Search (209 results, page 1 of 11)

0.10876336 = product of:
  0.16314504 = sum of:
    0.14336552 = weight(_text_:specialist in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14336552 = score(doc=3261,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.44192728 = fieldWeight in 3261, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3261)
    0.019779515 = product of:
      0.03955903 = sum of:
        0.03955903 = weight(_text_:22 in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03955903 = score(doc=3261,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3261, 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=3261)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Ontologies improve IR systems regarding its retrieval and presentation of information, which make the task of finding information more effective, efficient, and interactive. In this paper we argue that ontologies also greatly improve the engineering of such systems. We created a framework that uses ontology to drive the process of engineering an IR system. We developed a prototype that shows how a domain specialist without knowledge in the IR field can build an IR system with interactive components. The resulting system provides support for users not only to find their information needs but also to extend their state of knowledge. This way, our approach to ontology-enabled information retrieval addresses both the engineering aspect described here and also the usability aspect described elsewhere.

Date

28.11.2016 12:43:22

0.078102395 = product of:
  0.11715359 = sum of:
    0.09557702 = weight(_text_:specialist in 4395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09557702 = score(doc=4395,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.2946182 = fieldWeight in 4395, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4395)
    0.021576578 = product of:
      0.043153156 = sum of:
        0.043153156 = weight(_text_:librarians in 4395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043153156 = score(doc=4395,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.19796532 = fieldWeight in 4395, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4395)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Today many libraries are using computers and allied information technologies to improve their work methods and services. Consequently, the libraries need such professional staff, or need to train the present one, who could face the challenges placed by the introduction of these technologies in the libraries. To meet the demand of such professional staff, the departments of Library and Information Science in India introduced new courses of studies to expose their students in the use and application of computers and other allied technologies. Some courses introduced are: Computer Application in Libraries; Systems Analysis and Design Technique; Design and Development of Computer-based Library Information Systems; Database Organisation and Design; Library Networking; Use and Application of Communication Technology, and so forth. It is felt that the computer and information technologies biased courses need to be restructured, revised, and more harmoniously blended with the traditional main stream courses of library and information science discipline. We must alter the strategy of teaching library techniques, such as classification, cataloguing, and library procedures, and the techniques of designing computer-based library information systems and services. The use and application of these techniques get interwoven when we shift from a manually operated library system's environment to computer-based library system's environment. As such, it becomes necessary that we must follow an integrative approach, when we teach these techniques to the students of library and information science or train library staff in the use and application of these techniques to design, develop and implement computer-based library information systems and services. In the following sections of this paper, we shall outline the likeness or correspondence between certain concepts and techniques formed by computer specialist and the one developed by the librarians, in their respective domains. We make use of these techniques (i.e. the techniques of both the domains) in the design and implementation of computer-based library information systems and services. As such, it is essential that lessons of study concerning the exposition of these supplementary and complementary techniques must be integrated.

0.05575326 = product of:
  0.16725978 = sum of:
    0.16725978 = weight(_text_:specialist in 822) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16725978 = score(doc=822,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.51558185 = fieldWeight in 822, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=822)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The intricate 3D structure of the CNS lends itself to multimedia presentation, and is depicted here by way of dynamic 3D models that can be freely rotated, and in over 200 illustrations taken from the successful book "The Human Central Nervous System" by R. Nieuwenhuys et al, allowing the user to explore all aspects of this complex and fascinating subject. All this fully hyperlinked with over 2000 specialist terms. Optimal exam revision is guaranteed with the self-study option. For further information please contact: http://www.brainmedia.de/html/frames/pr/pr<BL>5/pr<BL>5<BL>02.html

0.04635056 = product of:
  0.13905168 = sum of:
    0.13905168 = sum of:
      0.08630631 = weight(_text_:librarians in 2686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08630631 = score(doc=2686,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04866305 = queryNorm
          0.39593065 = fieldWeight in 2686, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2686)
      0.052745372 = weight(_text_:22 in 2686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.052745372 = score(doc=2686,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04866305 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2686, 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=2686)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Metadata (structured information about an object or collection of objects) is increasingly important to libraries, archives, and museums. And although librarians are familiar with a number of issues that apply to creating and using metadata (e.g., authority control, controlled vocabularies, etc.), the world of metadata is nonetheless different than library cataloging, with its own set of challenges. Therefore, whether you are new to these concepts or quite experienced with classic cataloging, this short (20 pages) introductory paper on metadata can be helpful

