Search (872 results, page 1 of 44)

  • × theme_ss:"Suchmaschinen"
  1. Fong, W.W.: Searching the World Wide Web (1996) 0.06
    0.06479128 = product of:
      0.09718691 = sum of:
        0.008542033 = weight(_text_:in in 6597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008542033 = score(doc=6597,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 6597, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6597)
        0.08864488 = sum of:
          0.032032568 = weight(_text_:science in 6597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.032032568 = score(doc=6597,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.23282544 = fieldWeight in 6597, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6597)
          0.056612313 = weight(_text_:22 in 6597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.056612313 = score(doc=6597,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6597, 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=6597)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Reviews the availability on the WWW, of search engines designed to organize various web information sources. Discusses the differences and similarities of each search engine and their advantages and disadvantages. Search engines included in the study were: AltaVista, CUI W3 Catalog, InfoSeek, Lycos, Magellan, Yahoo
    Source
    Journal of library and information science. 22(1996) no.1, S.15-36
  2. Li, L.; Shang, Y.; Zhang, W.: Improvement of HITS-based algorithms on Web documents 0.06
    0.061344273 = product of:
      0.09201641 = sum of:
        0.08295621 = product of:
          0.24886861 = sum of:
            0.24886861 = weight(_text_:3a in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.24886861 = score(doc=2514,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.4428125 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052230705 = queryNorm
                0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 2514, 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=2514)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.009060195 = weight(_text_:in in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009060195 = score(doc=2514,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    In this paper, we present two ways to improve the precision of HITS-based algorithms onWeb documents. First, by analyzing the limitations of current HITS-based algorithms, we propose a new weighted HITS-based method that assigns appropriate weights to in-links of root documents. Then, we combine content analysis with HITS-based algorithms and study the effects of four representative relevance scoring methods, VSM, Okapi, TLS, and CDR, using a set of broad topic queries. Our experimental results show that our weighted HITS-based method performs significantly better than Bharat's improved HITS algorithm. When we combine our weighted HITS-based method or Bharat's HITS algorithm with any of the four relevance scoring methods, the combined methods are only marginally better than our weighted HITS-based method. Between the four relevance scoring methods, there is no significant quality difference when they are combined with a HITS-based algorithm.
    Content
    Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fdelab.csd.auth.gr%2F~dimitris%2Fcourses%2Fir_spring06%2Fpage_rank_computing%2Fp527-li.pdf. Vgl. auch: http://www2002.org/CDROM/refereed/643/.
  3. Alte Zeitschriften in Googles Buchsuche : Suchmaschine (2009) 0.06
    0.059498634 = product of:
      0.08924795 = sum of:
        0.012813049 = weight(_text_:in in 2619) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012813049 = score(doc=2619,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 2619, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2619)
        0.0764349 = sum of:
          0.03397567 = weight(_text_:science in 2619) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03397567 = score(doc=2619,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.24694869 = fieldWeight in 2619, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2619)
          0.042459235 = weight(_text_:22 in 2619) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.042459235 = score(doc=2619,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2619, 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=2619)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Content
    "Nach Büchern folgen jetzt auch Zeitschriften: Google digitalisiert gedruckte Magazine und macht sie über die Buchsuche zugänglich. Möglich ist das durch eine Partnerschaft des Suchmaschinenbetreibers mit mehreren Zeitschriftenverlagen in den USA. Anders als viele von Google digitalisierte Bücher können die Zeitschriftenartikel auch in Deutschland gelesen werden. Unter den Magazinen finden sich zum Beispiel das New York Magazine, Popular Mechanics oder Ebony, aber auch Popular Science und Bulletin of Atomic Science. Auch Men's Health ist dabei. Andere Titel sollen noch folgen. In Googles Buchsuche kann man die indexierten Zeitschriften nach verschiedenen Begriffen durchsuchen. Für die Magazine selbst gibt es allerdings kein Verzeichnis: Eine gezielte Suche nach einer bestimmten Zeitschrift ist deshalb nicht möglich. Die einzelnen Ausgaben stehen als vollständige farbige Scans zur Verfügung. Neben einem Inhaltsverzeichnis wird auch eine Liste mit Schlüsselbegriffen der jeweiligen Edition angezeigt. Eine Unterteilung nach Jahreszahlen gibt es ebenfalls."
    Date
    7. 2.2009 11:22:39
  4. Rose, D.E.: Reconciling information-seeking behavior with search user interfaces for the Web (2006) 0.06
    0.058756333 = product of:
      0.0881345 = sum of:
        0.010570227 = weight(_text_:in in 5296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010570227 = score(doc=5296,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.14877784 = fieldWeight in 5296, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5296)
        0.07756427 = sum of:
          0.028028497 = weight(_text_:science in 5296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.028028497 = score(doc=5296,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.20372227 = fieldWeight in 5296, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5296)
          0.049535774 = weight(_text_:22 in 5296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.049535774 = score(doc=5296,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5296, 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=5296)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    User interfaces of Web search engines reflect attributes of the underlying tools used to create them, rather than what we know about how people look for information. In this article, the author examines several characteristics of user search behavior: the variety of information-seeking goals, the cultural and situational context of search, and the iterative nature of the search task. An analysis of these characteristics suggests ways that interfaces can be redesigned to make searching more effective for users.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 17:58:06
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einer Special Section "Perspectives on Search User Interfaces: Best Practices and Future Visions"
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.6, S.797-799
  5. Bilal, D.: Children's use of the Yahooligans! Web search engine : III. Cognitive and physical behaviors on fully self-generated search tasks (2002) 0.05
    0.054784253 = product of:
      0.08217638 = sum of:
        0.015692718 = weight(_text_:in in 5228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015692718 = score(doc=5228,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.22087781 = fieldWeight in 5228, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5228)
        0.06648366 = sum of:
          0.024024425 = weight(_text_:science in 5228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.024024425 = score(doc=5228,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 5228, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5228)
          0.042459235 = weight(_text_:22 in 5228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.042459235 = score(doc=5228,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5228, 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=5228)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Bilal, in this third part of her Yahooligans! study looks at children's performance with self-generated search tasks, as compared to previously assigned search tasks looking for differences in success, cognitive behavior, physical behavior, and task preference. Lotus ScreenCam was used to record interactions and post search interviews to record impressions. The subjects, the same 22 seventh grade children in the previous studies, generated topics of interest that were mediated with the researcher into more specific topics where necessary. Fifteen usable sessions form the basis of the study. Eleven children were successful in finding information, a rate of 73% compared to 69% in assigned research questions, and 50% in assigned fact-finding questions. Eighty-seven percent began using one or two keyword searches. Spelling was a problem. Successful children made fewer keyword searches and the number of search moves averaged 5.5 as compared to 2.4 on the research oriented task and 3.49 on the factual. Backtracking and looping were common. The self-generated task was preferred by 47% of the subjects.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 53(2002) no.13, S.1170-1183
  6. Place, E.: Internationale Zusammenarbeit bei Internet Subject Gateways (1999) 0.05
    0.05172006 = product of:
      0.07758009 = sum of:
        0.011096427 = weight(_text_:in in 4189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011096427 = score(doc=4189,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.1561842 = fieldWeight in 4189, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4189)
        0.06648366 = sum of:
          0.024024425 = weight(_text_:science in 4189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.024024425 = score(doc=4189,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 4189, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4189)
          0.042459235 = weight(_text_:22 in 4189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.042459235 = score(doc=4189,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = 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)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Eine ganze Anzahl von Bibliotheken in Europa befaßt sich mit der Entwicklung von Internet Subject Gateways - einer Serviceleistung, die den Nutzern helfen soll, qualitativ hochwertige Internetquellen zu finden. Subject Gateways wie SOSIG (The Social Science Information Gateway) sind bereits seit einigen Jahren im Internet verfügbar und stellen eine Alternative zu Internet-Suchmaschinen wie AltaVista und Verzeichnissen wie Yahoo dar. Bezeichnenderweise stützen sich Subject Gateways auf die Fertigkeiten, Verfahrensweisen und Standards der internationalen Bibliothekswelt und wenden diese auf Informationen aus dem Internet an. Dieses Referat will daher betonen, daß Bibliothekare/innen idealerweise eine vorherrschende Rolle im Aufbau von Suchservices für Internetquellen spielen und daß Information Gateways eine Möglichkeit dafür darstellen. Es wird einige der Subject Gateway-Initiativen in Europa umreißen und die Werkzeuge und Technologien beschreiben, die vom Projekt DESIRE entwickelt wurden, um die Entwicklung neuer Gateways in anderen Ländern zu unterstützen. Es wird auch erörtert, wie IMesh, eine Gruppe für Gateways aus der ganzen Welt eine internationale Strategie für Gateways anstrebt und versucht, Standards zur Umsetzung dieses Projekts zu entwickeln
    Date
    22. 6.2002 19:35:09
  7. Nicholson, S.; Sierra, T.; Eseryel, U.Y.; Park, J.-H.; Barkow, P.; Pozo, E.J.; Ward, J.: How much of it is real? : analysis of paid placement in Web search engine results (2006) 0.05
    0.05172006 = product of:
      0.07758009 = sum of:
        0.011096427 = weight(_text_:in in 5278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011096427 = score(doc=5278,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.1561842 = fieldWeight in 5278, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5278)
        0.06648366 = sum of:
          0.024024425 = weight(_text_:science in 5278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.024024425 = score(doc=5278,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 5278, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5278)
          0.042459235 = weight(_text_:22 in 5278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.042459235 = score(doc=5278,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5278, 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=5278)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Most Web search tools integrate sponsored results with results from their internal editorial database in providing results to users. The goal of this research is to get a better idea of how much of the screen real estate displays real editorial results as compared to sponsored results. The overall average results are that 40% of all results presented on the first screen are real results, and when the entire first Web page is considered, 67% of the results are nonsponsored results. For general search tools such as Google, 56% of the first screen and 82% of the first Web page contain nonsponsored results. Other results include that query structure makes a significant difference in the percentage of nonsponsored results returned by a search. Similarly, the topic of the query also can have a significant effect on the percentage of sponsored results displayed by most Web search tools.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 16:32:57
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.4, S.448-461
  8. Large, A.; Beheshti, J.; Rahman, T.: Design criteria for children's Web portals : the users speak out (2002) 0.05
    0.050362572 = product of:
      0.07554386 = sum of:
        0.009060195 = weight(_text_:in in 197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009060195 = score(doc=197,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 197, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=197)
        0.06648366 = sum of:
          0.024024425 = weight(_text_:science in 197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.024024425 = score(doc=197,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 197, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=197)
          0.042459235 = weight(_text_:22 in 197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.042459235 = score(doc=197,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 197, 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=197)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Four focus groups were held with young Web users (10 to 13 years of age) to explore design criteria for Web portals. The focus group participants commented upon four existing portals designed with young users in mind: Ask Jeeves for Kids, KidsClick, Lycos Zone, and Yahooligans! This article reports their first impressions on using these portals, their likes and dislikes, and their suggestions for improvements. Design criteria for children's Web portals are elaborated based upon these comments under four headings: portal goals, visual design, information architecture, and personalization. An ideal portal should cater for both educational and entertainment needs, use attractive screen designs based especially on effective use of color, graphics, and animation, provide both keyword search facilities and browsable subject categories, and allow individual user personalization in areas such as color and graphics
    Date
    2. 6.2005 10:34:22
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 53(2002) no.2, S.79-94
  9. Höfer, W.: Detektive im Web (1999) 0.05
    0.048572987 = product of:
      0.07285948 = sum of:
        0.012813049 = weight(_text_:in in 4007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012813049 = score(doc=4007,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 4007, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4007)
        0.06004643 = product of:
          0.12009286 = sum of:
            0.12009286 = weight(_text_:22 in 4007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.12009286 = score(doc=4007,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052230705 = queryNorm
                0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 4007, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4007)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Ohne Altavista, Excite & Co. wären Internet-Surfer aufgeschmissen. Wie die Daten-Spürhunde arbeiten, wie Sie ihre Website anmelden und welche Tools helfen, steht in diesem Suchmaschinen-Special
    Date
    22. 8.1999 20:22:06
  10. Lewandowski, D.; Spree, U.: Ranking of Wikipedia articles in search engines revisited : fair ranking for reasonable quality? (2011) 0.05
    0.048190486 = product of:
      0.07228573 = sum of:
        0.016882677 = weight(_text_:in in 444) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016882677 = score(doc=444,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.2376267 = fieldWeight in 444, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=444)
        0.05540305 = sum of:
          0.020020355 = weight(_text_:science in 444) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.020020355 = score(doc=444,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 444, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=444)
          0.035382695 = weight(_text_:22 in 444) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.035382695 = score(doc=444,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 444, 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=444)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    This paper aims to review the fiercely discussed question of whether the ranking of Wikipedia articles in search engines is justified by the quality of the articles. After an overview of current research on information quality in Wikipedia, a summary of the extended discussion on the quality of encyclopedic entries in general is given. On this basis, a heuristic method for evaluating Wikipedia entries is developed and applied to Wikipedia articles that scored highly in a search engine retrieval effectiveness test and compared with the relevance judgment of jurors. In all search engines tested, Wikipedia results are unanimously judged better by the jurors than other results on the corresponding results position. Relevance judgments often roughly correspond with the results from the heuristic evaluation. Cases in which high relevance judgments are not in accordance with the comparatively low score from the heuristic evaluation are interpreted as an indicator of a high degree of trust in Wikipedia. One of the systemic shortcomings of Wikipedia lies in its necessarily incoherent user model. A further tuning of the suggested criteria catalog, for instance, the different weighing of the supplied criteria, could serve as a starting point for a user model differentiated evaluation of Wikipedia articles. Approved methods of quality evaluation of reference works are applied to Wikipedia articles and integrated with the question of search engine evaluation.
    Date
    30. 9.2012 19:27:22
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.1, S.117-132
  11. Sachse, J.: ¬The influence of snippet length on user behavior in mobile web search (2019) 0.05
    0.047612906 = product of:
      0.07141936 = sum of:
        0.016016312 = weight(_text_:in in 5493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016016312 = score(doc=5493,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.22543246 = fieldWeight in 5493, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5493)
        0.05540305 = sum of:
          0.020020355 = weight(_text_:science in 5493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.020020355 = score(doc=5493,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 5493, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5493)
          0.035382695 = weight(_text_:22 in 5493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.035382695 = score(doc=5493,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5493, 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=5493)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose Web search is more and more moving into mobile contexts. However, screen size of mobile devices is limited and search engine result pages face a trade-off between offering informative snippets and optimal use of space. One factor clearly influencing this trade-off is snippet length. The purpose of this paper is to find out what snippet size to use in mobile web search. Design/methodology/approach For this purpose, an eye-tracking experiment was conducted showing participants search interfaces with snippets of one, three or five lines on a mobile device to analyze 17 dependent variables. In total, 31 participants took part in the study. Each of the participants solved informational and navigational tasks. Findings Results indicate a strong influence of page fold on scrolling behavior and attention distribution across search results. Regardless of query type, short snippets seem to provide too little information about the result, so that search performance and subjective measures are negatively affected. Long snippets of five lines lead to better performance than medium snippets for navigational queries, but to worse performance for informational queries. Originality/value Although space in mobile search is limited, this study shows that longer snippets improve usability and user experience. It further emphasizes that page fold plays a stronger role in mobile than in desktop search for attention distribution.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Footnote
    Beitag in einem Special Issue: Information Science in the German-speaking Countries
  12. Su, L.T.: ¬A comprehensive and systematic model of user evaluation of Web search engines : Il. An evaluation by undergraduates (2003) 0.05
    0.047002252 = product of:
      0.07050338 = sum of:
        0.015100324 = weight(_text_:in in 2117) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015100324 = score(doc=2117,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 2117, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2117)
        0.05540305 = sum of:
          0.020020355 = weight(_text_:science in 2117) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.020020355 = score(doc=2117,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 2117, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2117)
          0.035382695 = weight(_text_:22 in 2117) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.035382695 = score(doc=2117,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2117, 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=2117)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    This paper presents an application of the model described in Part I to the evaluation of Web search engines by undergraduates. The study observed how 36 undergraduate used four major search engines to find information for their own individual problems and how they evaluated these engines based an actual interaction with the search engines. User evaluation was based an 16 performance measures representing five evaluation criteria: relevance, efficiency, utility, user satisfaction, and connectivity. Non-performance (user-related) measures were also applied. Each participant searched his/ her own topic an all four engines and provided satisfaction ratings for system features and interaction and reasons for satisfaction. Each also made relevance judgements of retrieved items in relation to his/her own information need and participated in post-search Interviews to provide reactions to the search results and overall performance. The study found significant differences in precision PR1 relative recall, user satisfaction with output display, time saving, value of search results, and overall performance among the four engines and also significant engine by discipline interactions an all these measures. In addition, the study found significant differences in user satisfaction with response time among four engines, and significant engine by discipline interaction in user satisfaction with search interface. None of the four search engines dominated in every aspect of the multidimensional evaluation. Content analysis of verbal data identified a number of user criteria and users evaluative comments based an these criteria. Results from both quantitative analysis and content analysis provide insight for system design and development, and useful feedback an strengths and weaknesses of search engines for system improvement
    Date
    24. 1.2004 18:27:22
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.13, S.1193-1222
  13. Aloteibi, S.; Sanderson, M.: Analyzing geographic query reformulation : an exploratory study (2014) 0.05
    0.047002252 = product of:
      0.07050338 = sum of:
        0.015100324 = weight(_text_:in in 1177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015100324 = score(doc=1177,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 1177, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1177)
        0.05540305 = sum of:
          0.020020355 = weight(_text_:science in 1177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.020020355 = score(doc=1177,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 1177, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1177)
          0.035382695 = weight(_text_:22 in 1177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.035382695 = score(doc=1177,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1177, 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=1177)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Search engine users typically engage in multiquery sessions in their quest to fulfill their information needs. Despite a plethora of research findings suggesting that a significant group of users look for information within a specific geographical scope, existing reformulation studies lack a focused analysis of how users reformulate geographic queries. This study comprehensively investigates the ways in which users reformulate such needs in an attempt to fill this gap in the literature. Reformulated sessions were sampled from a query log of a major search engine to extract 2,400 entries that were manually inspected to filter geo sessions. This filter identified 471 search sessions that included geographical intent, and these sessions were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively. The results revealed that one in five of the users who reformulated their queries were looking for geographically related information. They reformulated their queries by changing the content of the query rather than the structure. Users were not following a unified sequence of modifications and instead performed a single reformulation action. However, in some cases it was possible to anticipate their next move. A number of tasks in geo modifications were identified, including standard, multi-needs, multi-places, and hybrid approaches. The research concludes that it is important to specialize query reformulation studies to focus on particular query types rather than generically analyzing them, as it is apparent that geographic queries have their special reformulation characteristics.
    Date
    26. 1.2014 18:48:22
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.1, S.13-24
  14. Vaughan, L.; Chen, Y.: Data mining from web search queries : a comparison of Google trends and Baidu index (2015) 0.05
    0.047002252 = product of:
      0.07050338 = sum of:
        0.015100324 = weight(_text_:in in 1605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015100324 = score(doc=1605,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 1605, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1605)
        0.05540305 = sum of:
          0.020020355 = weight(_text_:science in 1605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.020020355 = score(doc=1605,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 1605, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1605)
          0.035382695 = weight(_text_:22 in 1605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.035382695 = score(doc=1605,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1605, 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=1605)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Numerous studies have explored the possibility of uncovering information from web search queries but few have examined the factors that affect web query data sources. We conducted a study that investigated this issue by comparing Google Trends and Baidu Index. Data from these two services are based on queries entered by users into Google and Baidu, two of the largest search engines in the world. We first compared the features and functions of the two services based on documents and extensive testing. We then carried out an empirical study that collected query volume data from the two sources. We found that data from both sources could be used to predict the quality of Chinese universities and companies. Despite the differences between the two services in terms of technology, such as differing methods of language processing, the search volume data from the two were highly correlated and combining the two data sources did not improve the predictive power of the data. However, there was a major difference between the two in terms of data availability. Baidu Index was able to provide more search volume data than Google Trends did. Our analysis showed that the disadvantage of Google Trends in this regard was due to Google's smaller user base in China. The implication of this finding goes beyond China. Google's user bases in many countries are smaller than that in China, so the search volume data related to those countries could result in the same issue as that related to China.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.1, S.13-22
  15. Loia, V.; Pedrycz, W.; Senatore, S.; Sessa, M.I.: Web navigation support by means of proximity-driven assistant agents (2006) 0.05
    0.046352074 = product of:
      0.06952811 = sum of:
        0.014125061 = weight(_text_:in in 5283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014125061 = score(doc=5283,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.19881277 = fieldWeight in 5283, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5283)
        0.05540305 = sum of:
          0.020020355 = weight(_text_:science in 5283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.020020355 = score(doc=5283,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 5283, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5283)
          0.035382695 = weight(_text_:22 in 5283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.035382695 = score(doc=5283,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5283, 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=5283)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    The explosive growth of the Web and the consequent exigency of the Web personalization domain have gained a key position in the direction of customization of the Web information to the needs of specific users, taking advantage of the knowledge acquired from the analysis of the user's navigational behavior (usage data) in correlation with other information collected in the Web context, namely, structure, content, and user profile data. This work presents an agent-based framework designed to help a user in achieving personalized navigation, by recommending related documents according to the user's responses in similar-pages searching mode. Our agent-based approach is grounded in the integration of different techniques and methodologies into a unique platform featuring user profiling, fuzzy multisets, proximity-oriented fuzzy clustering, and knowledge-based discovery technologies. Each of these methodologies serves to solve one facet of the general problem (discovering documents relevant to the user by searching the Web) and is treated by specialized agents that ultimately achieve the final functionality through cooperation and task distribution.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 16:59:13
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einer Special Topic Section on Soft Approaches to Information Retrieval and Information Access on the Web
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.4, S.515-527
  16. Garcés, P.J.; Olivas, J.A.; Romero, F.P.: Concept-matching IR systems versus word-matching information retrieval systems : considering fuzzy interrelations for indexing Web pages (2006) 0.04
    0.044893935 = product of:
      0.0673409 = sum of:
        0.011937855 = weight(_text_:in in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011937855 = score(doc=5288,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.16802745 = fieldWeight in 5288, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5288)
        0.05540305 = sum of:
          0.020020355 = weight(_text_:science in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.020020355 = score(doc=5288,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 5288, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5288)
          0.035382695 = weight(_text_:22 in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.035382695 = score(doc=5288,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5288, 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=5288)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    This article presents a semantic-based Web retrieval system that is capable of retrieving the Web pages that are conceptually related to the implicit concepts of the query. The concept of concept is managed from a fuzzy point of view by means of semantic areas. In this context, the proposed system improves most search engines that are based on matching words. The key of the system is to use a new version of the Fuzzy Interrelations and Synonymy-Based Concept Representation Model (FIS-CRM) to extract and represent the concepts contained in both the Web pages and the user query. This model, which was integrated into other tools such as the Fuzzy Interrelations and Synonymy based Searcher (FISS) metasearcher and the fz-mail system, considers the fuzzy synonymy and the fuzzy generality interrelations as a means of representing word interrelations (stored in a fuzzy synonymy dictionary and ontologies). The new version of the model, which is based on the study of the cooccurrences of synonyms, integrates a soft method for disambiguating word senses. This method also considers the context of the word to be disambiguated and the thematic ontologies and sets of synonyms stored in the dictionary.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 17:14:12
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einer Special Topic Section on Soft Approaches to Information Retrieval and Information Access on the Web
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.4, S.564-576
  17. Lewandowski, D.; Sünkler, S.: What does Google recommend when you want to compare insurance offerings? (2019) 0.04
    0.04405373 = product of:
      0.06608059 = sum of:
        0.010677542 = weight(_text_:in in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010677542 = score(doc=5288,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 5288, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5288)
        0.05540305 = sum of:
          0.020020355 = weight(_text_:science in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.020020355 = score(doc=5288,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 5288, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5288)
          0.035382695 = weight(_text_:22 in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.035382695 = score(doc=5288,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5288, 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=5288)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe a new method to improve the analysis of search engine results by considering the provider level as well as the domain level. This approach is tested by conducting a study using queries on the topic of insurance comparisons. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted an empirical study that analyses the results of search queries aimed at comparing insurance companies. The authors used a self-developed software system that automatically queries commercial search engines and automatically extracts the content of the returned result pages for further data analysis. The data analysis was carried out using the KNIME Analytics Platform. Findings Google's top search results are served by only a few providers that frequently appear in these results. The authors show that some providers operate several domains on the same topic and that these domains appear for the same queries in the result lists. Research limitations/implications The authors demonstrate the feasibility of this approach and draw conclusions for further investigations from the empirical study. However, the study is a limited use case based on a limited number of search queries. Originality/value The proposed method allows large-scale analysis of the composition of the top results from commercial search engines. It allows using valid empirical data to determine what users actually see on the search engine result pages.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einem Special Issue: Information Science in the German-speaking Countries
  18. Place, E.: International collaboration on Internet subject gateways (2000) 0.04
    0.04310005 = product of:
      0.06465007 = sum of:
        0.009247023 = weight(_text_:in in 4584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009247023 = score(doc=4584,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.1301535 = fieldWeight in 4584, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4584)
        0.05540305 = sum of:
          0.020020355 = weight(_text_:science in 4584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.020020355 = score(doc=4584,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 4584, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4584)
          0.035382695 = weight(_text_:22 in 4584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.035382695 = score(doc=4584,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4584, 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=4584)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Eine ganze Anzahl von Bibliotheken in Europa befaßt sich mit der Entwicklung von Internet Subject Gateways - einer Serviceleistung, die den Nutzern helfen soll, qualitativ hochwertige Internetquellen zu finden. Subject Gateways wie SOSIG (The Social Science Information Gateway) sind bereits seit einigen Jahren im Internet verfügbar und stellen eine Alternative zu Internet-Suchmaschinen wie AltaVista und Verzeichnissen wie Yahoo dar. Bezeichnenderweise stützen sich Subject Gateways auf die Fertigkeiten, Verfahrensweisen und Standards der internationalen Bibliothekswelt und wenden diese auf Informationen aus dem Internet an. Dieses Referat will daher betonen, daß Bibliothekare/innen idealerweise eine vorherrschende Rolle im Aufbau von Suchservices für Internetquellen spielen und daß Information Gateways eine Möglichkeit dafür darstellen. Es wird einige der Subject Gateway-Initiativen in Europa umreißen und die Werkzeuge und Technologien beschreiben, die vom Projekt DESIRE entwickelt wurden, um die Entwicklung neuer Gateways in anderen Ländern zu unterstützen. Es wird auch erörtert, wie IMesh, eine Gruppe für Gateways aus der ganzen Welt eine internationale Strategie für Gateways anstrebt und versucht, Standards zur Umsetzung dieses Projekts zu entwickeln
    Date
    22. 6.2002 19:35:35
  19. Chaudiron, S.; Ihadjadene, M.: Studying Web search engines from a user perspective : key concepts and main approaches (2012) 0.04
    0.04310005 = product of:
      0.06465007 = sum of:
        0.009247023 = weight(_text_:in in 109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009247023 = score(doc=109,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.1301535 = fieldWeight in 109, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=109)
        0.05540305 = sum of:
          0.020020355 = weight(_text_:science in 109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.020020355 = score(doc=109,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1375819 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 109, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=109)
          0.035382695 = weight(_text_:22 in 109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.035382695 = score(doc=109,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052230705 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 109, 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=109)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    This chapter shows that the wider use of Web search engines, reconsidering the theoretical and methodological frameworks to grasp new information practices. Beginning with an overview of the recent challenges implied by the dynamic nature of the Web, this chapter then traces the information behavior related concepts in order to present the different approaches from the user perspective. The authors pay special attention to the concept of "information practice" and other related concepts such as "use", "activity", and "behavior" largely used in the literature but not always strictly defined. The authors provide an overview of user-oriented studies that are meaningful to understand the different contexts of use of electronic information access systems, focusing on five approaches: the system-oriented approaches, the theories of information seeking, the cognitive and psychological approaches, the management science approaches, and the marketing approaches. Future directions of work are then shaped, including social searching and the ethical, cultural, and political dimensions of Web search engines. The authors conclude considering the importance of Critical theory to better understand the role of Web Search engines in our modern society.
    Date
    20. 4.2012 13:22:37
  20. Vidmar, D.J.: Darwin on the Web : the evolution of search tools (1999) 0.04
    0.042989552 = product of:
      0.06448433 = sum of:
        0.014948557 = weight(_text_:in in 3175) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014948557 = score(doc=3175,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07104705 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052230705 = queryNorm
            0.21040362 = fieldWeight in 3175, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3175)
        0.049535774 = product of:
          0.09907155 = sum of:
            0.09907155 = weight(_text_:22 in 3175) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09907155 = score(doc=3175,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18290302 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052230705 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3175, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3175)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Source
    Computers in libraries. 19(1999) no.5, S.22-28

Years

Languages

Types

  • a 739
  • el 82
  • m 66
  • s 14
  • x 11
  • r 4
  • p 2
  • More… Less…

Subjects

Classifications