Search (48 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus"
  1. Dextre Clarke, S.G.; Vernau, J.: ¬The thesaurus debate continues : guest editorial (2016) 0.03 
    0.034133743 = product of:
  0.1706687 = sum of:
    0.1706687 = weight(_text_:great in 2822) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1706687 = score(doc=2822,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2424797 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.7038474 = fieldWeight in 2822, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2822)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Content
    Einführung in ein Special issue: The Great Debate: "This House Believes that the Traditional Thesaurus has no Place in Modern Information Retrieval." [19 February 2015, 14:00-17:30 preceded by ISKO UK AGM and followed by networking, wine and nibbles; vgl.: http://www.iskouk.org/content/great-debate].
  2. Dextre Clarke, S.G.; Vernau, J.: Questions and answers on current developments inspired by the thesaurus tradition : points of view (2016) 0.03 
    0.034133743 = product of:
  0.1706687 = sum of:
    0.1706687 = weight(_text_:great in 2914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1706687 = score(doc=2914,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2424797 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.7038474 = fieldWeight in 2914, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2914)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Content
    Resumee zu einem Special issue: The Great Debate: "This House Believes that the Traditional Thesaurus has no Place in Modern Information Retrieval." [19 February 2015, 14:00-17:30 preceded by ISKO UK AGM and followed by networking, wine and nibbles; vgl.: http://www.iskouk.org/content/great-debate].
  3. Tudhope, D.; Binding, C.: Still quite popular after all those years : the continued relevance of the information retrieval thesaurus (2016) 0.03 
    0.025600305 = product of:
  0.12800153 = sum of:
    0.12800153 = weight(_text_:great in 2908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12800153 = score(doc=2908,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2424797 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.52788556 = fieldWeight in 2908, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2908)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Content
    Beitrag in einem Special issue: The Great Debate: "This House Believes that the Traditional Thesaurus has no Place in Modern Information Retrieval." [19 February 2015, 14:00-17:30 preceded by ISKO UK AGM and followed by networking, wine and nibbles; vgl.: http://www.iskouk.org/content/great-debate].
  4. MacFarlane, A.: Knowledge organisation and its role in multimedia information retrieval (2016) 0.03 
    0.025600305 = product of:
  0.12800153 = sum of:
    0.12800153 = weight(_text_:great in 2911) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12800153 = score(doc=2911,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2424797 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.52788556 = fieldWeight in 2911, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2911)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Content
    Beitrag in einem Special issue: The Great Debate: "This House Believes that the Traditional Thesaurus has no Place in Modern Information Retrieval." [19 February 2015, 14:00-17:30 preceded by ISKO UK AGM and followed by networking, wine and nibbles; vgl.: http://www.iskouk.org/content/great-debate].
  5. Kempf, A.O.; Neubert, J.: ¬The role of thesauri in an Open Web : a case study of the STW Thesaurus for economics (2016) 0.03 
    0.025600305 = product of:
  0.12800153 = sum of:
    0.12800153 = weight(_text_:great in 2912) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12800153 = score(doc=2912,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2424797 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.52788556 = fieldWeight in 2912, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2912)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Content
    Beitrag in einem Special issue: The Great Debate: "This House Believes that the Traditional Thesaurus has no Place in Modern Information Retrieval." [19 February 2015, 14:00-17:30 preceded by ISKO UK AGM and followed by networking, wine and nibbles; vgl.: http://www.iskouk.org/content/great-debate].
