Search (836 results, page 1 of 42)

0.08371753 = product of:
  0.16743506 = sum of:
    0.16743506 = sum of:
      0.12540789 = weight(_text_:searching in 3589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.12540789 = score(doc=3589,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.59964067 = fieldWeight in 3589, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3589)
      0.04202718 = weight(_text_:22 in 3589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04202718 = score(doc=3589,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3589, 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=3589)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Information searching in practice seldom is an end in itself. In work, work task (WT) performance forms the context, which information searching should serve. Therefore, information retrieval (IR) systems development/evaluation should take the WT context into account. The present paper analyzes how WT features: task complexity and task types, affect information searching in authentic work: the types of information needs, search processes, and search media. We collected data on 22 information professionals in authentic work situations in three organization types: city administration, universities, and companies. The data comprise 286 WTs and 420 search tasks (STs). The data include transaction logs, video recordings, daily questionnaires, interviews. and observation. The data were analyzed quantitatively. Even if the participants used a range of search media, most STs were simple throughout the data, and up to 42% of WTs did not include searching. WT's effects on STs are not straightforward: different WT types react differently to WT complexity. Due to the simplicity of authentic searching, the WT/ST types in interactive IR experiments should be reconsidered.

0.08211206 = product of:
  0.16422412 = sum of:
    0.16422412 = product of:
      0.49267235 = sum of:
        0.49267235 = weight(_text_:3a in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.49267235 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.43830654 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            1.1240361 = fieldWeight in 973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=973)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fcreativechoice.org%2Fdoc%2FHansJonas.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1TM3teaYKgABL5H9yoIifA&opi=89978449.

0.06842672 = product of:
  0.13685344 = sum of:
    0.13685344 = product of:
      0.4105603 = sum of:
        0.4105603 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.4105603 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.43830654 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

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

0.05798655 = product of:
  0.1159731 = sum of:
    0.1159731 = sum of:
      0.08095045 = weight(_text_:searching in 2702) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08095045 = score(doc=2702,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.38706642 = fieldWeight in 2702, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2702)
      0.035022654 = weight(_text_:22 in 2702) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035022654 = score(doc=2702,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2702, 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=2702)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Query suggestion is a common feature of many information search systems. While much research has been conducted about how to generate suggestions, fewer studies have been conducted about how people interact with and use suggestions. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how and when people integrate query suggestions into their searches and the outcome of this usage. The paper further investigates the relationships between search expertise, topic difficulty, and temporal segment of the search and query suggestion usage. A secondary analysis of data was conducted using data collected in a previous controlled laboratory study. In this previous study, 23 undergraduate research participants used an experimental search system with query suggestions to conduct four topic searches. Results showed that participants integrated the suggestions into their searching fairly quickly and that participants with less search expertise used more suggestions and saved more documents. Participants also used more suggestions towards the end of their searches and when searching for more difficult topics. These results show that query suggestion can provide support in situations where people have less search expertise, greater difficulty searching and at specific times during the search.

Date

25. 1.2016 18:43:22

0.057231586 = product of:
  0.11446317 = sum of:
    0.11446317 = sum of:
      0.06543146 = weight(_text_:searching in 1463) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06543146 = score(doc=1463,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.31286204 = fieldWeight in 1463, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1463)
      0.049031712 = weight(_text_:22 in 1463) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049031712 = score(doc=1463,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1463, 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=1463)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.050559208 = product of:
  0.101118416 = sum of:
    0.101118416 = sum of:
      0.06609576 = weight(_text_:searching in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06609576 = score(doc=2680,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.3160384 = fieldWeight in 2680, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2680)
      0.035022654 = weight(_text_:22 in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035022654 = score(doc=2680,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2680, 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=2680)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This study addresses the impact of domain expertise (i.e. of prior knowledge of the domain) on the performance and query strategies used by users while searching for information. Twenty-four experts (psychology students) and 24 non-experts (students from other disciplines) had to search for psychology information from the Universalis website in order to perform six information problems of varying complexity: two simple problems (the keywords required to complete the task were provided in the problem statement), two more difficult problems (the keywords required had to be inferred) and two impossible problems (no answer was provided by the website). The results showed that participants with prior knowledge in the domain (experts in psychology) performed better (i.e. reached more correct answers after shorter search times) than non-experts. This difference was stronger as the complexity of the problems increased. This study also showed that experts and non-experts displayed different query strategies. Experts reformulated the impossible problems more often than non-experts, because they produced new queries with psychology-related keywords. The participants rarely used thematic category tool and when they did so this did not enhance their performance.

