Search (74 results, page 1 of 4)

  • × author_ss:"Smiraglia, R.P."
  1. Smiraglia, R.P.: Referencing as evidentiary : an editorial (2020) 0.03
    0.031328738 = product of:
      0.11487204 = sum of:
        0.01727841 = weight(_text_:of in 5729) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01727841 = score(doc=5729,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 5729, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5729)
        0.012919044 = weight(_text_:on in 5729) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012919044 = score(doc=5729,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 5729, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5729)
        0.08467458 = weight(_text_:great in 5729) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08467458 = score(doc=5729,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19443816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.43548337 = fieldWeight in 5729, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5729)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    The referencing habits of scholars, having abandoned physical bibliography for harvesting of digital resources, are in crisis, endangering the bibliographical infrastructure supporting the domain of knowledge organization. Research must be carefully managed and its circumstances controlled. Bibliographical replicability is one important part of the social role of scholarship. References in Knowledge Organization volume 45 (2018) were compiled and analyzed to help visualize the state of referencing in the KO domain. The dependence of science on the ability to replicate is even more critical in a global distributed digital environment. There is great richness in KO that make it even more critical that our scholarly community tend to the relationship between bibliographical verity and the very replicability that is allowing the field to grow theoretically over time.
  2. Ridenour, L.; Smiraglia, R.P.: How interdisciplinary is knowledge organization? : An epistemological view of knowledge organization as a domain (2016) 0.02
    0.017586157 = product of:
      0.096723855 = sum of:
        0.010555085 = weight(_text_:of in 4880) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010555085 = score(doc=4880,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.19546966 = fieldWeight in 4880, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4880)
        0.08616877 = weight(_text_:technological in 4880) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08616877 = score(doc=4880,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18347798 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.46964094 = fieldWeight in 4880, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4880)
      0.18181819 = coord(2/11)
    
    Source
    Knowledge organization for a sustainable world: challenges and perspectives for cultural, scientific, and technological sharing in a connected society : proceedings of the Fourteenth International ISKO Conference 27-29 September 2016, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil / organized by International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO-Brazil, São Paulo State University ; edited by José Augusto Chaves Guimarães, Suellen Oliveira Milani, Vera Dodebei
  3. Smiraglia, R.P.; Henry, J.A.: Facets among the topoi : an emerging taxonomy of silent film music (2016) 0.02
    0.017586157 = product of:
      0.096723855 = sum of:
        0.010555085 = weight(_text_:of in 4899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010555085 = score(doc=4899,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.19546966 = fieldWeight in 4899, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4899)
        0.08616877 = weight(_text_:technological in 4899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08616877 = score(doc=4899,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18347798 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.46964094 = fieldWeight in 4899, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4899)
      0.18181819 = coord(2/11)
    
    Source
    Knowledge organization for a sustainable world: challenges and perspectives for cultural, scientific, and technological sharing in a connected society : proceedings of the Fourteenth International ISKO Conference 27-29 September 2016, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil / organized by International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO-Brazil, São Paulo State University ; edited by José Augusto Chaves Guimarães, Suellen Oliveira Milani, Vera Dodebei
  4. Smiraglia, R.P.: Extending classification interaction : Portuguese data case studies (2016) 0.02
    0.017024064 = product of:
      0.09363235 = sum of:
        0.007463572 = weight(_text_:of in 4891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007463572 = score(doc=4891,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.13821793 = fieldWeight in 4891, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4891)
        0.08616877 = weight(_text_:technological in 4891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08616877 = score(doc=4891,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18347798 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.46964094 = fieldWeight in 4891, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4891)
      0.18181819 = coord(2/11)
    
    Source
    Knowledge organization for a sustainable world: challenges and perspectives for cultural, scientific, and technological sharing in a connected society : proceedings of the Fourteenth International ISKO Conference 27-29 September 2016, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil / organized by International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO-Brazil, São Paulo State University ; edited by José Augusto Chaves Guimarães, Suellen Oliveira Milani, Vera Dodebei
  5. Keilty, P.; Smiraglia, R.P.: Gay male nomenclature (2016) 0.02
    0.017024064 = product of:
      0.09363235 = sum of:
        0.007463572 = weight(_text_:of in 4957) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007463572 = score(doc=4957,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.13821793 = fieldWeight in 4957, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4957)
        0.08616877 = weight(_text_:technological in 4957) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08616877 = score(doc=4957,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18347798 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.46964094 = fieldWeight in 4957, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4957)
      0.18181819 = coord(2/11)
    
    Source
    Knowledge organization for a sustainable world: challenges and perspectives for cultural, scientific, and technological sharing in a connected society : proceedings of the Fourteenth International ISKO Conference 27-29 September 2016, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil / organized by International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO-Brazil, São Paulo State University ; edited by José Augusto Chaves Guimarães, Suellen Oliveira Milani, Vera Dodebei
  6. Smiraglia, R.P.: ISKO 12's bookshelf - evolving intension : an editorial (2013) 0.01
    0.012476154 = product of:
      0.045745894 = sum of:
        0.018066432 = weight(_text_:of in 636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018066432 = score(doc=636,freq=30.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.33457235 = fieldWeight in 636, product of:
              5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
                30.0 = termFreq=30.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=636)
        0.015983174 = weight(_text_:on in 636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015983174 = score(doc=636,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.21044704 = fieldWeight in 636, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=636)
        0.011696288 = product of:
          0.023392577 = sum of:
            0.023392577 = weight(_text_:22 in 636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023392577 = score(doc=636,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12092275 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.034531306 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 636, 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=636)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    The 2012 biennial international research conference of the International Society for Knowledge Organization was held August 6-9, in Mysore, India. It was the second international ISKO conference to be held in India (Canada and India are the only countries to have hosted two international ISKO conferences), and for many attendees travel to the exotic Indian subcontinent was a new experience. Interestingly, the mix of people attending was quite different from recent meetings held in Europe or North America. The conference was lively and, as usual, jam-packed with new research. Registration took place on a veranda in the garden of the B. N. Bahadur Institute of Management Sciences where the meetings were held at the University of Mysore. This graceful tree (Figure 1) kept us company and kept watch over our considerations (as indeed it does over the academic enterprise of the Institute). The conference theme was "Categories, Contexts and Relations in Knowledge Organization." The opening and closing sessions fittingly were devoted to serious introspection about the direction of the domain of knowledge organization. This editorial, in line with those following past international conferences, is an attempt to comment on the state of the domain by reflecting domain-analytically on the proceedings of the conference, primarily using bibliometric measures. In general, it seems the domain is secure in its intellectual moorings, as it continues to welcome a broad granular array of shifting research questionsin its intension. It seems that the continual concretizing of the theoretical core of knowledge organization (KO) seems to act as a catalyst for emergent ideas, which can be observed as part of the evolving intension of the domain.