  6. Mooers, C.N.: ¬The indexing language of an information retrieval system (1985) 0.03 
    0.025203308 = product of:
  0.06300827 = sum of:
    0.052797936 = weight(_text_:great in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052797936 = score(doc=3644,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2424797 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.21774168 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
    0.010210334 = product of:
      0.020420669 = sum of:
        0.020420669 = weight(_text_:22 in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020420669 = score(doc=3644,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15080018 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043063257 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Calvin Mooers' work toward the resolution of the problem of ambiguity in indexing went unrecognized for years. At the time he introduced the "descriptor" - a term with a very distinct meaning-indexers were, for the most part, taking index terms directly from the document, without either rationalizing them with context or normalizing them with some kind of classification. It is ironic that Mooers' term came to be attached to the popular but unsophisticated indexing methods which he was trying to root out. Simply expressed, what Mooers did was to take the dictionary definitions of terms and redefine them so clearly that they could not be used in any context except that provided by the new definition. He did, at great pains, construct such meanings for over four hundred words; disambiguation and specificity were sought after and found for these words. He proposed that all indexers adopt this method so that when the index supplied a term, it also supplied the exact meaning for that term as used in the indexed document. The same term used differently in another document would be defined differently and possibly renamed to avoid ambiguity. The disambiguation was achieved by using unabridged dictionaries and other sources of defining terminology. In practice, this tends to produce circularity in definition, that is, word A refers to word B which refers to word C which refers to word A. It was necessary, therefore, to break this chain by creating a new, definitive meaning for each word. Eventually, means such as those used by Austin (q.v.) for PRECIS achieved the same purpose, but by much more complex means than just creating a unique definition of each term. Mooers, however, was probably the first to realize how confusing undefined terminology could be. Early automatic indexers dealt with distinct disciplines and, as long as they did not stray beyond disciplinary boundaries, a quick and dirty keyword approach was satisfactory. The trouble came when attempts were made to make a combined index for two or more distinct disciplines. A number of processes have since been developed, mostly involving tagging of some kind or use of strings. Mooers' solution has rarely been considered seriously and probably would be extremely difficult to apply now because of so much interdisciplinarity. But for a specific, weIl defined field, it is still weIl worth considering. Mooers received training in mathematics and physics from the University of Minnesota and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He was the founder of Zator Company, which developed and marketed a coded card information retrieval system, and of Rockford Research, Inc., which engages in research in information science. He is the inventor of the TRAC computer language.
    Footnote
    Original in: Information retrieval today: papers presented at an Institute conducted by the Library School and the Center for Continuation Study, University of Minnesota, Sept. 19-22, 1962. Ed. by Wesley Simonton. Minneapolis, Minn.: The Center, 1963. S.21-36.
  7. Dorst, L.: Restoring the tower of Babel : building a multilingual thesaurus on health promotion (1998) 0.02 
    0.023895623 = product of:
  0.119478114 = sum of:
    0.119478114 = weight(_text_:education in 2248) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.119478114 = score(doc=2248,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.20288157 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.5889057 = fieldWeight in 2248, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2248)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    In 1994 the International Union for Health Promotion and Health Education, Regional Office for Europe began a thesaurus project in the field of health promotion and health education, in collaboration with terminologists and health promotion specialists from various European countries. Describes the different phases of the international project. Pays special attention to the origin of the project and the international cooperative imperative needed to bring such a project to fruition
  8. ¬The Great Debate, 19 February 2015, ISKO UK (2015) 0.02 
    0.021333588 = product of:
  0.10666794 = sum of:
    0.10666794 = weight(_text_:great in 2105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10666794 = score(doc=2105,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2424797 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.43990463 = fieldWeight in 2105, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2105)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Once upon a time, the thesaurus was venerated. It marked a breakthrough in the retrieval of very specific needles of information hidden in large haystacks. Some of the veneration rubbed off on to the trained information professionals, who alone mastered the occult art of using it to concoct effective search strategies. All this was in the time before we had a computer on every desk, when a collection of 10,000 articles was considered large, and long before the Google era. But now, who has the patience to consult a complicated thesaurus? Only a dedicated few. Has the thesaurus passed its sell-by date? And even its use-by date? These questions, and more, were tossed around at the Great Debate by a community of enthusiasts. While some limitations of the old-fashioned (?) thesaurus were noted, it still received a happy vote of confidence at the end. - Judi Vernau (2015) First speaker for the proposition - Vanda Broughton (2015) First speaker for the opposition - Helen Lippell (2015) Second speaker for the proposition - Leonard Will (2015) Second speaker for the opposition - Cross-examination of expert witnesses - Martin White (2015) Questions and discussion from the floor
  9. Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Origins and trajectory of the long thesaurus debate (2016) 0.02 
    0.021333588 = product of:
  0.10666794 = sum of:
    0.10666794 = weight(_text_:great in 2913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10666794 = score(doc=2913,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2424797 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.43990463 = fieldWeight in 2913, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2913)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Content
    Beitrag in einem Special issue: The Great Debate: "This House Believes that the Traditional Thesaurus has no Place in Modern Information Retrieval." [19 February 2015, 14:00-17:30 preceded by ISKO UK AGM and followed by networking, wine and nibbles; vgl.: http://www.iskouk.org/content/great-debate].