Date

10. 9.2004 10:22:40

0.042938795 = product of:
  0.12881638 = sum of:
    0.12881638 = product of:
      0.38644913 = sum of:
        0.38644913 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.38644913 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4125659 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja

0.039823756 = product of:
  0.11947126 = sum of:
    0.11947126 = weight(_text_:specialist in 2815) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11947126 = score(doc=2815,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.36827272 = fieldWeight in 2815, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2815)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In the future, frontier research in many fields will increasingly require the collaboration of globally distributed groups of researchers needing access to distributed computing, data resources and support for remote access to expensive, multi-national specialized facilities such as telescopes and accelerators or specialist data archives. There is also a general belief that an important road to innovation will be provided by multi-disciplinary and collaborative research - from bio-informatics and earth systems science to social science and archaeology. There will also be an explosion in the amount of research data collected in the next decade - 100's of Terabytes will be common in many fields. These future research requirements constitute the 'eResearch' agenda. Powerful software services will be widely deployed on top of the academic research networks to form the necessary 'Cyberinfrastructure' to provide a collaborative research environment for the global academic community. The difficulties in combining data and information from distributed sources, the multi-disciplinary nature of research and collaboration, and the need to move to present researchers with tooling that enable them to express what they want to do rather than how to do it highlight the need for an ecosystem of Semantic Computing technologies. Such technologies will further facilitate information sharing and discovery, will enable reasoning over information, and will allow us to start thinking about knowledge and how it can be handled by computers. This talk will review the elements of this vision and explain the need for semantic-oriented computing by exploring eResearch projects that have successfully applied relevant technologies. It will also suggest that a software + service model with scientific services delivered from the cloud will become an increasingly accepted model for research.

0.034351036 = product of:
  0.10305311 = sum of:
    0.10305311 = product of:
      0.3091593 = sum of:
        0.3091593 = weight(_text_:3a in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.3091593 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4125659 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 230, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=230)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

https%3A%2F%2Ftannerlectures.utah.edu%2F_documents%2Fa-to-z%2Fp%2Fpopper80.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3f4QRTEH-OEBmoYr2J_c7H

0.03379158 = product of:
  0.10137474 = sum of:
    0.10137474 = weight(_text_:specialist in 1159) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10137474 = score(doc=1159,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.3124898 = fieldWeight in 1159, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1159)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Theses: 1. Who should be addressed by digital libraries? How shall we measure whether we have reached the desired audience? Thesis: The primary audience for a digital library is neither the leading specialist in the respective field, nor the freshman, but the advanced student or young researcher and the "almost specialist". The primary topic of digitization projects should not be the absolute top range of the "treasures" of a collection, but those materials that we always have wanted to promote if they were just marginally more important. Whether we effectively serve them to the appropriate community of serious users can only be measured according to criteria that have yet to be developed. 2. The appropriate size of digital libraries and their access tools Thesis: Digital collections need a critical, minimal size to make their access worthwhile. In the end, users want to access information, not metadata or gimmicks. 3. The quality of digital objects Thesis: If digital library resources are to be integrated into the daily work of the research community, they must appear on the screen of the researcher in a quality that is useful in actual work. 4. The granularity / modularity of digital repositories Thesis: While digital libraries are self-contained bodies of information, they are not the basic unit that most users want to access. Users are, as a rule, more interested in the individual objects in the library and need a straightforward way to access them. 5. Digital collections as integrated reference systems Thesis: Traditional libraries support their collections with reference material. Digital collections need to find appropriate models to replicate this functionality. 6. Library and teaching Thesis: The use of multimedia in teaching is as much of a current buzzword as the creation of digital collections. It is obvious that they should be connected. A clear-cut separation of the two approaches is nevertheless necessary.

0.031859007 = product of:
  0.09557702 = sum of:
    0.09557702 = weight(_text_:specialist in 1194) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09557702 = score(doc=1194,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.2946182 = fieldWeight in 1194, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1194)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The Electronic Cultural Atlas Initiative was formed to encourage scholarly communication and the sharing of data among researchers who emphasize the relationships between place, time, and topic in the study of culture and history. In an effort to develop better tools and practices, The Electronic Cultural Atlas Initiative has sponsored the collaborative development of software for downloading and editing geo-temporal data to create dynamic maps, a clearinghouse of shared datasets accessible through a map-based interface, projects on format and content standards for gazetteers and time period directories, studies to improve geo-temporal aspects in online catalogs, good practice guidelines for preparing e-publications with dynamic geo-temporal displays, and numerous international conferences. The Electronic Cultural Atlas Initiative (ECAI) grew out of discussions among an international group of scholars interested in religious history and area studies. It was established as a unit under the Dean of International and Area Studies at the University of California, Berkeley in 1997. ECAI's mission is to promote an international collaborative effort to transform humanities scholarship through use of the digital environment to share data and by placing greater emphasis on the notions of place and time. Professor Lewis Lancaster is the Director. Professor Michael Buckland, with a library and information studies background, joined the effort as Co-Director in 2000. Assistance from the Lilly Foundation, the California Digital Library (University of California), and other sources has enabled ECAI to nurture a community; to develop a catalog ("clearinghouse") of Internet-accessible georeferenced resources; to support the development of software for obtaining, editing, manipulating, and dynamically visualizing geo-temporally encoded data; and to undertake research and development projects as needs and resources determine. Several hundred scholars worldwide, from a wide range of disciplines, are informally affiliated with ECAI, all interested in shared use of historical and cultural data. The Academia Sinica (Taiwan), The British Library, and the Arts and Humanities Data Service (UK) are among the well-known affiliates. However, ECAI mainly comprises individual scholars and small teams working on their own small projects on a very wide range of cultural, social, and historical topics. Numerous specialist committees have been fostering standardization and collaboration by area and by themes such as trade-routes, cities, religion, and sacred sites.

0.02913349 = product of:
  0.087400466 = sum of:
    0.087400466 = sum of:
      0.06102778 = weight(_text_:librarians in 1447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06102778 = score(doc=1447,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04866305 = queryNorm
          0.27996525 = fieldWeight in 1447, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1447)
      0.026372686 = weight(_text_:22 in 1447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.026372686 = score(doc=1447,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04866305 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1447, 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=1447)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The BAER Web Resources Group was charged in October 1999 with defining and describing the parameters of electronic resources that do not clearly belong to the categories being defined by the BAER Digital Group or the BAER Electronic Journals Group. After some difficulty identifying precisely which resources fell under the Group's charge, we finally named the following types of resources for our consideration: web sites, electronic texts, indexes, databases and abstracts, online reference resources, and networked and non-networked CD-ROMs. Electronic resources are a vast and growing collection that touch nearly every department within the Library. It is unrealistic to think one department can effectively administer all aspects of the collection. The Group then began to focus on the concern of bibliographic access to these varied resources, and to define parameters for handling or processing them within the Library. Some key elements became evident as the work progressed. * Selection process of resources to be acquired for the collection * Duplication of effort * Use of CORC * Resource Finder design * Maintenance of Resource Finder * CD-ROMs not networked * Communications * Voyager search limitations. An unexpected collaboration with the Web Development Committee on the Resource Finder helped to steer the Group to more detailed descriptions of bibliographic access. This collaboration included development of data elements for the Resource Finder database, and some discussions on Library staff processing of the resources. The Web Resources Group invited expert testimony to help the Group broaden its view to envision public use of the resources and discuss concerns related to technical services processing. The first testimony came from members of the Resource Finder Committee. Some background information on the Web Development Resource Finder Committee was shared. The second testimony was from librarians who select electronic texts. Three main themes were addressed: accessing CD-ROMs; the issue of including non-networked CD-ROMs in the Resource Finder; and, some special concerns about electronic texts. The third testimony came from librarians who select indexes and abstracts and also provide Reference services. Appendices to this report include minutes of the meetings with the experts (Appendix A), a list of proposed data elements to be used in the Resource Finder (Appendix B), and recommendations made to the Resource Finder Committee (Appendix C). Below are summaries of the key elements.

Date

21. 4.2002 10:22:31

0.023894254 = product of:
  0.07168276 = sum of:
    0.07168276 = weight(_text_:specialist in 1195) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07168276 = score(doc=1195,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.22096364 = fieldWeight in 1195, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1195)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Sponsored by the German Ministry of Education and Research with funding of 800.000 EURO, the German Network of Expertise in long-term storage of digital resources (nestor) began in June 2003 as a cooperative effort of 6 partners representing different players within the field of long-term preservation. The partners include: * The German National Library (Die Deutsche Bibliothek) as the lead institution for the project * The State and University Library of Lower Saxony Göttingen (Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Göttingen) * The Computer and Media Service and the University Library of Humboldt-University Berlin (Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin) * The Bavarian State Library in Munich (Bayerische Staatsbibliothek) * The Institute for Museum Information in Berlin (Institut für Museumskunde) * General Directorate of the Bavarian State Archives (GDAB) As in other countries, long-term preservation of digital resources has become an important issue in Germany in recent years. Nevertheless, coming to agreement with institutions throughout the country to cooperate on tasks for a long-term preservation effort has taken a great deal of effort. Although there had been considerable attention paid to the preservation of physical media like CD-ROMS, technologies available for the long-term preservation of digital publications like e-books, digital dissertations, websites, etc., are still lacking. Considering the importance of the task within the federal structure of Germany, with the responsibility of each federal state for its science and culture activities, it is obvious that the approach to a successful solution of these issues in Germany must be a cooperative approach. Since 2000, there have been discussions about strategies and techniques for long-term archiving of digital information, particularly within the distributed structure of Germany's library and archival institutions. A key part of all the previous activities was focusing on using existing standards and analyzing the context in which those standards would be applied. One such activity, the Digital Library Forum Planning Project, was done on behalf of the German Ministry of Education and Research in 2002, where the vision of a digital library in 2010 that can meet the changing and increasing needs of users was developed and described in detail, including the infrastructure required and how the digital library would work technically, what it would contain and how it would be organized. The outcome was a strategic plan for certain selected specialist areas, where, amongst other topics, a future call for action for long-term preservation was defined, described and explained against the background of practical experience.

0.023894254 = product of:
  0.07168276 = sum of:
    0.07168276 = weight(_text_:specialist in 3716) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07168276 = score(doc=3716,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.22096364 = fieldWeight in 3716, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3716)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Vorwort Stellen Sie sich vor: Wir befinden uns im Jahre 2030 irgendwo in Deutschland. Irgendwo? Nein, bei Ihnen in der guten Stube, wo Sie Ihren Enkelkindern stolz von Ihrer Weltumsegelung aus dem Jahr 2010 berichten. Untermalen möchten Sie Ihre Geschichte gerne mit anschaulichem Bildmaterial und zeitgenössischer Musik. Diese hatte damals wesentlich zur Mythen- und Legendenbildung im Freundeskreis beigetragen, seitdem genießen Sie den Ruf eines unerschrockenen Helden. Nun ist es an der Zeit, diese kleine Geschichte lebendig zu halten und sie der nächsten Generation, nämlich Ihren Enkelkindern, weiterzugeben. Doch Ihr GODD (Global Omnipresent Digital Device) weigert sich, die aufwändig erstellte Videoschau überhaupt zu lesen. Ganz im Gegenteil, Ihnen wird lapidar mitgeteilt, dass es sich um veraltete Technik handelt, die nicht länger unterstützt wird. Sie möchten sich bitte an einen "Datenarchäologen" Ihres Vertrauens wenden. Aber was ist nun eigentlich ein "Datenarchäologe"? Ein Datenarchäologe stellt nicht mehr lesbare Daten wieder her, um sie wieder nutzbar zu machen. Er - oder sie - kommt zum Einsatz, wenn die Havarie schon erfolgt ist. Doch soweit soll es nicht kommen. Deshalb benötigt man Experten wie den "Digital Curator" oder den "Digital Preservation Specialist", der dafür sorgt, dass bereits bei der Entstehung digitaler Daten perspektivisch ihre langfristige Erhaltung berücksichtigt wird. Er - oder sie - ist in der Lage eine Institution bei der Entwicklung ihrer Langzeitarchivierungsstrategie für die erzeugten Daten zu unterstützen oder Entwicklungen in einem vertrauenswürdigen digitalen Langzeitarchivsystem zu planen und durchzuführen.

0.02317528 = product of:
  0.06952584 = sum of:
    0.06952584 = sum of:
      0.043153156 = weight(_text_:librarians in 3608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.043153156 = score(doc=3608,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04866305 = queryNorm
          0.19796532 = fieldWeight in 3608, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3608)
      0.026372686 = weight(_text_:22 in 3608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.026372686 = score(doc=3608,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04866305 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3608, 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=3608)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

You were going to get one-click access to the full text of nearly every book that's ever been published. Books still in print you'd have to pay for, but everything else-a collection slated to grow larger than the holdings at the Library of Congress, Harvard, the University of Michigan, at any of the great national libraries of Europe-would have been available for free at terminals that were going to be placed in every local library that wanted one. At the terminal you were going to be able to search tens of millions of books and read every page of any book you found. You'd be able to highlight passages and make annotations and share them; for the first time, you'd be able to pinpoint an idea somewhere inside the vastness of the printed record, and send somebody straight to it with a link. Books would become as instantly available, searchable, copy-pasteable-as alive in the digital world-as web pages. It was to be the realization of a long-held dream. "The universal library has been talked about for millennia," Richard Ovenden, the head of Oxford's Bodleian Libraries, has said. "It was possible to think in the Renaissance that you might be able to amass the whole of published knowledge in a single room or a single institution." In the spring of 2011, it seemed we'd amassed it in a terminal small enough to fit on a desk. "This is a watershed event and can serve as a catalyst for the reinvention of education, research, and intellectual life," one eager observer wrote at the time. On March 22 of that year, however, the legal agreement that would have unlocked a century's worth of books and peppered the country with access terminals to a universal library was rejected under Rule 23(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. When the library at Alexandria burned it was said to be an "international catastrophe." When the most significant humanities project of our time was dismantled in court, the scholars, archivists, and librarians who'd had a hand in its undoing breathed a sigh of relief, for they believed, at the time, that they had narrowly averted disaster.

0.02157658 = product of:
  0.064729735 = sum of:
    0.064729735 = product of:
      0.12945947 = sum of:
        0.12945947 = weight(_text_:librarians in 4845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12945947 = score(doc=4845,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.593896 = fieldWeight in 4845, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4845)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.021469397 = product of:
  0.06440819 = sum of:
    0.06440819 = product of:
      0.19322456 = sum of:
        0.19322456 = weight(_text_:3a in 4388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19322456 = score(doc=4388,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4125659 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4388, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4388)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Vgl. unter: https://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwizweHljdbcAhVS16QKHXcFD9QQFjABegQICRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublication%2F271200105_Die_Autonomie_des_Menschen_und_der_Maschine_-_gegenwartige_Definitionen_von_Autonomie_zwischen_philosophischem_Hintergrund_und_technologischer_Umsetzbarkeit_Redigierte_Version_der_Magisterarbeit_Karls&usg=AOvVaw06orrdJmFF2xbCCp_hL26q.

0.021469397 = product of:
  0.06440819 = sum of:
    0.06440819 = product of:
      0.19322456 = sum of:
        0.19322456 = weight(_text_:3a in 5669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19322456 = score(doc=5669,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4125659 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 5669, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5669)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

"Die Englischsprachige Wikipedia verfügt jetzt über mehr als 6 Millionen Artikel. An zweiter Stelle kommt die deutschsprachige Wikipedia mit 2.3 Millionen Artikeln, an dritter Stelle steht die französischsprachige Wikipedia mit 2.1 Millionen Artikeln (via Researchbuzz: Firehose <https://rbfirehose.com/2020/01/24/techcrunch-wikipedia-now-has-more-than-6-million-articles-in-english/> und Techcrunch <https://techcrunch.com/2020/01/23/wikipedia-english-six-million-articles/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Techcrunch+%28TechCrunch%29&guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9yYmZpcmVob3NlLmNvbS8yMDIwLzAxLzI0L3RlY2hjcnVuY2gtd2lraXBlZGlhLW5vdy1oYXMtbW9yZS10aGFuLTYtbWlsbGlvbi1hcnRpY2xlcy1pbi1lbmdsaXNoLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAK0zHfjdDZ_spFZBF_z-zDjtL5iWvuKDumFTzm4HvQzkUfE2pLXQzGS6FGB_y-VISdMEsUSvkNsg2U_NWQ4lwWSvOo3jvXo1I3GtgHpP8exukVxYAnn5mJspqX50VHIWFADHhs5AerkRn3hMRtf_R3F1qmEbo8EROZXp328HMC-o>). 250120 via digithek ch = #fineBlog s.a.: Angesichts der Veröffentlichung des 6-millionsten Artikels vergangene Woche in der englischsprachigen Wikipedia hat die Community-Zeitungsseite "Wikipedia Signpost" ein Moratorium bei der Veröffentlichung von Unternehmensartikeln gefordert. Das sei kein Vorwurf gegen die Wikimedia Foundation, aber die derzeitigen Maßnahmen, um die Enzyklopädie gegen missbräuchliches undeklariertes Paid Editing zu schützen, funktionierten ganz klar nicht. *"Da die ehrenamtlichen Autoren derzeit von Werbung in Gestalt von Wikipedia-Artikeln überwältigt werden, und da die WMF nicht in der Lage zu sein scheint, dem irgendetwas entgegenzusetzen, wäre der einzige gangbare Weg für die Autoren, fürs erste die Neuanlage von Artikeln über Unternehmen zu untersagen"*, schreibt der Benutzer Smallbones in seinem Editorial <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-01-27/From_the_editor> zur heutigen Ausgabe."

0.018685868 = product of:
  0.056057602 = sum of:
    0.056057602 = product of:
      0.112115204 = sum of:
        0.112115204 = weight(_text_:librarians in 545) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.112115204 = score(doc=545,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.5143291 = fieldWeight in 545, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=545)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This paper aims to explore the theory and practice of education in schools and the further education as two levels of the Information Society in Hungary . The LIS education is considered the third level over previous levels. I attempt to survey the curriculum and content of different subjects in school; and the division of the programme for librarians. There is a great and long history of UDC usage in Hungary. The lecture sketches stairs of tradition from the beginning to the situation nowadays. Szab ó Ervin began to train the UDC at the Municipal Library in Budapest from 1910. He not only used, but taught the UDC for librarians in his courses, too. As a consequence of Szab ó Ervin's activity the librarians knew and used the UDC very early, and all libraries would use it. The article gives a short overview of recent developments and duties, the situation after the new Hungarian edition, the UDC usage in Hungarian OPAC and the possibility of UDC visualization.

0.017980482 = product of:
  0.053941444 = sum of:
    0.053941444 = product of:
      0.10788289 = sum of:
        0.10788289 = weight(_text_:librarians in 1186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10788289 = score(doc=1186,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.4949133 = fieldWeight in 1186, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1186)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In 1994 the National Science Foundation launched its Digital Libraries Initiative (DLI). The choice of combining the word digital with library immediately defined three interested parties: librarians, computer scientists, and publishers. The eventual impact of the Initiative reached far beyond these three groups. The Google search engine emerged from the funded work and has changed working styles for virtually all professions and private activities that involve a computer. The improved methods for searching video, which the Initiative funded, have led to new approaches for detecting longitudinal trends in nursing home occupant health (CareMedia). Similarly, the Initiative has touched the work of historians, anthropologists, political science and law, and many other professions. But one of the more intriguing aspects of the DLI was its matchmaking coup of uniting librarians and computer scientists. Publishers were and are on the scene, but triangles are complicated, and just contemplating the binary union between academic librarians and computer scientists is rich enough for one article. Between the two, are there clear winners and losers after 10 years? Many would answer this question with a vigorous nod.

0.017980482 = product of:
  0.053941444 = sum of:
    0.053941444 = product of:
      0.10788289 = sum of:
        0.10788289 = weight(_text_:librarians in 983) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10788289 = score(doc=983,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.4949133 = fieldWeight in 983, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=983)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This study aims to introduce librarians to ChatGPT and challenge them to think about how it fits into their work and what learning they will need to do in order to stay relevant in the realm of artificial intelligence. Design/methodology/approach Popular and scientific media sources were monitored over the course of two months to gather current discussions about the uses of and opinions about ChatGPT. This was analyzed in light of historical developments in education and libraries. Additional sources of information on the topic were described and discussed so that the issue is made relevant to librarians and libraries. Findings The potential risks and benefits of ChatGPT are highly relevant for librarians but also currently not fully understood. We are in a very early stage of understanding and using this technology but it does appear to have the possibility of becoming disruptive to libraries as well as many other aspects of life. Originality/value ChatGPT-3 has only been publicly available since the end of November 2022. We are just now starting to take a deeper dive into what this technology means for libraries. This paper is one of the early ones that provide librarians with some direction in terms of where to focus their interest and attention in learning about it.

0.01758179 = product of:
  0.052745372 = sum of:
    0.052745372 = product of:
      0.105490744 = sum of:
        0.105490744 = weight(_text_:22 in 5449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.105490744 = score(doc=5449,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5449, 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=5449)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 2.1997 19:26:34