    Date
    22. 2.2013 11:43:34
  7. Leazer, G.H.; Smiraglia, R.P.: Bibliographic families in the library catalog : a qualitative analysis and grounded theory (1999) 0.01
    0.010293575 = product of:
      0.037743106 = sum of:
        0.016818931 = weight(_text_:of in 107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016818931 = score(doc=107,freq=26.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.31146988 = fieldWeight in 107, product of:
              5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
                26.0 = termFreq=26.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=107)
        0.009227889 = weight(_text_:on in 107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009227889 = score(doc=107,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 107, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=107)
        0.011696288 = product of:
          0.023392577 = sum of:
            0.023392577 = weight(_text_:22 in 107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023392577 = score(doc=107,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12092275 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.034531306 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 107, 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=107)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    Forty-five years have passed since Lubetzky outlined the primary objectives of the catalog, which should facilitate the identification of specific bibliographic entities, and the explicit recoguition of works and relationships amongthem. Still, our catalogs are better designed to identify specific bibliographic entities than they are to guide users among the network of potential related editions and translations of works. In this paper, we seck to examine qualitatively some interesting examples of families of related works, defined as bibliographic families. Although the cases described here were derived from a random sample, this is a qualitative analysis. We selected these bibliographic families for their ability to reveal the strengths and weaknesses of Leazer's model, which incorporates relationship taxonomies by Tillett and Smiraglia Qualitatice analysis is intended to produce on explanation of a phenomenou, particularly an identification of any palterns observed. Patterns observed in qualitative analysis can be used to affirm external observations of the same phenomena; conclusions can contribute to what is knoton as grounded theory-a unique explanation grounded in the phenomenon under study. We arrive at two statements of grounded theory concerning bibliographic families: cataloger-generated implicit maps among works are inadequate, and qualitative analysis suggests the complexity of even the smallest bibliographic families. We conclude that user behavior study is needed to suggest which alternative maps are preferable.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  8. Graf, A.M.; Smiraglia, R.P.: Race & ethnicity in the Encyclopedia of Milwaukee : a case study in the use of domain analysis (2014) 0.01
    0.0099260025 = product of:
      0.03639534 = sum of:
        0.015471167 = weight(_text_:of in 1412) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015471167 = score(doc=1412,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.28651062 = fieldWeight in 1412, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1412)
        0.009227889 = weight(_text_:on in 1412) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009227889 = score(doc=1412,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 1412, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1412)
        0.011696288 = product of:
          0.023392577 = sum of:
            0.023392577 = weight(_text_:22 in 1412) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023392577 = score(doc=1412,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12092275 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.034531306 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1412, 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=1412)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    Scholarly domains have been analyzed using various tools and techniques to reveal complex genealogies of scholarship, authorship, citation and ontology, resulting in not only deeper knowledge of each area studied, but in a better developed set of methodologies for domain exploration in general. While domain analysis itself is being used frequently in LIS, there remain many areas against which domain analytical tools have not yet been applied. This is the case with encyclopedic collections of knowledge, such as that which is being developed as the Encyclopedia of Milwaukee (EMKE) within the history department at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. This descriptive study will analyze resources categorized under race and ethnicity from a comprehensive bibliography on the history of metropolitan Milwaukee that was designed to serve those who would research and write entries for the EMKE. Bibliometric and analytic techniques are employed to explore the intension and extension of the domain as it is developing.
    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
  9. Smiraglia, R.P.: Shifting intension in knowledge organization : an editorial (2012) 0.01
    0.009304918 = product of:
      0.034118034 = sum of:
        0.013193856 = weight(_text_:of in 630) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013193856 = score(doc=630,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 630, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=630)
        0.009227889 = weight(_text_:on in 630) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009227889 = score(doc=630,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 630, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=630)
        0.011696288 = product of:
          0.023392577 = sum of:
            0.023392577 = weight(_text_:22 in 630) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023392577 = score(doc=630,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12092275 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.034531306 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 630, 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=630)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    In the keynote paper for the 12th International ISKO Conference in Mysore I discussed the dynamicity of the domain of knowledge organization from the perspective of ongoing domain analyses. Metaanalysis of a series of studies shows that knowledge organization is a strong, scientific community, with a distinct extension that now embraces the search for interoperability, and with intension that shifts along two continuums, one of which is methodological (or epistemological) and ranges from empirical experimental methods to humanistic narrative methods, while the other is more contextual and ranges from concept theory to applied KOS. These elements seem to remain core in knowledge organization as a domain over time (Smiraglia 2012). Another interesting finding is the degree to which the intension along that theory-application continuum is stretched by papers presented at regional ISKO chapter conferences. Since 2006 it has been the policy of this journal to offer to publish the leading papers from any peer-reviewed regional ISKO conference. The papers are selected by conference organizers and forwarded to Knowledge Organization for publication. By analyzing the papers separately we are able to see both the presence of the domain's core internationally and the constant tug and pull on the intension as authors bring new ideas and new research to regional conferences. This editorial, then, summarizes papers from regional conferences that have appeared in Knowledge Organization in 2011 and 2012.