  10. Hjoerland, B.: Does the traditional thesaurus have a place in modern information retrieval? (2016) 0.02 
    0.021333588 = product of:
  0.10666794 = sum of:
    0.10666794 = weight(_text_:great in 2915) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10666794 = score(doc=2915,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2424797 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.43990463 = fieldWeight in 2915, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2915)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Content
    Beitrag in einem Special issue: The Great Debate: "This House Believes that the Traditional Thesaurus has no Place in Modern Information Retrieval." [19 February 2015, 14:00-17:30 preceded by ISKO UK AGM and followed by networking, wine and nibbles; vgl.: http://www.iskouk.org/content/great-debate].
  11. García-Marco, F.-J.: Enhancing the visibility and relevance of thesauri in the Web : searching for a hub in the linked data environment (2016) 0.02 
    0.021333588 = product of:
  0.10666794 = sum of:
    0.10666794 = weight(_text_:great in 2916) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10666794 = score(doc=2916,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2424797 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.43990463 = fieldWeight in 2916, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2916)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Content
    Beitrag in einem Special issue: The Great Debate: "This House Believes that the Traditional Thesaurus has no Place in Modern Information Retrieval." [19 February 2015, 14:00-17:30 preceded by ISKO UK AGM and followed by networking, wine and nibbles; vgl.: http://www.iskouk.org/content/great-debate].
  12. White, M.: ¬The value of taxonomies, thesauri and metadata in enterprise search (2016) 0.02 
    0.021333588 = product of:
  0.10666794 = sum of:
    0.10666794 = weight(_text_:great in 2964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10666794 = score(doc=2964,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2424797 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.43990463 = fieldWeight in 2964, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2964)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Content
    Beitrag in einem Special issue: The Great Debate: "This House Believes that the Traditional Thesaurus has no Place in Modern Information Retrieval." [19 February 2015, 14:00-17:30 preceded by ISKO UK AGM and followed by networking, wine and nibbles; vgl.: http://www.iskouk.org/content/great-debate].
  13. Spiteri, L.F.: ¬The use of facet analysis in information retrieval thesauri : an examination of selected guidelines for thesaurus construction (1997) 0.01 
    0.014784663 = product of:
  0.07392331 = sum of:
    0.07392331 = weight(_text_:education in 372) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07392331 = score(doc=372,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20288157 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.3643668 = fieldWeight in 372, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=372)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Facet analysis has been used in the construction of faceted thesauri since the publication of the Information Retrieval Thesaurus of Education Terms in 1968. In spite of the growth in the number of faceted thesauri since then, there appears to be little consensus among thesaurus designers regarding how the principles of facet analysis are to be used in thesauri. An examination of various national and international guidelines for thesaurus construction reveals that they emphasize primarily the construction of alphabetical thesauri, but provide little guidance in the use of facet analysis in thesauri.
  14. Scheven, E.: ¬Die neue Thesaurusnorm ISO 25964 und die GND (2017) 0.01 
    0.014784663 = product of:
  0.07392331 = sum of:
    0.07392331 = weight(_text_:education in 3505) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07392331 = score(doc=3505,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20288157 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.3643668 = fieldWeight in 3505, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3505)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Theorie, Semantik und Organisation von Wissen: Proceedings der 13. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und dem 13. Internationalen Symposium der Informationswissenschaft der Higher Education Association for Information Science (HI) Potsdam (19.-20.03.2013): 'Theory, Information and Organization of Knowledge' / Proceedings der 14. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und Natural Language & Information Systems (NLDB) Passau (16.06.2015): 'Lexical Resources for Knowledge Organization' / Proceedings des Workshops der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) auf der SEMANTICS Leipzig (1.09.2014): 'Knowledge Organization and Semantic Web' / Proceedings des Workshops der Polnischen und Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) Cottbus (29.-30.09.2011): 'Economics of Knowledge Production and Organization'. Hrsg. von W. Babik, H.P. Ohly u. K. Weber
  15. Kuhr, P.S.: Putting the world back together : mapping multiple vocabularies into a single thesaurus (2003) 0.01 
    0.012672568 = product of:
  0.06336284 = sum of:
    0.06336284 = weight(_text_:education in 3813) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06336284 = score(doc=3813,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20288157 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.3123144 = fieldWeight in 3813, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3813)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    This paper describes an ongoing project in which the subject headings contained in twelve controlled vocabularies covering multiple disciplines from the humanities to the sciences and including law and education among others are being collapsed into a single vocabulary and reference structure. The design of the database, algorithms created to programmatically link like-concepts, and daily maintenance are detailed. The problems and pitfalls of dealing with multiple vocabularies are noted, as well as the difficulties in relying purely an computer generated algorithms. The application of this megathesaurus to bibliographic records and methodology of retrieval is explained.