Date

25. 1.2016 18:46:22

0.049055643 = product of:
  0.09811129 = sum of:
    0.09811129 = sum of:
      0.05608411 = weight(_text_:searching in 2360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05608411 = score(doc=2360,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.26816747 = fieldWeight in 2360, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2360)
      0.04202718 = weight(_text_:22 in 2360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04202718 = score(doc=2360,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2360, 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=2360)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article reports the author's recent research in developing a holistic model for various levels of digital library (DL) evaluation in which perceived important criteria from heterogeneous stakeholder groups are organized and presented. To develop such a model, the author applied a three-stage research approach: exploration, confirmation, and verification. During the exploration stage, a literature review was conducted followed by an interview, along with a card sorting technique, to collect important criteria perceived by DL experts. Then the criteria identified were used for developing an online survey during the confirmation stage. Survey respondents (431 in total) from 22 countries rated the importance of the criteria. A holistic DL evaluation model was constructed using statistical techniques. Eventually, the verification stage was devised to test the reliability of the model in the context of searching and evaluating an operational DL. The proposed model fills two lacunae in the DL domain: (a) the lack of a comprehensive and flexible framework to guide and benchmark evaluations, and (b) the uncertainty about what divergence exists among heterogeneous DL stakeholders, including general users.

0.049055643 = product of:
  0.09811129 = sum of:
    0.09811129 = sum of:
      0.05608411 = weight(_text_:searching in 4649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05608411 = score(doc=4649,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.26816747 = fieldWeight in 4649, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4649)
      0.04202718 = weight(_text_:22 in 4649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04202718 = score(doc=4649,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4649, 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=4649)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

More and more cultural heritage institutions publish their collections, vocabularies and metadata on the Web. The resulting Web of linked cultural data opens up exciting new possibilities for searching and browsing through these cultural heritage collections. We report on ongoing work in which we investigate the estimation of relevance in this Web of Culture. We study existing measures of semantic distance and how they apply to two use cases. The use cases relate to the structured, multilingual and multimodal nature of the Culture Web. We distinguish between measures using the Web, such as Google distance and PMI, and measures using the Linked Data Web, i.e. the semantic structure of metadata vocabularies. We perform a small study in which we compare these semantic distance measures to human judgements of relevance. Although it is too early to draw any definitive conclusions, the study provides new insights into the applicability of semantic distance measures to the Web of Culture, and clear starting points for further research.

Date

26.12.2011 13:40:22

0.049055643 = product of:
  0.09811129 = sum of:
    0.09811129 = sum of:
      0.05608411 = weight(_text_:searching in 1347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05608411 = score(doc=1347,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.26816747 = fieldWeight in 1347, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1347)
      0.04202718 = weight(_text_:22 in 1347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04202718 = score(doc=1347,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1347, 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=1347)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Terminology registries (TRs) are a crucial element of the infrastructure required for resource discovery services, digital libraries, Linked Data, and semantic interoperability generally. They can make the content of knowledge organization systems (KOS) available both for human and machine access. The paper describes the attributes and functionality for a TR, based on a review of published literature, existing TRs, and a survey of experts. A domain model based on user tasks is constructed and a set of core metadata elements for use in TRs is proposed. Ideally, the TR should allow searching as well as browsing for a KOS, matching a user's search while also providing information about existing terminology services, accessible to both humans and machines. The issues surrounding metadata for KOS are also discussed, together with the rationale for different aspects and the importance of a core set of KOS metadata for future machine-based access; a possible core set of metadata elements is proposed. This is dealt with in terms of practical experience and in relation to the Dublin Core Application Profile.