    Date
    22. 2.2013 11:09:49
  10. Smiraglia, R.P.: On sameness and difference : an editorial (2008) 0.01
    0.007928245 = product of:
      0.029070228 = sum of:
        0.0139941955 = weight(_text_:of in 1919) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0139941955 = score(doc=1919,freq=72.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.25915858 = fieldWeight in 1919, product of:
              8.485281 = tf(freq=72.0), with freq of:
                72.0 = termFreq=72.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1919)
        0.009227889 = weight(_text_:on in 1919) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009227889 = score(doc=1919,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 1919, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1919)
        0.005848144 = product of:
          0.011696288 = sum of:
            0.011696288 = weight(_text_:22 in 1919) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.011696288 = score(doc=1919,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12092275 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.034531306 = queryNorm
                0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 1919, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1919)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Content
    "1. What is? Many of us equate the principle activity of knowledge organization with that of ontology, which at its essence is the revelation of the structure of a domain. Among the essential choices that must be made in the construction of ontology are those involving "IsA" relationships. "What is a" is the primary question that defines what belongs inside a set and what, therefore, does not. Employing Dahlberg's concept-theoretic is one approach to defining the elements that belong in a set, although there are many other approaches as well. Whatever method is used, once a set is constituted its members will be considered to be like each other in some way, in other words, they are thought to be the same in some manner, or to some degree. Which leads naturally to the question of how alike must two entities be to be declared the same? Or its correlate, how dissimilar must they be to be declared different? Pondering this question led me to think about musical works that are of the genre "variations on a theme by X." In such works a composer uses a musical mnemonic-a melody usually-to draw listeners into the aural experience, and then, subsequent iterations all contain this original mnemonic but surround it or manipulate it in various ways. The result is always iterative but never boring because each iteration is subtly (or not so subtly) different from the last. And the technique allows the character of the original to be explored fully as well as for it to be reinterpreted by the current composer. In the end it is not so unlike, although a lot more interesting than, multiple citations by an author of another's works- say, like the way each time I cite Patrick Wilson it comes out a little differently. Same but different. Sameness and difference turn out to be essential philosophical positions. Many of the philosophical points of view brought to bear on knowledge organization suggest one or more points of view about this essential question. Semiotics (for example) suggests that signs are always being interpreted anew, phenomenology suggests entities might appear differently as a matter of their individual perception. All points of view are useful because they all shed light on formerly dark corners of the essential questions in knowledge organization.
    2. Collocation versus disambiguation Of course, the practical reality is that systems must accommodate dual purposes when they declare entities to be the same or different. We wish at once to collocate or draw together everything that is alike, and at the same time to disambiguate the collocated set. So, the tension between the two purposes holds every system in balance. A set of collocated entities is thought to contain entities that are the same to some degree, but different enough to require an approach to sorting the elements of the set. It reminds me again of Wilson, who said of relevance that sometimes people just want something that serves as a means to some end. What does that suggest about sameness and difference? Perhaps that "more or less the same" or "a little bit different" reveals a sort of fuzzy-set, which opens the brackets around the set of equivalent entities that have been collocated. If so, then it means all the more that the differences, no matter how slight, need to be accounted for in the disambiguation. Of course there is quite a lot of overlap among domains, especially among closely related domains. We can see that in the articles in the present issue of this journal. We have papers that have come from at least three domains, and yet they all treat of knowledge and its conceptual ordering. Yet there is little conformity among the works cited by these four papers. What does that tell us? Perhaps that different domains are a little bit the same?
    3. A New Perspective: Theme and Variations In musicology there is a factual reality that every sound you hear can be reduced to a sort of calculus that expresses its tonal and metrical relationships. Schenkerian analysis (Forte and Gilbert 1982) is one approach to this. In the end it reveals a singular truth, which is that music (like information) is essentially an ordered accretion of energy. The beauty of this type of analysis is what it reveals when large quantities of music are analyzed-it reveals sets of similarities that might never have been noticed otherwise. The music information retrieval domain has built its technology and its science along these lines. So where does this leave knowledge organization? In the semantic Web and the magical kingdoms that will follow it, it will be necessary to make samenessdifference decisions of a different sort, to provide the ability to make heretofore unimaginable connections. Elsewhere I have asked when a funeral urn is like a ship's log: the answer is when the instantiation set has the same calculus in its scope, which tells us that the two artifacts have approximately equal impact factors along some cultural or social trajectory. These are the sorts of questions knowledge organization can be able to answer if we can move toward a large base of empirical evidence to which similarity measures can be applied and from which new hypotheses can be drawn to direct investigation. Why have these questions not yet been answered? Because they have not yet been posed."
    Date
    12. 6.2008 20:18:22
  11. Smiraglia, R.P.; Leazer, G.H.: Derivative bibliographic relationships : the work relationship in a global bibliographic database (1999) 0.01
    0.0074733687 = product of:
      0.041103527 = sum of:
        0.025120353 = weight(_text_:of in 3663) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025120353 = score(doc=3663,freq=58.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.46520394 = fieldWeight in 3663, product of:
              7.615773 = tf(freq=58.0), with freq of:
                58.0 = termFreq=58.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3663)
        0.015983174 = weight(_text_:on in 3663) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015983174 = score(doc=3663,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.21044704 = fieldWeight in 3663, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3663)
      0.18181819 = coord(2/11)
    
    Abstract
    To contribute to the development of a sophisticated control of bibliographic works research must be build on the growing understanding of the nature of the work and the constitution of bibliographic families. The present study was designed to address the following in the context of a global bibliographic database: OCLC's WorldCat: the proportion of works that are members of bibliographic families; the size of each family; bibliographic characteristics that can be associated with the existence or extent of derivative bibliographic relationships; the frequency with which each type of relationship appears; and the complexity of bibliographic families. A sample of bibliographic families was constructed. Results indicate that a core of works of similar character constitute the bibliographic population of American academic and research libraries (OCLC members). It seems that the canon of derivative works is greater in the academic sphere than in the bibliographic universe represented by OCLC at large. The size of a bibliographic family seems to be related to its popularity or its canonicity. Discipline, form, and genre all fail to demonstrate any influence on derivation of works. Further study of specific segments of the bibliographic universe, for instance the literature of particular disciplines, is clearly called for. The purpose of this research is to contribute to the development of a sophisticated control of bibliographic works and families. In particular, this research is designed to build on our growing understanding of the nature of the work and the constitution of bibliographic families
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 50(1999) no.6, S.493-504
  12. Heuvel, C. van den; Smiraglia, R.P.: Concepts as particles : metaphors for the universe of knowledge (2010) 0.01
    0.007012862 = product of:
      0.03857074 = sum of:
        0.01939093 = weight(_text_:of in 3513) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01939093 = score(doc=3513,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 3513, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3513)
        0.01917981 = weight(_text_:on in 3513) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01917981 = score(doc=3513,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.25253648 = fieldWeight in 3513, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3513)
      0.18181819 = coord(2/11)
    
    Abstract
    Discoveries in high energy physics have led to new understanding about the nature of that which exists. We use the metaphor of the particle collider to accumulate components of a theory of knowledge that underlies the science of knowledge organization. We outline the concepts of a knowledge universe, the central role of concepts, and the intertwining roles of works, instantiations and documents. This thought experiment provides a different epistemological reading of "knowledge" by demonstrating a semantics that is based on structure and on related forces between components, rather than on content, so as to enable the development of mechanisms for linking related knowledge entities with so-far undiscovered similarities.
    Source
    Paradigms and conceptual systems in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Eleventh International ISKO Conference, 23-26 February 2010 Rome, Italy. Edited by Claudio Gnoli and Fulvio Mazzocchi
  13. Smiraglia, R.P.; Heuvel, C. van den; Dousa, T.M.: Interactions between elementary structures in universes of knowledge (2011) 0.01
    0.007012862 = product of:
      0.03857074 = sum of:
        0.01939093 = weight(_text_:of in 4812) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01939093 = score(doc=4812,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 4812, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4812)
        0.01917981 = weight(_text_:on in 4812) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01917981 = score(doc=4812,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.25253648 = fieldWeight in 4812, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4812)
      0.18181819 = coord(2/11)
    
    Abstract
    Contrasts in 20th century classification theory relate to a transition from a universe of "knowledge" system towards one of "concepts' Initiatives to develop a Simple Knowledge Organization Systems (SKOS) standard based on classification schemes and taxonomies within the framework of the Semantic Web (SW) are attempts to bridge the gap. Current knowledge organization systems (KOS) seem to reinforce "syntactics" at the expense of semantics. We claim that all structure is syntactic but knowledge structures need to have a semantic component as well. Therefore we consider classifications as artificial languages. The Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) constitutes a natural language-independent notation system that allows for mediating between concepts and knowledge systems. We discuss an elementary theory of knowledge organization based on the structure of knowledge rather than on the content of documents. Semantics becomes not a matter of synonymous concepts, but rather of coordinating knowledge structures. The interactions between these systems represent interactions between different universes of knowledge or concepts.
    Source
    Classification and ontology: formal approaches and access to knowledge: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar, 19-20 September 2011, The Hague, The Netherlands. Eds.: A. Slavic u. E. Civallero
  14. Smiraglia, R.P.; Heuvel, C. van den: Classifications and concepts : towards an elementary theory of knowledge interaction (2013) 0.01
    0.0069539202 = product of:
      0.03824656 = sum of:
        0.019790784 = weight(_text_:of in 1758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019790784 = score(doc=1758,freq=36.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.36650562 = fieldWeight in 1758, product of:
              6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
                36.0 = termFreq=36.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1758)
        0.018455777 = weight(_text_:on in 1758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018455777 = score(doc=1758,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.24300331 = fieldWeight in 1758, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1758)
      0.18181819 = coord(2/11)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - This paper seeks to outline the central role of concepts in the knowledge universe, and the intertwining roles of works, instantiations, and documents. In particular the authors are interested in ontological and epistemological aspects of concepts and in the question to which extent there is a need for natural languages to link concepts to create meaningful patterns. Design/methodology/approach - The authors describe the quest for the smallest elements of knowledge from a historical perspective. They focus on the metaphor of the universe of knowledge and its impact on classification and retrieval of concepts. They outline the major components of an elementary theory of knowledge interaction. Findings - The paper outlines the major components of an elementary theory of knowledge interaction that is based on the structure of knowledge rather than on the content of documents, in which semantics becomes not a matter of synonymous concepts, but rather of coordinating knowledge structures. The evidence is derived from existing empirical research. Originality/value - The paper shifts the bases for knowledge organization from a search for a universal order to an understanding of a universal structure within which many context-dependent orders are possible.
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 69(2013) no.3, S.360-383
  15. Smiraglia, R.P.: ¬The progress of theory in knowledge organization (2002) 0.01
    0.006925095 = product of:
      0.03808802 = sum of:
        0.01745383 = weight(_text_:of in 811) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01745383 = score(doc=811,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.32322758 = fieldWeight in 811, product of:
              5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
                28.0 = termFreq=28.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=811)
        0.02063419 = weight(_text_:on in 811) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02063419 = score(doc=811,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.271686 = fieldWeight in 811, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=811)
      0.18181819 = coord(2/11)
    
    Abstract
    We understand "theory" to be a system of testable explanatory statements derived from research. In knowledge organization, the generation of theory has moved from an epistemic stance of pragmatism (based on observation of the construction of retrieval tools), to empiricism (based on the results of empirical research). In the nineteenth century, Panizzi (1841), Cutter (1876), and Dewey (1876), developed very pragmatic tools (i.e., catalogs and classifications), explaining as they did so the principles by which their tools were constructed. By 1950, key papers at a University of Chicago Graduate Library School conference on "Bibliographic Organization" recorded the role of bibliographic organization in civilization (Clapp, 1950) and deemed classification the basis of bibliographic organization (Shera, 1950). In 1961, the International Conference on Cataloguing Principles in Paris brought together key thinkers on the design of catalogs. Wilson (1968) expounded a system for bibliographic apparatus, and provided the framework for empirical theoretical development. In 2000, Svenonius asserted that knowledge organization is accomplished through a bibliographic language (or, more properly through a complex set of bibliographic languages), with semantics, syntax, pragmatics, and rules to govern their implementation. Logical positivism notwithstanding, rationalist and historicist stances have begun to come to the fore of late through the promulgation of qualitative methods, most notably those employed in classification, user-interface design, and bibliometric research.