  16. Fischer, D.H.: Converting a thesaurus to OWL : Notes on the paper "The National Cancer Institute's Thesaurus and Ontology" (2004) 0.01 
    0.010559588 = product of:
  0.052797936 = sum of:
    0.052797936 = weight(_text_:great in 2362) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052797936 = score(doc=2362,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2424797 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.21774168 = fieldWeight in 2362, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2362)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    The paper analysed here is a kind of position paper. In order to get a better under-standing of the reported work I used the retrieval interface of the thesaurus, the so-called NCI DTS Browser accessible via the Web3, and I perused the cited OWL file4 with numerous "Find" and "Find next" string searches. In addition the file was im-ported into Protégé 2000, Release 2.0, with OWL Plugin 1.0 and Racer Plugin 1.7.14. At the end of the paper's introduction the authors say: "In the following sections, this paper will describe the terminology development process at NCI, and the issues associated with converting a description logic based nomenclature to a semantically rich OWL ontology." While I will not deal with the first part, i.e. the terminology development process at NCI, I do not see the thesaurus as a description logic based nomenclature, or its cur-rent state and conversion already result in a "rich" OWL ontology. What does "rich" mean here? According to my view there is a great quantity of concepts and links but a very poor description logic structure which enables inferences. And what does the fol-lowing really mean, which is said a few lines previously: "Although editors have defined a number of named ontologic relations to support the description-logic based structure of the Thesaurus, additional relation-ships are considered for inclusion as required to support dependent applications."
  17. Röttsches, H.: Thesauruspflege im Verbund der Bibliotheken der obersten Bundesbehörden (1989) 0.01 
    0.008168268 = product of:
  0.040841337 = sum of:
    0.040841337 = product of:
      0.081682675 = sum of:
        0.081682675 = weight(_text_:22 in 4199) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.081682675 = score(doc=4199,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15080018 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043063257 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4199, 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=4199)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Mitteilungen der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Parlaments- und Behördenbibliotheken. 1989, H.67, S.1-22
  18. Byrne, C.C.; McCracken, S.A.: ¬An adaptive thesaurus employing semantic distance, relational inheritance and nominal compound interpretation for linguistic support of information retrieval (1999) 0.01 
    0.0070013716 = product of:
  0.03500686 = sum of:
    0.03500686 = product of:
      0.07001372 = sum of:
        0.07001372 = weight(_text_:22 in 4483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07001372 = score(doc=4483,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15080018 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043063257 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4483, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4483)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    15. 3.2000 10:22:37
  19. Maniez, J.: ¬Des classifications aux thesaurus : du bon usage des facettes (1999) 0.01 
    0.0070013716 = product of:
  0.03500686 = sum of:
    0.03500686 = product of:
      0.07001372 = sum of:
        0.07001372 = weight(_text_:22 in 6404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07001372 = score(doc=6404,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15080018 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043063257 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6404, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6404)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
  20. Maniez, J.: ¬Du bon usage des facettes : des classifications aux thésaurus (1999) 0.01 
    0.0070013716 = product of:
  0.03500686 = sum of:
    0.03500686 = product of:
      0.07001372 = sum of:
        0.07001372 = weight(_text_:22 in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07001372 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15080018 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043063257 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3773, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3773)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 34
  • d 9
  • f 4
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 42
  • el 3
  • m 2
  • n 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications