning, as this section offers glimpses of a compelling argument. Bade laments, "Many librarians simply do not sec cataloging as an intellectual activity requiring an educated mind" (p. 20). Commenting an recent trends in copy cataloging practice, he declares, "The disaster of our time is that this work is being done more and more by people who can neither evaluate nor correct imported errors and offen are forbidden from even thinking about it" (p. 26). Bade argues that the most valuable content found in catalog records is the intellectual content contributed by knowledgeable catalogers, and he asserts that to perform intellectually demanding tasks such as subject analysis reliably and effectively, catalogers must have the linguistic and subject knowledge required to gain at least a rudimentary understanding of the materials that they describe. He contends that requiring catalogers to quickly dispense with materials in unfamiliar languages and subjects clearly undermines their ability to perform the intellectual work of cataloging and leads to an increasing number of errors in the bibliographic records contributed to shared databases.
-
Kedar, R.; Shoham, S.: ¬The subject cataloging of monographs with the use of a thesaurus (2003)
0.01
0.01078829 = product of:
0.032364868 = sum of:
0.032364868 = product of:
0.064729735 = sum of:
0.064729735 = weight(_text_:librarians in 2700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.064729735 = score(doc=2700,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.296948 = fieldWeight in 2700, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2700)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- This paper presents the findings of a study of indexing procedure with the use of a thesaurus for post-coordination. In the first phase of the study, the indexing records of 50 books, prepared by a central cataloging service (the Israeli Center for Libraries), were compared with the indexing records for these books prepared by three independent indexers. In the second phase, indexing records for three books prepared by 51 librarians were studied. In both phases, indexing records were analyzed for mistakes and possible reasons for these mistakes are offered.
-
Veenema, F.: To index or not to index (1996)
0.01
0.008790895 = product of:
0.026372686 = sum of:
0.026372686 = product of:
0.052745372 = sum of:
0.052745372 = weight(_text_:22 in 7247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052745372 = score(doc=7247,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7247, 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=7247)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Canadian journal of information and library science. 21(1996) no.2, S.1-22
-
Booth, A.: How consistent is MEDLINE indexing? (1990)
0.01
0.0076920334 = product of:
0.0230761 = sum of:
0.0230761 = product of:
0.0461522 = sum of:
0.0461522 = weight(_text_:22 in 3510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0461522 = score(doc=3510,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3510, 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=3510)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Health libraries review. 7(1990) no.1, S.22-26
-
Neshat, N.; Horri, A.: ¬A study of subject indexing consistency between the National Library of Iran and Humanities Libraries in the area of Iranian studies (2006)
0.01
0.0076920334 = product of:
0.0230761 = sum of:
0.0230761 = product of:
0.0461522 = sum of:
0.0461522 = weight(_text_:22 in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0461522 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 230, 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=230)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 4. 1.2007 10:22:26
-
Taniguchi, S.: Recording evidence in bibliographic records and descriptive metadata (2005)
0.01
0.0065931715 = product of:
0.019779515 = sum of:
0.019779515 = product of:
0.03955903 = sum of:
0.03955903 = weight(_text_:22 in 3565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03955903 = score(doc=3565,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3565, 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=3565)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 18. 6.2005 13:16:22
-
Leininger, K.: Interindexer consistency in PsychINFO (2000)
0.01
0.0065931715 = product of:
0.019779515 = sum of:
0.019779515 = product of:
0.03955903 = sum of:
0.03955903 = weight(_text_:22 in 2552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03955903 = score(doc=2552,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2552, 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=2552)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 9. 2.1997 18:44:22
-
Subrahmanyam, B.: Library of Congress Classification numbers : issues of consistency and their implications for union catalogs (2006)
0.01
0.0054943096 = product of:
0.016482929 = sum of:
0.016482929 = product of:
0.032965858 = sum of:
0.032965858 = weight(_text_:22 in 5784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032965858 = score(doc=5784,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5784, 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=5784)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
White, H.; Willis, C.; Greenberg, J.: HIVEing : the effect of a semantic web technology on inter-indexer consistency (2014)
0.01
0.0054943096 = product of:
0.016482929 = sum of:
0.016482929 = product of:
0.032965858 = sum of:
0.032965858 = weight(_text_:22 in 1781) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032965858 = score(doc=1781,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1781, 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=1781)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of the Helping Interdisciplinary Vocabulary Engineering (HIVE) system on the inter-indexer consistency of information professionals when assigning keywords to a scientific abstract. This study examined first, the inter-indexer consistency of potential HIVE users; second, the impact HIVE had on consistency; and third, challenges associated with using HIVE. Design/methodology/approach - A within-subjects quasi-experimental research design was used for this study. Data were collected using a task-scenario based questionnaire. Analysis was performed on consistency results using Hooper's and Rolling's inter-indexer consistency measures. A series of t-tests was used to judge the significance between consistency measure results. Findings - Results suggest that HIVE improves inter-indexing consistency. Working with HIVE increased consistency rates by 22 percent (Rolling's) and 25 percent (Hooper's) when selecting relevant terms from all vocabularies. A statistically significant difference exists between the assignment of free-text keywords and machine-aided keywords. Issues with homographs, disambiguation, vocabulary choice, and document structure were all identified as potential challenges. Research limitations/implications - Research limitations for this study can be found in the small number of vocabularies used for the study. Future research will include implementing HIVE into the Dryad Repository and studying its application in a repository system. Originality/value - This paper showcases several features used in HIVE system. By using traditional consistency measures to evaluate a semantic web technology, this paper emphasizes the link between traditional indexing and next generation machine-aided indexing (MAI) tools.