Date

22. 8.2014 17:12:54

0.049055643 = product of:
  0.09811129 = sum of:
    0.09811129 = sum of:
      0.05608411 = weight(_text_:searching in 1406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05608411 = score(doc=1406,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.26816747 = fieldWeight in 1406, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1406)
      0.04202718 = weight(_text_:22 in 1406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04202718 = score(doc=1406,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1406, 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=1406)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In the paper I argue that metaphors widely used in presenting knowledge organization, despite of their methodological correctness, play an ambiguous role. They are mostly conceived and used as models of information/knowledge organization such as library documents, databases and internet tools and devices. But due to their suggestive power and pervasive role, they can also obscure the structure of such organization. One can expect explanatory (descriptive) benefits from spatial (e.g. terrestrial or aquatic) metaphors comparing modes of organizing and accessing knowledge to oceans, pathways networks or even rhizomes. But mapping or metaphorically presenting cognitive undertakings such as searching, browsing or retrieving information/knowledge can obscure their actual essence. As held by the cognitive theory of metaphor (Lakoff, Johnson, Ritchie), certain aspects of complex phenomena (i.e. knowledge organization) are repeatedly obscured and hidden. I argue that metaphors containing probability concepts, although not immediately intuitive or comprehensible, are more fruitful effective in mapping knowledge organization.

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.047898706 = product of:
  0.09579741 = sum of:
    0.09579741 = product of:
      0.28739223 = sum of:
        0.28739223 = weight(_text_:3a in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.28739223 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.43830654 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 5955, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5955)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: Philosophisch-ethische Rezensionen vom 09.11.2019 (Jürgen Czogalla), Unter: https://philosophisch-ethische-rezensionen.de/rezension/Goedert1.html. In: B.I.T. online 23(2020) H.3, S.345-347 (W. Sühl-Strohmenger) [Unter: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.b-i-t-online.de%2Fheft%2F2020-03-rezensionen.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0iY3f_zNcvEjeZ6inHVnOK]. In: Open Password Nr. 805 vom 14.08.2020 (H.-C. Hobohm) [Unter: https://www.password-online.de/?mailpoet_router&endpoint=view_in_browser&action=view&data=WzE0MywiOGI3NjZkZmNkZjQ1IiwwLDAsMTMxLDFd].

0.046389237 = product of:
  0.092778474 = sum of:
    0.092778474 = sum of:
      0.06476036 = weight(_text_:searching in 1422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06476036 = score(doc=1422,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.30965313 = fieldWeight in 1422, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1422)
      0.02801812 = weight(_text_:22 in 1422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02801812 = score(doc=1422,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1422, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1422)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose A higher level of retrieval relevance along with pertinence is what information systems are required to provide if they are to gain more user satisfaction. Although in almost every IR system, general and non-topical terms are not considered to play a major role in indexing, the underlying assumption of current study stems from the fact that these terms could be effective in better searching by end-users. Thus this paper aims at proposing a new approach in this regard using a small thesaurus of general and non-topical terms which can be used along with queries (i.e., topical keywords). This would help making users' queries closer to natural language. Method In the first phase of this study, a set of 669 non-topical terms, which were identified through a previous study, was assumed as the test bed. Based on the main goal of the present paper, the list was analyzed and divided into major categories. As for the second phase, a preferred label representing each category was selected and assigned based on its "use warrant"; and to this end Google Trends was applied for determining the most-frequent general and non-topical terms among users' web searches. At last the developed thesaurus was tested in searching and the retrieved results were evaluated in terms of relevance and pertinence. Results The findings of this study show that, although there is rather a diverse range of general and non-topical terms appearing before or after topical keywords in Web documents, users are still using no or only a small fracture of them in their search queries. The findings also show that these terms would be of great assistance in providing more relevant results and a meaningful display of the results. This paper then proposes a conceptual model for applying such a thesaurus in searching the Web.

