Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval"
  • × type_ss:"el"
  1. Woods, E.W.; IFLA Section on classification and Indexing and Indexing and Information Technology; Joint Working Group on a Classification Format: Requirements for a format of classification data : Final report, July 1996 (1996) 0.02
    0.021947198 = product of:
      0.08778879 = sum of:
        0.08778879 = weight(_text_:data in 3008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08778879 = score(doc=3008,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.5928845 = fieldWeight in 3008, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3008)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Object
    USMARC for classification data
  2. Concise UNIMARC Classification Format : Draft 5 (20000125) (2000) 0.02
    0.020692015 = product of:
      0.08276806 = sum of:
        0.08276806 = weight(_text_:data in 4421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08276806 = score(doc=4421,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.5589768 = fieldWeight in 4421, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4421)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Object
    UNIMARC for classification data
  3. Quick Guide to Publishing a Classification Scheme on the Semantic Web (2008) 0.02
    0.015679834 = product of:
      0.06271934 = sum of:
        0.06271934 = weight(_text_:data in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06271934 = score(doc=3061,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.42357713 = fieldWeight in 3061, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3061)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    This document describes in brief how to express the content and structure of a classification scheme, and metadata about a classification scheme, in RDF using the SKOS vocabulary. RDF allows data to be linked to and/or merged with other RDF data by semantic web applications. The Semantic Web, which is based on the Resource Description Framework (RDF), provides a common framework that allows data to be shared and reused across application, enterprise, and community boundaries. Publishing classifications schemes in SKOS will unify the great many of existing classification efforts in the framework of the Semantic Web.
  4. Tunkelang, D.: Dynamic category sets : an approach for faceted search (2006) 0.01
    0.012802532 = product of:
      0.051210128 = sum of:
        0.051210128 = weight(_text_:data in 3082) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051210128 = score(doc=3082,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.34584928 = fieldWeight in 3082, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3082)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    In this paper, we present Dynamic Category Sets, a novel approach that addresses the vocabulary problem for faceted data. In their paper on the vocabulary problem, Furnas et al. note that "the keywords that are assigned by indexers are often at odds with those tried by searchers." Faceted search systems exhibit an interesting aspect of this problem: users do not necessarily understand an information space in terms of the same facets as the indexers who designed it. Our approach addresses this problem by employing a data-driven approach to discover sets of values across multiple facets that best match the query. When there are multiple candidates, we offer a clarification dialog that allows the user to disambiguate them.
  5. Reiner, U.: Automatische DDC-Klassifizierung von bibliografischen Titeldatensätzen (2009) 0.01
    0.007930585 = product of:
      0.03172234 = sum of:
        0.03172234 = product of:
          0.06344468 = sum of:
            0.06344468 = weight(_text_:22 in 611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06344468 = score(doc=611,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16398162 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046827413 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 611, 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=611)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    22. 8.2009 12:54:24
  6. Yu, N.: Readings & Web resources for faceted classification 0.01
    0.0077595054 = product of:
      0.031038022 = sum of:
        0.031038022 = weight(_text_:data in 4394) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031038022 = score(doc=4394,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.2096163 = fieldWeight in 4394, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4394)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    The term "facet" has been used in various places, while in most cases it is just a buzz word to replace what is indeed "aspect" or "category". The references below either define and explain the original concept of facet or provide guidelines for building 'real' faceted search/browse. I was interested in faceted classification because it seems to be a natural and efficient way for organizing and browsing Web collections. However, to automatically generate facets and their isolates is extremely difficult since it involves concept extraction and concept grouping, both of which are difficult problems by themselves. And it is almost impossible to achieve mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive 'true' facets without human judgment. Nowadays, faceted search/browse widely exists, implicitly or explicitly, on a majority of retail websites due to the multi-aspects nature of the data. However, it is still rarely seen on any digital library sites. (I could be wrong since I haven't kept myself updated with this field for a while.)
  7. Van Dijck, P.: Introduction to XFML (2003) 0.01
    0.006344468 = product of:
      0.025377871 = sum of:
        0.025377871 = product of:
          0.050755743 = sum of:
            0.050755743 = weight(_text_:22 in 2474) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.050755743 = score(doc=2474,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16398162 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046827413 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2474, 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=2474)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    http://www.xml.com/lpt/a/2003/01/22/xfml.html
  8. Place, E.: Internationale Zusammenarbeit bei Internet Subject Gateways (1999) 0.00
    0.0047583506 = product of:
      0.019033402 = sum of:
        0.019033402 = product of:
          0.038066804 = sum of:
            0.038066804 = weight(_text_:22 in 4189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.038066804 = score(doc=4189,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16398162 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046827413 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4189, 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=4189)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    22. 6.2002 19:35:09