  16. Smiraglia, R.P.: Bibliocentrism revisited : RDA and FRBRoo (2015) 0.01
    0.006165732 = product of:
      0.033911526 = sum of:
        0.020861318 = weight(_text_:of in 2364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020861318 = score(doc=2364,freq=40.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.38633084 = fieldWeight in 2364, product of:
              6.3245554 = tf(freq=40.0), with freq of:
                40.0 = termFreq=40.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2364)
        0.013050207 = weight(_text_:on in 2364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013050207 = score(doc=2364,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 2364, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2364)
      0.18181819 = coord(2/11)
    
    Abstract
    Bibliocentricity in the library catalog arose from the practice of resource description, which emerged from the simple listing of books as objects with little reference to their intellectual content. Combined with shifting cultural conceptions of authorship, this led to a complex system in which the implicit concept of "goodness" affected the efficacy of description of varying resources. Issues of domain-specificity, cultural origins or contexts of usage have been disregarded in deference to book-like considerations. RDA (Resource Description and Access provides for analytical descriptions using the knowledge-based FRBR conceptual model of entities based on the artifactual intersection of intellectual works and cultural information carriers. The more empirically- based FRBRoo, an object-oriented revision of the conceptual model, reflects the atemporality of instantiation. FRBRoo seems promising as a potential additional facet for expressing structural components of knowledge represented by traditionally conceptual KOSs. In this study two cases are analyzed from the point of view of both RDA and FRBRoo. Analysis shows how little synergy has been gained through RDA's implementation of the FRBR model. The cases analyzed using RDA and FRBRoo serve as artifacts of cultural discourse, by which the measure of objective violence reflects the degree to which individual works still cannot be disambiguated.
    Content
    Beitrag anlässlich: Proceedings of the 3rd Milwaukee Conference on Ethics in Knowledge Organization, May 28-29, 2015, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, USA. Vgl.: http://www.ergon-verlag.de/isko_ko/downloads/ko_42_2015_5.
  17. Smiraglia, R.P.: Universes, dimensions, domains, intensions and extensions : knowledge organization for the 21st century (2012) 0.01
    0.006065757 = product of:
      0.033361662 = sum of:
        0.017701415 = weight(_text_:of in 819) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017701415 = score(doc=819,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 819, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=819)
        0.015660247 = weight(_text_:on in 819) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015660247 = score(doc=819,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.20619515 = fieldWeight in 819, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=819)
      0.18181819 = coord(2/11)
    
    Abstract
    In KO there is work to solidify concept theory, which is at the core of our discipline; but there are other dimensions, as well as suggestions that classification must engage a multi-verse. This paper encompasses a domain analysis of KO as a means of visualizing the emergence and coherence of our domain, and as a way of denominating the parameters of the universe (or universes) in which our domain operates, as well as the dimensions of the operational paradigms at work. In other words, we look here at the extension and intension of KO as a domain. KO as a domain demonstrates coherence across time and across geopolitical boundaries, particularly as it concerns its theoretical foundations. Consistently marked dimensions within the domain: theoretical versus applied on one continuum, humanistic versus scientific on another. These dimensions serve to maintain constructive and dynamic tension within the domain, which in turn keeps the research front constantly in a state of renewal.
    Source
    Categories, contexts and relations in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Twelfth International ISKO Conference 6-9 August 2012, Mysore, India. Eds.: Neelameghan, A. u. K.S. Raghavan
  18. Smiraglia, R.P.: Be careful what you wish for : lacunae in the FRBR family of models (2012) 0.01
    0.005911077 = product of:
      0.03251092 = sum of:
        0.019591875 = weight(_text_:of in 1907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019591875 = score(doc=1907,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.36282203 = fieldWeight in 1907, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1907)
        0.012919044 = weight(_text_:on in 1907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012919044 = score(doc=1907,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 1907, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1907)
      0.18181819 = coord(2/11)
    
    Abstract
    The library catalog as a catalog of works was an infectious idea, which together with research led to reconceptualization in the form of the FRBR conceptual model. Two categories of lacunae emerge-the expression entity, and gaps in the model such as aggregates and dynamic documents. Evidence needed to extend the FRBR model is available in contemporary research on instantiation. The challenge for the bibliographic community is to begin to think of FRBR as a form of knowledge organization system, adding a final dimension to classification. The papers in the present volume offer a compendium of the promise of the FRBR model.
    Content
    Introduction to a special issue "The FRBR family of conceptual models: toward a linked future"
  19. Smiraglia, R.P.: Classification interaction demonstrated empirically (2014) 0.01
    0.0056051966 = product of:
      0.03082858 = sum of:
        0.016793035 = weight(_text_:of in 1420) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016793035 = score(doc=1420,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.3109903 = fieldWeight in 1420, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1420)
        0.014035545 = product of:
          0.02807109 = sum of:
            0.02807109 = weight(_text_:22 in 1420) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02807109 = score(doc=1420,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12092275 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.034531306 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1420, 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=1420)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.18181819 = coord(2/11)
    
    Abstract
    There is greater depth in knowledge organization systems beyond the surface of hierarchically-structured concepts. Deconstructed elements of a knowledge organization system share network-like relationships that might be used in interaction with the characteristics of documents to provide "classification interaction" as a means of identifying previously undiscovered relationships. A random sample of UDC call numbers from the online catalog of the Catholic University of Leuven (KU Leuven) is analyzed to discover interactions among conceptual classification, instantiation, and bibliographic demographic characteristics. The associations demonstrated represent ways in which predictable interactions occur among classified bibliographic entities and the components of the rich UDC classification.
    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
  20. Smiraglia, R.P.; Cai, X.: Tracking the evolution of clustering, machine learning, automatic indexing and automatic classification in knowledge organization (2017) 0.01
    0.005599546 = product of:
      0.0307975 = sum of:
        0.012341722 = weight(_text_:of in 3627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012341722 = score(doc=3627,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.22855641 = fieldWeight in 3627, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3627)
        0.018455777 = weight(_text_:on in 3627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018455777 = score(doc=3627,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.24300331 = fieldWeight in 3627, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3627)
      0.18181819 = coord(2/11)
    
    Abstract
    A very important extension of the traditional domain of knowledge organization (KO) arises from attempts to incorporate techniques devised in the computer science domain for automatic concept extraction and for grouping, categorizing, clustering and otherwise organizing knowledge using mechanical means. Four specific terms have emerged to identify the most prevalent techniques: machine learning, clustering, automatic indexing, and automatic classification. Our study presents three domain analytical case analyses in search of answers. The first case relies on citations located using the ISKO-supported "Knowledge Organization Bibliography." The second case relies on works in both Web of Science and SCOPUS. Case three applies co-word analysis and citation analysis to the contents of the papers in the present special issue. We observe scholars involved in "clustering" and "automatic classification" who share common thematic emphases. But we have found no coherence, no common activity and no social semantics. We have not found a research front, or a common teleology within the KO domain. We also have found a lively group of authors who have succeeded in submitting papers to this special issue, and their work quite interestingly aligns with the case studies we report. There is an emphasis on KO for information retrieval; there is much work on clustering (which involves conceptual points within texts) and automatic classification (which involves semantic groupings at the meta-document level).