Search (1665 results, page 1 of 84)

0.19329357 = product of:
  0.28994036 = sum of:
    0.23654105 = weight(_text_:specialist in 364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.23654105 = score(doc=364,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.72914284 = fieldWeight in 364, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=364)
    0.053399306 = product of:
      0.10679861 = sum of:
        0.10679861 = weight(_text_:librarians in 364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10679861 = score(doc=364,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.48993918 = fieldWeight in 364, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=364)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Conducting a literature review is an important activity for postgraduates and many undergraduates. Librarians can play an important role, directing students to digital libraries, compiling online subject reSource lists, and educating about the need to evaluate the quality of online resources. In order to conduct an effective literature search in a new area, however, in some subjects it is necessary to gain basic topic knowledge, including specialist vocabularies. Google's link-based page ranking algorithm makes this search engine an ideal tool for finding specialist topic introductory material, particularly in computer science, and so librarians should be teaching this as part of a strategic literature review approach.

0.18053532 = product of:
  0.27080297 = sum of:
    0.21371672 = weight(_text_:specialist in 1582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21371672 = score(doc=1582,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.65878636 = fieldWeight in 1582, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1582)
    0.057086263 = product of:
      0.114172526 = sum of:
        0.114172526 = weight(_text_:librarians in 1582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.114172526 = score(doc=1582,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.52376705 = fieldWeight in 1582, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1582)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The university subject librarians' role is at the centre of new models of teaching and learning, yet further debate and published contributions are still needed to shape its future direction. "Subject Librarians: Engaging with the Learning and Teaching Environment" assesses trends and challenges in current practice, and aims to encourage renewed thinking and improved approaches. Its editors and authors include experienced practitioners and academics. At a time of great change and increasing challenges in higher education, this book offers directors of academic services, library managers, librarians and lecturers a chance to reflect on the key issues and consider the needs of the learning community. "Subject Librarians: Engaging with the Learning and Teaching Environment" also provides a perspective on current practice and a reference source for students of Information Management and Information Studies.

Content

Inhalt: PART I THE SUBJECT SPECIALIST IN HIGHER EDUCATION The Subject Specialist in Higher Education - A Review of the Literature / Margaret Feetham Professional Engagement - The Subject Specialist in Higher Education / Penny Dale with Maggie Leharne, Trudi Knight and Kate Marshall Quality Assurance, Quality Enhancement / Jill Beard Learning and Teaching / Kerry Shephard Relating to Further Education - Partners and Franchises / Jane Ryland Virtual Learning Environments / Marian Matthews Changing Relationships in the University / Kerry Shephard and Marian Matthews PART II SERVING DIFFERENT CONSTITUENCIES Serving Different Constituencies: Undergraduates / Jenny Campbell and Pete Maggs Serving Different Constituencies: Asynchronous Learners / Janet Peters Serving Different Constituencies: Researchers / Matt Holland Serving Different Constituencies: International Students / Frank Frew PART III INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES A Review of International Trends in Library Faculty Support in Higher Education: A Special Focus on Southern African University Libraries / Buhle Mbambo PART IV CONCLUSION Conclusion / Penny Dale, Matt Holland and Marian Matthews

LCSH

Area specialist librarians

Subject

Area specialist librarians

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

0.09063613 = product of:
  0.13595419 = sum of:
    0.11947126 = weight(_text_:specialist in 2624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11947126 = score(doc=2624,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.36827272 = fieldWeight in 2624, 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=2624)
    0.016482929 = product of:
      0.032965858 = sum of:
        0.032965858 = weight(_text_:22 in 2624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032965858 = score(doc=2624,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2624, 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=2624)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This paper describes the information properties of museum specimen labels and machine learning tools to automatically extract Darwin Core (DwC) and other metadata from these labels processed through Optical Character Recognition (OCR). The DwC is a metadata profile describing the core set of access points for search and retrieval of natural history collections and observation databases. Using the HERBIS Learning System (HLS) we extract 74 independent elements from these labels. The automated text extraction tools are provided as a web service so that users can reference digital images of specimens and receive back an extended Darwin Core XML representation of the content of the label. This automated extraction task is made more difficult by the high variability of museum label formats, OCR errors and the open class nature of some elements. In this paper we introduce our overall system architecture, and variability robust solutions including, the application of Hidden Markov and Naïve Bayes machine learning models, data cleaning, use of field element identifiers, and specialist learning models. The techniques developed here could be adapted to any metadata extraction situation with noisy text and weakly ordered elements.

Source

Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas

0.09063613 = product of:
  0.13595419 = sum of:
    0.11947126 = weight(_text_:specialist in 2754) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11947126 = score(doc=2754,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.36827272 = fieldWeight in 2754, 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=2754)
    0.016482929 = product of:
      0.032965858 = sum of:
        0.032965858 = weight(_text_:22 in 2754) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032965858 = score(doc=2754,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2754, 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=2754)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This article presents an exploratory study of Blobgects, an experimental interface for an online museum catalog that enables social tagging and blogging activity around a set of cultural heritage objects held by a preeminent museum of anthropology and archaeology. This study attempts to understand not just whether social tagging and commenting about these objects is useful but rather whose tags and voices matter in presenting different expert perspectives around digital museum objects. Based on an empirical comparison between two different user groups (Canadian Inuit high-school students and museum studies students in the United States), we found that merely adding the ability to tag and comment to the museum's catalog does not sufficiently allow users to learn about or engage with the objects represented by catalog entries. Rather, the specialist language of the catalog provides too little contextualization for users to enter into the sort of dialog that proponents of Web 2.0 technologies promise. Overall, we propose a more nuanced application of Web 2.0 technologies within museums - one which provides a contextual basis that gives users a starting point for engagement and permits users to make sense of objects in relation to their own needs, uses, and understandings.

Date

22. 3.2009 18:52:32

0.09063613 = product of:
  0.13595419 = sum of:
    0.11947126 = weight(_text_:specialist in 3010) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11947126 = score(doc=3010,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.36827272 = fieldWeight in 3010, 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=3010)
    0.016482929 = product of:
      0.032965858 = sum of:
        0.032965858 = weight(_text_:22 in 3010) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032965858 = score(doc=3010,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3010, 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=3010)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The role of a modern librarian has become more and more demanding in the information age. One of the new challenges for the information specialists is what's usually called "the teaching librarian", meaning that the librarian or information specialist should be able to teach at least basic practical searching skills to the patrons in need for relevant information. Query Performance Analyser (QPA) is a tool for analysing and comparing the performance of individual queries. It has been developed in the department of information studies at the University of Tampere. It can be used in user training to demonstrate the characteristics of IR systems and different searching strategies. Usually users can't get any feedback about the effectiveness of their queries and therefore may have difficulties to perceive the actual fectiveness of a query formulated, or the effect changes between queries. QPA provides a instant visual feedback about the performance of a given query and gives the user a possibility to compare the effectiveness of multiple queries and the performance of different query formulation strategies. QPA is based on predefined search topics. They all contain a corpus of documents that are relevant to the given topic. The purpose of this paper is to give a brief insight to the infrastructure of QPA, the basic :Functionality of the QPA-based game, and to its implementation in IR education.

Date

22. 7.2009 11:03:43

0.08863251 = product of:
  0.13294876 = sum of:
    0.09557702 = weight(_text_:specialist in 4500) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09557702 = score(doc=4500,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.2946182 = fieldWeight in 4500, 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=4500)
    0.037371732 = product of:
      0.074743465 = sum of:
        0.074743465 = weight(_text_:librarians in 4500) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.074743465 = score(doc=4500,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.34288603 = fieldWeight in 4500, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4500)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Librarians face daunting challenges posed by recent trends in technology, publishing and education as the impact of a globalising information economy forces a rethink of both library strategic directions and everyday library operations. This book brings together the current main issues and dilemmas facing libraries; the book clearly shows how to deal with them, and provides a best-practice guide to solutions based an the most up-to-date thinking. Key Features - Provides analysis of recent trends and relevant and viable solutions to problems facing all librarians - Draws an the author's international and practical experience in libraries

Content

Readership The book will be useful for: staff at all managerial and supervisory levels within library and information services; students and staff in library/information studies courses (undergraduate and postgraduate); educationalists; publishers; and all people interested in recent information and digital trends. Contents The impact an libraries of a globalising information economy-trends in technology; publishing, and education; changes in the form and delivery of information; changes in the nature of library operations The information game - how to locate, acquire, present and manage information in the Internet age; how to manage print versus electronic formats; access versus ownership: resolving the dilemma in the short and Jong term Digital presentation and preservation - how best to apply digital technologies in library operations; how best to make available e-information: text, data-sets, and audio-visual; digital preservation: advantages and disadvantages; publish or perish?; a guide to digital publishing for the librarian User perspectives - attracting users to the library: physically and virtually; how best to teach users to exploit and evaluate the 'new library'; what reference and technical services users now want and how to provide them Financial constrains and solutions-escalating material budgets: digital solutions and illusions; staff and overhead costs: using digital applications for 'win-win' solutions; cooperation versus competition Professional and workplace challenges - coping with constant change; the technical and reference divide in the digital age; avoiding information overkill; balancing specialist and generalist skills among librarians Resolving ethical and legal dilemmas

0.07167189 = product of:
  0.21501565 = sum of:
    0.21501565 = sum of:
      0.16886345 = weight(_text_:librarians in 158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.16886345 = score(doc=158,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04866305 = queryNorm
          0.7746619 = fieldWeight in 158, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=158)
      0.0461522 = weight(_text_:22 in 158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0461522 = score(doc=158,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04866305 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 158, 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=158)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The role of cataloging education within the library profession is a topic of considerable interest and debate. Fifty-five heads of reference and sixty-five heads of cataloging in Association of Research Librarians institutions responded to a survey based upon the Association for Library Collections and Technical Services Educational Policy Statement, Appendix: Knowledge and Skills, Intellectual Access and Information Organization, concerning the importance of cataloging competencies for all entry-level academic librarians. The survey found that practitioners agreed upon a definite set of core cataloging competencies that all entry-level academic librarians should possess. This finding holds larger implications for library education for academic librarians and for the profession as a whole.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.0683396 = product of:
  0.102509394 = sum of:
    0.08362989 = weight(_text_:specialist in 2496) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08362989 = score(doc=2496,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.25779092 = fieldWeight in 2496, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2496)
    0.018879505 = product of:
      0.03775901 = sum of:
        0.03775901 = weight(_text_:librarians in 2496) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03775901 = score(doc=2496,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.17321965 = fieldWeight in 2496, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2496)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Content

"Will there ever be a science equivalent of Google? Two of the world's biggest science publishing and information firms seem to think that there will. They are about to compete head-to-head to create the most popular tool for searching the scientific literature. Elsevier, the Amsterdam-based publisher of more than 1,800 journals, has announced that this autumn it will launch Scopus, an online search engine covering abstracts and references from 14,000 scientific journals. Scopus will arrive as a direct competitor for the established Web of Science, owned by Thomson ISI of Philadelphia, the scientific information specialist. "Scopus will definitely be a threat to ISI," says one science publishing expert, who asked not to be named. "But ISI will not just let this happen. There will be some kind of arms race in terms of adding new features." Many researchers are already wedded to subject-specific databases of scientific information, such as PubMed, for biomedical research. But Web of Science is currently the only service to cover the full spectrum of scientific disciplines and publications. It can also generate the citation statistics that are sometimes used to measure the quality ofjournals and individual papers. ISI, which is widely used by libraries worldwide, may be hard to displace. It covers fewer than 9,000 journals, but it has been available in its present form since 1997 and includes a 60-year archive of papers. Thomson ISI says it will extend this to 105 years by the end of 2005. The company also owns the only extensive database an patent abstracts.
Elsevier cannot hope to match this coverage in the short term. The company has been able to draw an its experience of running biomedical and pharmaceutical databases, and developers began compiling a multidisciplinary index two years ago. Even so, when it launches, Scopus will index only five years of references far some journals, rising to ten years during 2005. Data an abstracts will go back further, in some cases to the mid-1960s. Because Scopus has been built from scratch, Elsevier has been able to work with librarians to develop an alternative to the Web of Science interface, which has been criticized by some users. "Users are very happy with Scopus," says Steven Gheyselinck, a librarian at the University of Lausanne in Switzerland who has been testing it. Although Scopus and Web of Science are the only products aiming to cover all of science, other search engines are also under development. The Google of science could end up being Google itself the company has collaborated with nine publishers, including Nature Publishing Group, to create an engine called CrossRef Search. This service, a pilot of which appeared last month, allows users to search digital versions of all papers held by the publishers involved and returns links to articles an their websites. Unlike Web of Science and Scopus, which scan through the titles and abstracts of articles, CrossRef Search also searches the full text of papers. Many of the other 300 or so members of CrossRef - a publishers' collaboration established to allow easier linking between citations - are likely to join the service if the pilot is successful."

0.0647129 = product of:
  0.09706934 = sum of:
    0.07728983 = product of:
      0.23186947 = sum of:
        0.23186947 = weight(_text_:3a in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.23186947 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4125659 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.019779515 = product of:
      0.03955903 = sum of:
        0.03955903 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03955903 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Content

Vgl.: http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CEAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.91.4940%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&ei=dOXrUMeIDYHDtQahsIGACg&usg=AFQjCNHFWVh6gNPvnOrOS9R3rkrXCNVD-A&sig2=5I2F5evRfMnsttSgFF9g7Q&bvm=bv.1357316858,d.Yms.

Date

8. 1.2013 10:22:32

0.06371801 = product of:
  0.19115403 = sum of:
    0.19115403 = weight(_text_:specialist in 3687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19115403 = score(doc=3687,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.5892364 = fieldWeight in 3687, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3687)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Bibliothekswissenschaft - quo vadis? Eine Disziplin zwischen Traditionen und Visionen: Programme - Modelle - Forschungsaufgaben / Library Science - quo vadis? A Discipline between Challenges and Opportunities: Programs - Models - Research Assignments. Mit einem Geleitwort von / With a Preface by Guy St. Clair Consulting Specialist for Knowledge Management and Learning, New York, NY und einem Vorwort von / and a Foreword by Georg Ruppelt Sprecher von / Speaker of BID - Bibliothek & Information Deutschland Bundesvereinigung Deutscher Bibliotheksund Informationsverbände e.V. Hrsg. von P. Hauke

0.06371801 = product of:
  0.19115403 = sum of:
    0.19115403 = weight(_text_:specialist in 3689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19115403 = score(doc=3689,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.5892364 = fieldWeight in 3689, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3689)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Bibliothekswissenschaft - quo vadis? Eine Disziplin zwischen Traditionen und Visionen: Programme - Modelle - Forschungsaufgaben / Library Science - quo vadis? A Discipline between Challenges and Opportunities: Programs - Models - Research Assignments. Mit einem Geleitwort von / With a Preface by Guy St. Clair Consulting Specialist for Knowledge Management and Learning, New York, NY und einem Vorwort von / and a Foreword by Georg Ruppelt Sprecher von / Speaker of BID - Bibliothek & Information Deutschland Bundesvereinigung Deutscher Bibliotheksund Informationsverbände e.V. Hrsg. von P. Hauke

0.06304546 = product of:
  0.09456818 = sum of:
    0.07168276 = weight(_text_:specialist in 2863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07168276 = score(doc=2863,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.22096364 = fieldWeight in 2863, 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=2863)
    0.022885418 = product of:
      0.045770835 = sum of:
        0.045770835 = weight(_text_:librarians in 2863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045770835 = score(doc=2863,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.20997393 = fieldWeight in 2863, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2863)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Aimed at students and professionals within Library and Information Services (LIS), this book is about the power and potential of ontologies to enhance the electronic search process. The book will compare search strategies and results in the current search environment and demonstrate how these could be transformed using ontologies and concept searching. Simple descriptions, visual representations, and examples of ontologies will bring a full understanding of how these concept maps are constructed to enhance retrieval through natural language queries. Readers will gain a sense of how ontologies are currently being used and how they could be applied in the future, encouraging them to think about how their own work and their users' search experiences could be enhanced by the creation of a customized ontology. Key Features Written by a librarian, for librarians (most work on ontologies is written and read by people in computer science and knowledge management) Written by a librarian who has created her own ontology and performed research on its capabilities Written in easily understandable language, with concepts broken down to the basics The Author Ms. King is the Information Specialist at the Center on Media and Child Health at Children's Hospital Boston. She is a graduate of Smith College (B.A.) and Simmons College (M.L.I.S.). She is an active member of the Special Libraries Association, and was the recipient of the 2005 SLA Innovation in Technology Award for the creation of a customized media effects ontology used for semantic searching. Readership The book is aimed at practicing librarians and information professionals as well as graduate students of Library and Information Science. Contents Introduction Part 1: Understanding Ontologies - organising knowledge; what is an ontology? How are ontologies different from other knowledge representations? How are ontologies currently being used? Key concepts Ontologies in semantic search - determining whether a search was successful; what does semantic search have to offer? Semantic techniques; semantic searching behind the scenes; key concepts Creating an ontology - how to create an ontology; key concepts Building an ontology from existing components - choosing components; customizing your knowledge structure; key concepts Part 2: Semantic Technologies Natural language processing - tagging parts of speech; grammar-based NLP; statistical NLP; semantic analysis,; current applications of NLP; key concepts Using metadata to add semantic information - structured languages; metadata tagging; semantic tagging; key concepts Other semantic capabilities - semantic classification; synsets; topic maps; rules and inference; key concepts Part 3: Case Studies: Theory into Practice Biogen Idec: using semantics in drug discovery research - Biogen Idec's solution; the future The Center on Media and Child Health: using an ontology to explore the effects of media - building the ontology; choosing the source; implementing and comparing to Boolean search; the future Partners HealthCare System: semantic technologies to improve clinical decision support - the medical appointment; partners healthcare system's solution; lessons learned; the future MINDSWAP: using ontologies to aid terrorism; intelligence gathering - building, using and maintaining the ontology; sharing information with other experts; future plans Part 4: Advanced Topics Languages for expressing ontologies - XML; RDF; OWL; SKOS; Ontology language features - comparison chart Tools for building ontologies - basic criteria when evaluating ontologies Part 5: Transitions to the Future

0.058984425 = product of:
  0.17695327 = sum of:
    0.17695327 = sum of:
      0.13080107 = weight(_text_:librarians in 120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.13080107 = score(doc=120,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04866305 = queryNorm
          0.60005057 = fieldWeight in 120, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=120)
      0.0461522 = weight(_text_:22 in 120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0461522 = score(doc=120,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04866305 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 120, 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=120)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Authority control has long been an important part of the cataloging process. However, few studies have been conducted examining how librarians learn about it. Research conducted to date suggests that many librarians learn about authority control on the job rather than in formal classes. To offer an introduction to authority control information for librarians, an annotated bibliography is provided. It includes monographs, articles and papers, electronic discussion groups, Web sites related to professional conferences, additional Web sites related to authority control, and training offered through the Name Authority Cooperative Program and the Subject Authority Cooperative Program. A summary of possible future trends in authority control is also provided.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.058576792 = product of:
  0.08786519 = sum of:
    0.07168276 = weight(_text_:specialist in 3099) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07168276 = score(doc=3099,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.22096364 = fieldWeight in 3099, 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=3099)
    0.016182434 = product of:
      0.032364868 = sum of:
        0.032364868 = weight(_text_:librarians in 3099) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032364868 = score(doc=3099,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.148474 = fieldWeight in 3099, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3099)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Content

"When Randall C. Jimerson, the president of the Society of American Archivists, heard of Google's plan to convert certain holdings at Oxford University and at some of the leading research libraries in the United States into digital files, searchable over the Web, he asked, "What are they thinking?" Mr. Jimerson had worries. Who would select the material? How would it be organized and identified to avoid mountains of excerpts taken out of context? Would Google users eventually forgo the experience of holding a book or looking at a historicaldocument? But in recent interviews, many scholars and librarians applauded the announcement by Google, the operator of the world's most popular Internet search service, to digitize some of the collections at Oxford, the University of Michigan, Stanford University, Harvard and the New York Public Library. The plan, in the words of Paul Duguid, information specialist at the University of California at Berkeley, will "blast wide open" the walls around the libraries of world-class institutions.

0.05826698 = product of:
  0.17480093 = sum of:
    0.17480093 = sum of:
      0.12205556 = weight(_text_:librarians in 2998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.12205556 = score(doc=2998,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04866305 = queryNorm
          0.5599305 = fieldWeight in 2998, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2998)
      0.052745372 = weight(_text_:22 in 2998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.052745372 = score(doc=2998,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04866305 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2998, 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=2998)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Humboldt University invited experts to Berlin recently to offer advice about its library science program. While the education of librarians for the twenty-first century needs to include practical training, those who plan to work in a research environment, or who want a research degree like a PhD, need to acquire a methodology that grounds their work in an established scholarly context.

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.4, S.337-339

0.0579382 = product of:
  0.1738146 = sum of:
    0.1738146 = sum of:
      0.10788289 = weight(_text_:librarians in 245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.10788289 = score(doc=245,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04866305 = queryNorm
          0.4949133 = fieldWeight in 245, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=245)
      0.065931715 = weight(_text_:22 in 245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.065931715 = score(doc=245,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04866305 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 245, 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=245)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Knjiznice za prihodnost : napredek in sodelovanje : zbornik referatov [ Libraries for the future : development and collaboration: proceedings / Professional conference of Union of associations of Slovene Librarians], Portoroz, October 22-23, 2007; ed. M. Ambrozic

0.05575326 = product of:
  0.16725978 = sum of:
    0.16725978 = weight(_text_:specialist in 3535) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16725978 = score(doc=3535,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.51558185 = fieldWeight in 3535, 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=3535)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The present paper presents a philosophical approach to knowledge organization, proposing the pragmatic doctrine of C.S. Peirce as basic analytical framework for knowledge domains. The theoretical framework discussed is related to the qualitative brauch of knowledge organization theory 1.e. within scope of Hjoerland's domain analytical view (Hjoerland and Albrechtsen 1995; Hjoerland 2002; Hjoerland 2004), and promote a general framework for analyzing domain knowledge and concepts. However, the concept of knowledge organization can be viewed in at least two perspectives, one that defines knowledge organization as an activity performed by a human actor e.g. an information specialist, and secondly a view that has the perspective of the inherent self-organizing structure of a knowledge domain the latter being investigated in the paper.

0.055031624 = product of:
  0.16509487 = sum of:
    0.16509487 = sum of:
      0.13212901 = weight(_text_:librarians in 2551) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.13212901 = score(doc=2551,freq=12.0), product of:
          0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04866305 = queryNorm
          0.6061425 = fieldWeight in 2551, product of:
            3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
              12.0 = termFreq=12.0
            4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2551)
      0.032965858 = weight(_text_:22 in 2551) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.032965858 = score(doc=2551,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04866305 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2551, 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=2551)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Discusses the roles that subject librarians (or 'subject specialists') play in contemporary UK academic libraries. Argues that subject librarians, who still form a significant grouping of senior staff in most UK academic libraries, continue to have a significant role to play in the delivery of library services and that applies to both traditional and electronic library services. Discusses the traditional role of subject librarians and analyzes the way in which this role is changing. Those areas where the changing responsibilities are extensions of traditional roles into new areas are pinpointed, together with examples of where subject librarians are performing new roles and adopting new ways of working. Areas where the changing role of subject librarians can be specifically identified include: greater emphasis on liaison with users; advocacy of the collections; adopting new roles; dealing with user enquiries in new ways; working with technical staff; selecting electronic library materials; carrying out more information skills training; having a greater involvement in the implementation of educational technology; team working and project working. Presents practical examples based on experiences at Nottingham university and other UK research libraries. The redesign and relaunch of Nottingham University Library Web site is described to illustrate many of these points.

Date

9. 2.1997 18:44:22

0.052247636 = product of:
  0.07837145 = sum of:
    0.06758316 = weight(_text_:specialist in 2924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06758316 = score(doc=2924,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.20832653 = fieldWeight in 2924, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2924)
    0.010788289 = product of:
      0.021576578 = sum of:
        0.021576578 = weight(_text_:librarians in 2924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021576578 = score(doc=2924,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.09898266 = fieldWeight in 2924, 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=2924)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Many information professionals working in small units today fail to find the published tools for subject-based organization that are appropriate to their local needs, whether they are archivists, special librarians, information officers, or knowledge or content managers. Large established standards for document description and organization are too unwieldy, unnecessarily detailed, or too expensive to install and maintain. In other cases the available systems are insufficient for a specialist environment, or don't bring things together in a helpful way. A purpose built, in-house system would seem to be the answer, but too often the skills necessary to create one are lacking. This practical text examines the criteria relevant to the selection of a subject-management system, describes the characteristics of some common types of subject tool, and takes the novice step by step through the process of creating a system for a specialist environment. The methodology employed is a standard technique for the building of a thesaurus that incidentally creates a compatible classification or taxonomy, both of which may be used in a variety of ways for document or information management. Key areas covered are: What is a thesaurus? Tools for subject access and retrieval; what a thesaurus is used for? Why use a thesaurus? Examples of thesauri; the structure of a thesaurus; thesaural relationships; practical thesaurus construction; the vocabulary of the thesaurus; building the systematic structure; conversion to alphabetic format; forms of entry in the thesaurus; maintaining the thesaurus; thesaurus software; and; the wider environment. Essential for the practising information professional, this guide is also valuable for students of library and information science.