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.04105603 = product of:
  0.08211206 = sum of:
    0.08211206 = product of:
      0.24633618 = sum of:
        0.24633618 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.24633618 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.43830654 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, 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=400)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.

0.04105603 = product of:
  0.08211206 = sum of:
    0.08211206 = product of:
      0.24633618 = sum of:
        0.24633618 = weight(_text_:3a in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.24633618 = score(doc=484,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.43830654 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 484, 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=484)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

https%3A%2F%2Fjournals.univie.ac.at%2Findex.php%2Fvoebm%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F5332%2F5271%2F&usg=AOvVaw2yQdFGHlmOwVls7ANCpTii.

0.040879704 = product of:
  0.08175941 = sum of:
    0.08175941 = sum of:
      0.04673676 = weight(_text_:searching in 4194) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04673676 = score(doc=4194,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.22347288 = fieldWeight in 4194, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4194)
      0.035022654 = weight(_text_:22 in 4194) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035022654 = score(doc=4194,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4194, 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=4194)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The use of primary source materials is recognized as key to supporting history and social studies education. The extensive digitization of library, museum, and other cultural heritage collections represents an important teaching resource. Yet, searching and selecting digital primary sources appropriate for classroom use can be difficult and time-consuming. This study investigates the design requirements and the potential usefulness of a domain-specific ontology to facilitate access to, and use of, a collection of digital primary source materials developed by the Library of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. During a three-phase study, an ontology model was designed and evaluated with the involvement of social studies teachers. The findings revealed that the design of the ontology was appropriate to support the information needs of the teachers and was perceived as a potentially useful tool to enhance collection access. The primary contribution of this study is the introduction of an approach to ontology development that is user-centered and designed to facilitate access to digital cultural heritage materials. Such an approach should be considered on a case-by-case basis in relation to the size of the ontology being built, the nature of the knowledge domain, and the type of end users targeted.

Date

22. 1.2011 14:11:34

0.040879704 = product of:
  0.08175941 = sum of:
    0.08175941 = sum of:
      0.04673676 = weight(_text_:searching in 4195) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04673676 = score(doc=4195,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.22347288 = fieldWeight in 4195, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4195)
      0.035022654 = weight(_text_:22 in 4195) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035022654 = score(doc=4195,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4195, 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=4195)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Webcasting systems were developed to provide remote access in real-time to live events. Today, these systems have an additional requirement: to accommodate the "second life" of webcasts as archival information objects. Research to date has focused on facilitating the production and storage of webcasts as well as the development of more interactive and collaborative multimedia tools to support the event, but research has not examined how people interact with a webcasting system to access and use the contents of those archived events. Using an experimental design, this study examined how 16 typical users interact with a webcasting system to respond to a set of information tasks: selecting a webcast, searching for specific information, and making a gist of a webcast. Using several data sources that included user actions, user perceptions, and user explanations of their actions and decisions, the study also examined the strategies employed to complete the tasks. The results revealed distinctive system-use patterns for each task and provided insights into the types of tools needed to make webcasting systems better suited for also using the webcasts as information objects.

