Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Referieren"
  1. Endres-Niggemeyer, B.: Summarising text for intelligent communication : results of the Dagstuhl seminar (1994) 0.01
    0.013390707 = product of:
      0.08034424 = sum of:
        0.08034424 = weight(_text_:states in 8867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08034424 = score(doc=8867,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22009853 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.039970156 = queryNorm
            0.3650376 = fieldWeight in 8867, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=8867)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    As a result of the transition to full-text storage, multimedia and networking, information systems are becoming more efficient but at the same time more difficult to use, in particular because users are confronted with information volumes that increasingly exceed individual processing capacities. Consequently, there is an increase in the demand for user aids such as summarising techniques. Against this background, the interdisciplinary Dagstuhl Seminar 'Summarising Text for Intelligent Communication' (Dec. 1993) outlined the academic state of the art with regard to summarising (abstracting) and proposed future directions for research and system development. Research is currently shifting its attention from text summarising to summarising states of affairs. Recycling solutions are put forward in order to satisfy short-term needs for summarisation products. In the medium and long term, it is necessary to devise concepts and methods of intelligent summarising which have a better formal and empirical grounding and a more modular organisation
  2. Cross, C.; Oppenheim, C.: ¬A genre analysis of scientific abstracts (2006) 0.01
    0.008927138 = product of:
      0.053562824 = sum of:
        0.053562824 = weight(_text_:states in 5603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053562824 = score(doc=5603,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22009853 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.039970156 = queryNorm
            0.24335839 = fieldWeight in 5603, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5603)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of the paper is to analyse the structure of a small number of abstracts that have appeared in the CABI database over a number of years, during which time the authorship of the abstracts changed from CABI editorial staff to journal article authors themselves. This paper reports a study of the semantic organisation and thematic structure of 12 abstracts from the field of protozoology in an effort to discover whether these abstracts followed generally agreed abstracting guidelines. Design/methodology/approach - The method adopted was a move analysis of the text of the abstracts. This move analysis revealed a five-move pattern: move 1 situates the research within the scientific community; move 2 introduces the research by either describing the main features of the research or presenting its purpose; move 3 describes the methodology; move 4 states the results; and move 5 draws conclusions or suggests practical applications. Findings - Thematic analysis shows that scientific abstract authors thematise their subject by referring to the discourse domain or the "real" world. Not all of the abstracts succeeded in following the guideline advice. However, there was general consistency regarding semantic organisation and thematic structure. Research limitations/implications - The research limitations were the small number of abstracts examined, from just one subject domain. Practical limitations - The practical implications are the need for abstracting services to be clearer and more prescriptive regarding how they want abstracts to be structured as the lack of formal training in abstract writing increases the risk of subjectivity and verbosity and reduces clarity in scientific abstracts. Another implication of the research are that abstracting and indexing services must ensure that they maintain abstract quality if they introduce policies of accepting author abstracts. This is important as there is probably little formal training in abstract writing for science students at present. Recommendations for further research are made. Originality/value - This paper reports a study of the semantic organisation and thematic structure of 12 abstracts from the field of protozoology.
  3. Koltay, T.: ¬A hypertext tutorial on abstracting for library science students (1995) 0.00
    0.004512837 = product of:
      0.027077023 = sum of:
        0.027077023 = product of:
          0.054154046 = sum of:
            0.054154046 = weight(_text_:22 in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054154046 = score(doc=3061,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13996868 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.039970156 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3061, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3061)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Date
    27. 1.1996 18:22:06
  4. Palais, E.S.: Abstracting for reference librarians (1988) 0.00
    0.0036102696 = product of:
      0.021661617 = sum of:
        0.021661617 = product of:
          0.043323234 = sum of:
            0.043323234 = weight(_text_:22 in 2832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043323234 = score(doc=2832,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13996868 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.039970156 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2832, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2832)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Source
    Reference librarian. 1988, no.22, S.297-308
  5. Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.: Which layout do you prefer? : an analysis of readers' preferences for different typographic layouts of structured abstracts (1996) 0.00
    0.002707702 = product of:
      0.016246213 = sum of:
        0.016246213 = product of:
          0.032492425 = sum of:
            0.032492425 = weight(_text_:22 in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.032492425 = score(doc=4411,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13996868 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.039970156 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4411, 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=4411)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Source
    Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.1, S.27-37
  6. Ward, M.L.: ¬The future of the human indexer (1996) 0.00
    0.002707702 = product of:
      0.016246213 = sum of:
        0.016246213 = product of:
          0.032492425 = sum of:
            0.032492425 = weight(_text_:22 in 7244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.032492425 = score(doc=7244,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13996868 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.039970156 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 7244, 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=7244)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Date
    9. 2.1997 18:44:22
  7. Wan, X.; Yang, J.; Xiao, J.: Incorporating cross-document relationships between sentences for single document summarizations (2006) 0.00
    0.002707702 = product of:
      0.016246213 = sum of:
        0.016246213 = product of:
          0.032492425 = sum of:
            0.032492425 = weight(_text_:22 in 2421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.032492425 = score(doc=2421,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13996868 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.039970156 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2421, 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=2421)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Source
    Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006
  8. Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.; Blurton, A.: Obtaining information accurately and quickly : are structured abstracts more efficient? (1996) 0.00
    0.0022564186 = product of:
      0.0135385115 = sum of:
        0.0135385115 = product of:
          0.027077023 = sum of:
            0.027077023 = weight(_text_:22 in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027077023 = score(doc=7673,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13996868 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.039970156 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 7673, 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=7673)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Source
    Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.5, S.349-356