Date

22. 1.2011 14:16:14

0.040879704 = product of:
  0.08175941 = sum of:
    0.08175941 = sum of:
      0.04673676 = weight(_text_:searching in 4540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04673676 = score(doc=4540,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.22347288 = fieldWeight in 4540, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4540)
      0.035022654 = weight(_text_:22 in 4540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035022654 = score(doc=4540,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4540, 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=4540)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - This study intends to identify factors that affect relevance judgment of retrieved information as part of the 2007 TREC Legal track interactive task. Design/methodology/approach - Data were gathered and analyzed from the participants of the 2007 TREC Legal track interactive task using a questionnaire which includes not only a list of 80 relevance factors identified in prior research, but also a space for expressing their thoughts on relevance judgment in the process. Findings - This study finds that topicality remains a primary criterion, out of various options, for determining relevance, while specificity of the search request, task, or retrieved results also helps greatly in relevance judgment. Research limitations/implications - Relevance research should focus on the topicality and specificity of what is being evaluated as well as conducted in real environments. Practical implications - If multiple relevance factors are presented to assessors, the total number in a list should be below ten to take account of the limited processing capacity of human beings' short-term memory. Otherwise, the assessors might either completely ignore or inadequately consider some of the relevance factors when making judgment decisions. Originality/value - This study presents a method for reducing the artificiality of relevance research design, an apparent limitation in many related studies. Specifically, relevance judgment was made in this research as part of the 2007 TREC Legal track interactive task rather than a study devised for the sake of it. The assessors also served as searchers so that their searching experience would facilitate their subsequent relevance judgments.

Date

12. 7.2011 18:29:22

0.040879704 = product of:
  0.08175941 = sum of:
    0.08175941 = sum of:
      0.04673676 = weight(_text_:searching in 109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04673676 = score(doc=109,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.22347288 = fieldWeight in 109, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=109)
      0.035022654 = weight(_text_:22 in 109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035022654 = score(doc=109,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

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

0.040879704 = product of:
  0.08175941 = sum of:
    0.08175941 = sum of:
      0.04673676 = weight(_text_:searching in 1398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04673676 = score(doc=1398,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.22347288 = fieldWeight in 1398, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1398)
      0.035022654 = weight(_text_:22 in 1398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035022654 = score(doc=1398,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1398, 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=1398)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper considers classical bibliographic databases based on the Boolean retrieval model (for example MEDLINE and PsycInfo). This model is challenged by modern search engines and information retrieval (IR) researchers, who often consider Boolean retrieval as a less efficient approach. This speech examines this claim and argues for the continued value of Boolean systems, which implies two further issues: (1) the important role of human expertise in searching (expert searchers and "information literacy") and (2) the role of knowledge organization (KO) in the design and use of classical databases, including controlled vocabularies and human indexing. An underlying issue is the kind of retrieval system for which one should aim. It is suggested that Julian Warner's (2010) differentiation between the computer science traditions, aiming at automatically transforming queries into (ranked) sets of relevant documents, and an older library-orientated tradition aiming at increasing the "selection power" of users seems important. The Boolean retrieval model is important in order to provide users with the power to make informed searches and have full control over what is found and what is not found. These issues may also have important implications for the maintenance of information science and KO as research fields as well as for the information profession as a profession in its own right.

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.040879704 = product of:
  0.08175941 = sum of:
    0.08175941 = sum of:
      0.04673676 = weight(_text_:searching in 1405) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04673676 = score(doc=1405,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.22347288 = fieldWeight in 1405, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1405)
      0.035022654 = weight(_text_:22 in 1405) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035022654 = score(doc=1405,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1405, 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=1405)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Mapping a knowledge domain in the interdisciplinary field of Social Memory is discussed, considering the linguistic materiality and the conceptual relations that are most appropriate to its representation. Theoretical instruments for knowledge organization in the field of information as well as of memory are both central in contemporary social studies and they must help a clear representation of a domain, especially when it lies in disciplinary frontiers. Two perspectives were used as methodological procedures: the conceptual analysis regarding the categorization of the authors' intellectual production selected from syllabus of the discipline Social Memory and Institution; and discursive fragments selected from Paul Ricour's text memory and imagination . As main results, data analysis from the first corpus pointed out six main facets that organize the memory context; and the second corpus, related to discursive materiality, organizes Ricour's ideas of memory from some philosophical points of view. As conclusions, we consider that mapping key concepts and discourses towards the main categories (ontological) and towards a group of relations derived from the discursive analysis process has enabled a possible framework for social memory indexing/searching studies. Even though this proposal is specific to a topic in a teaching program, it indicates a promising path for upcoming studies in Knowledge Organization.

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik