-
Cleverdon, C.W.: ASLIB Cranfield Research Project : Report on the first stage of an investigation into the comparative efficiency of indexing systems (1960)
0.05
0.04985311 = product of:
0.14955932 = sum of:
0.14955932 = sum of:
0.06507045 = weight(_text_:systems in 6158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06507045 = score(doc=6158,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.4074492 = fieldWeight in 6158, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6158)
0.08448886 = weight(_text_:22 in 6158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08448886 = score(doc=6158,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1819777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6158, 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=6158)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Footnote
- Rez. in: College and research libraries 22(1961) no.3, S.228 (G. Jahoda)
-
Cleverdon, C.W.: Evaluation tests of information retrieval systems (1970)
0.05
0.047793493 = product of:
0.07169024 = sum of:
0.02830994 = weight(_text_:information in 2272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02830994 = score(doc=2272,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 2272, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2272)
0.0433803 = product of:
0.0867606 = sum of:
0.0867606 = weight(_text_:systems in 2272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0867606 = score(doc=2272,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.5432656 = fieldWeight in 2272, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2272)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
-
Azubuike, A.A.; Umoh, J.S.: Computerized information storage and retrieval systems (1988)
0.05
0.047793493 = product of:
0.07169024 = sum of:
0.02830994 = weight(_text_:information in 4153) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02830994 = score(doc=4153,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 4153, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4153)
0.0433803 = product of:
0.0867606 = sum of:
0.0867606 = weight(_text_:systems in 4153) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0867606 = score(doc=4153,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.5432656 = fieldWeight in 4153, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4153)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
-
Boyce, B.R.; McLain, J.P.: Entry point depth and online search using a controlled vocabulary (1989)
0.03
0.033562243 = product of:
0.05034336 = sum of:
0.012385598 = weight(_text_:information in 2287) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012385598 = score(doc=2287,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 2287, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2287)
0.03795776 = product of:
0.07591552 = sum of:
0.07591552 = weight(_text_:systems in 2287) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07591552 = score(doc=2287,freq=8.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.47535738 = fieldWeight in 2287, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2287)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- The depth of indexing, the number of terms assigned on average to each document in a retrieval system as entry points, has a significantly effect on the standard retrieval performance measures in modern commercial retrieval systems, just as it did in previous experimental work. Tests on the effect of basic index search, as opposed to controlled vocabulary search, in these real systems are quite different than traditional comparisons of free text searching with controlled vocabulary searching. In modern commercial systems the controlled vocabulary serves as a precision device, since the strucure of the default for unqualified search terms in these systems requires that it do so.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 40(1989), S.273-276
-
Hersh, W.R.; Hickam, D.H.: ¬A comparison of two methods for indexing and retrieval from a full-text medical database (1992)
0.03
0.03219512 = product of:
0.04829268 = sum of:
0.021452487 = weight(_text_:information in 4526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021452487 = score(doc=4526,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 4526, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4526)
0.026840193 = product of:
0.053680386 = sum of:
0.053680386 = weight(_text_:systems in 4526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.053680386 = score(doc=4526,freq=4.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.33612844 = fieldWeight in 4526, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4526)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Reports results of a study of 2 information retrieval systems on a 2.000 document full text medical database. The first system, SAPHIRE, features concept based automatic indexing and statistical retrieval techniques, while the second system, SWORD, features traditional word based Boolean techniques, 16 medical students at Oregon Health Sciences Univ. each performed 10 searches and their results, recorded in terms of recall and precision, showed nearly equal performance for both systems. SAPHIRE was also compared with a version of SWORD modified to use automatic indexing and ranked retrieval. Using batch input of queries, the latter method performed slightly better
- Imprint
- Medford, NJ : Learned Information Inc.
- Source
- Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, Pittsburgh, 26.-29.10.92. Ed.: D. Shaw
-
Veenema, F.: To index or not to index (1996)
0.03
0.032120734 = product of:
0.0481811 = sum of:
0.02001815 = weight(_text_:information in 7247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02001815 = score(doc=7247,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 7247, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7247)
0.028162954 = product of:
0.05632591 = sum of:
0.05632591 = weight(_text_:22 in 7247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05632591 = score(doc=7247,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1819777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7247, 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=7247)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Describes an experiment comparing the performance of automatic full-text indexing software for personal computers with the human intellectual assignment of indexing terms in each document in a collection. Considers the times required to index the document, to retrieve documents satisfying 5 typical foreseen information needs, and the recall and precision ratios of searching. The software used is QuickFinder facility in WordPerfect 6.1 for Windows
- Source
- Canadian journal of information and library science. 21(1996) no.2, S.1-22
-
Subrahmanyam, B.: Library of Congress Classification numbers : issues of consistency and their implications for union catalogs (2006)
0.03
0.03194317 = product of:
0.0958295 = sum of:
0.0958295 = sum of:
0.060625814 = weight(_text_:systems in 5784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060625814 = score(doc=5784,freq=10.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.37961838 = fieldWeight in 5784, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5784)
0.03520369 = weight(_text_:22 in 5784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03520369 = score(doc=5784,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1819777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5784, 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=5784)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- This study examined Library of Congress Classification (LCC)-based class numbers assigned to a representative sample of 200 titles in 52 American library systems to determine the level of consistency within and across those systems. The results showed that under the condition that a library system has a title, the probability of that title having the same LCC-based class number across library systems is greater than 85 percent. An examination of 121 titles displaying variations in class numbers among library systems showed certain titles (for example, multi-foci titles, titles in series, bibliographies, and fiction) lend themselves to alternate class numbers. Others were assigned variant numbers either due to latitude in the schedules or for reasons that cannot be pinpointed. With increasing dependence on copy cataloging, the size of such variations may continue to decrease. As the preferred class number with its alternates represents a title more fully than just the preferred class number, this paper argues for continued use of alternates by library systems and for finding a method to link alternate class numbers to preferred class numbers for enriched subject access through local and union catalogs.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Rowley, J.: ¬The controlled versus natural indexing languages debate revisited : a perspective on information retrieval practice and research (1994)
0.03
0.03126324 = product of:
0.04689486 = sum of:
0.01978217 = weight(_text_:information in 7151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01978217 = score(doc=7151,freq=10.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.21684799 = fieldWeight in 7151, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=7151)
0.027112689 = product of:
0.054225378 = sum of:
0.054225378 = weight(_text_:systems in 7151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054225378 = score(doc=7151,freq=8.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.339541 = fieldWeight in 7151, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=7151)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- This article revisits the debate concerning controlled and natural indexing languages, as used in searching the databases of the online hosts, in-house information retrieval systems, online public access catalogues and databases stored on CD-ROM. The debate was first formulated in the early days of information retrieval more than a century ago but, despite significant advance in technology, remains unresolved. The article divides the history of the debate into four eras. Era one was characterised by the introduction of controlled vocabulary. Era two focused on comparisons between different indexing languages in order to assess which was best. Era three saw a number of case studies of limited generalisability and a general recognition that the best search performance can be achieved by the parallel use of the two types of indexing languages. The emphasis in Era four has been on the development of end-user-based systems, including online public access catalogues and databases on CD-ROM. Recent developments in the use of expert systems techniques to support the representation of meaning may lead to systems which offer significant support to the user in end-user searching. In the meantime, however, information retrieval in practice involves a mixture of natural and controlled indexing languages used to search a wide variety of different kinds of databases
- Source
- Journal of information science. 20(1994) no.2, S.108-119
-
Krovetz, R.; Croft, W.B.: Lexical ambiguity and information retrieval (1992)
0.03
0.029166719 = product of:
0.043750077 = sum of:
0.024771197 = weight(_text_:information in 4028) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024771197 = score(doc=4028,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 4028, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4028)
0.01897888 = product of:
0.03795776 = sum of:
0.03795776 = weight(_text_:systems in 4028) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03795776 = score(doc=4028,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 4028, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4028)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Reports on an analysis of lexical ambiguity in information retrieval text collections and on experiments to determine the utility of word meanings for separating relevant from nonrelevant documents. Results show that there is considerable ambiguity even in a specialised database. Word senses provide a significant separation between relevant and nonrelevant documents, but several factors contribute to determining whether disambiguation will make an improvement in performance such as: resolving lexical ambiguity was found to have little impact on retrieval effectiveness for documents that have many words in common with the query. Discusses other uses of word sense disambiguation in an information retrieval context
- Source
- ACM transactions on information systems. 10(1992) no.2, S.115-141
-
Ballard, R.M.: Indexing and its relevance to technical processing (1993)
0.03
0.026416022 = product of:
0.03962403 = sum of:
0.012511344 = weight(_text_:information in 554) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012511344 = score(doc=554,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 554, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=554)
0.027112689 = product of:
0.054225378 = sum of:
0.054225378 = weight(_text_:systems in 554) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054225378 = score(doc=554,freq=8.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.339541 = fieldWeight in 554, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=554)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- The development of regional on-line catalogs and in-house information systems for retrieval of references provide examples of the impact of indexing theory and applications on technical processing. More emphasis must be given to understanding the techniques for evaluating the effectiveness of a file, irrespective of whether that file was created as a library catalog or an index to information sources. The most significant advances in classification theory in recent decades has been as a result of efforts to improve effectiveness of indexing systems. Library classification systems are indexing languages or systems. Courses offered for the preparation of indexers in the United States and the United Kingdom are reviewed. A point of congruence for both the indexer and the library classifier would appear to be the need for a thorough preparation in the techniques of subject analysis. Any subject heading list will suffer from omissions as well as the inclusion of terms which the patron will never use. Indexing theory has provided the technical services department with methods for evaluation of effectiveness. The writer does not believe that these techniques are used, nor do current courses, workshops, and continuing education programs stress them. When theory is totally subjugated to practice, critical thinking and maximum effectiveness will suffer.
-
Soergel, D.: Indexing and retrieval performance : the logical evidence (1994)
0.03
0.026150528 = product of:
0.03922579 = sum of:
0.012385598 = weight(_text_:information in 579) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012385598 = score(doc=579,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 579, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=579)
0.026840193 = product of:
0.053680386 = sum of:
0.053680386 = weight(_text_:systems in 579) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.053680386 = score(doc=579,freq=4.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.33612844 = fieldWeight in 579, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=579)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- This article presents a logical analysis of the characteristics of indexing and their effects on retrieval performance.It establishes the ability to ask the questions one needs to ask as the foundation of performance evaluation, and recall and discrimination as the basic quantitative performance measures for binary noninteractive retrieval systems. It then defines the characteristics of indexing that affect retrieval - namely, indexing devices, viewpoint-based and importance-based indexing exhaustivity, indexing specifity, indexing correctness, and indexing consistency - and examines in detail their effects on retrieval. It concludes that retrieval performance depends chiefly on the match between indexing and the requirements of the individual query and on the adaption of the query formulation to the characteristics of the retrieval system, and that the ensuing complexity must be considered in the design and testing of retrieval systems
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 45(1994) no.8, S.589-599
-
Tseng, Y.-H.: Keyword extraction techniques and relevance feedback (1997)
0.02
0.024329841 = product of:
0.03649476 = sum of:
0.017515881 = weight(_text_:information in 1830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017515881 = score(doc=1830,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 1830, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1830)
0.01897888 = product of:
0.03795776 = sum of:
0.03795776 = weight(_text_:systems in 1830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03795776 = score(doc=1830,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 1830, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1830)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Automatic keyword extraction is an important and fundamental technology in an advanced information retrieval systems. Briefly compares several major keyword extraction methods, lists their advantages and disadvantages, and reports recent research progress in Taiwan. Also describes the application of a keyword extraction algorithm in an information retrieval system for relevance feedback. Preliminary analysis shows that the error rate of extracting relevant keywords is 18%, and that the precision rate is over 50%. The main disadvantage of this approach is that the extraction results depend on the retrieval results, which in turn depend on the data held by the database. Apart from collecting more data, this problem can be alleviated by the application of a thesaurus constructed by the same keyword extraction algorithm
-
Prasher, R.G.: Evaluation of indexing system (1989)
0.02
0.023896746 = product of:
0.03584512 = sum of:
0.01415497 = weight(_text_:information in 4998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01415497 = score(doc=4998,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 4998, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4998)
0.02169015 = product of:
0.0433803 = sum of:
0.0433803 = weight(_text_:systems in 4998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0433803 = score(doc=4998,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.2716328 = fieldWeight in 4998, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4998)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Describes information system and its various components-index file construstion, query formulation and searching. Discusses an indexing system, and brings out the need for its evaluation. Explains the concept of the efficiency of indexing systems and discusses factors which control this efficiency. Gives criteria for evaluation. Discusses recall and precision ratios, as also noise ratio, novelty ratio, and exhaustivity and specificity and the impact of each on the efficiency of indexing system. Mention also various steps for evaluation.
-
Saarti, J.: Consistency of subject indexing of novels by public library professionals and patrons (2002)
0.02
0.023896746 = product of:
0.03584512 = sum of:
0.01415497 = weight(_text_:information in 4473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01415497 = score(doc=4473,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 4473, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4473)
0.02169015 = product of:
0.0433803 = sum of:
0.0433803 = weight(_text_:systems in 4473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0433803 = score(doc=4473,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.2716328 = fieldWeight in 4473, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4473)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- The paper discusses the consistency of fiction indexing of library professionals and patrons based on an empirical test. Indexing was carried out with a Finnish fictional thesaurus and all of the test persons indexed the same five novels. The consistency of indexing was determined to be low; several reasons are postulated. Also an algorithm for typified indexing of fiction is given as well as some suggestions for the development of fiction information retrieval systems and content representation.
-
David, C.; Giroux, L.; Bertrand-Gastaldy, S.; Lanteigne, D.: Indexing as problem solving : a cognitive approach to consistency (1995)
0.02
0.02310364 = product of:
0.03465546 = sum of:
0.018387845 = weight(_text_:information in 3609) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018387845 = score(doc=3609,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 3609, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3609)
0.016267613 = product of:
0.032535225 = sum of:
0.032535225 = weight(_text_:systems in 3609) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032535225 = score(doc=3609,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 3609, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3609)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Imprint
- Alberta : Alberta University, School of Library and Information Studies
- Source
- Connectedness: information, systems, people, organizations. Proceedings of CAIS/ACSI 95, the proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference of the Canadian Association for Information Science. Ed. by Hope A. Olson and Denis B. Ward
-
Taniguchi, S.: Recording evidence in bibliographic records and descriptive metadata (2005)
0.02
0.021158962 = product of:
0.03173844 = sum of:
0.010616227 = weight(_text_:information in 3565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010616227 = score(doc=3565,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3565, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3565)
0.021122215 = product of:
0.04224443 = sum of:
0.04224443 = weight(_text_:22 in 3565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04224443 = score(doc=3565,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1819777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3565, 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=3565)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Date
- 18. 6.2005 13:16:22
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.8, S.872-882
-
Leininger, K.: Interindexer consistency in PsychINFO (2000)
0.02
0.021158962 = product of:
0.03173844 = sum of:
0.010616227 = weight(_text_:information in 2552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010616227 = score(doc=2552,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2552, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2552)
0.021122215 = product of:
0.04224443 = sum of:
0.04224443 = weight(_text_:22 in 2552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04224443 = score(doc=2552,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1819777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2552, 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=2552)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Date
- 9. 2.1997 18:44:22
- Source
- Journal of librarianship and information science. 32(2000) no.1, S.4-8
-
Lu, K.; Mao, J.: ¬An automatic approach to weighted subject indexing : an empirical study in the biomedical domain (2015)
0.02
0.02112194 = product of:
0.03168291 = sum of:
0.012511344 = weight(_text_:information in 4005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012511344 = score(doc=4005,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 4005, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4005)
0.019171566 = product of:
0.03834313 = sum of:
0.03834313 = weight(_text_:systems in 4005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03834313 = score(doc=4005,freq=4.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.24009174 = fieldWeight in 4005, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4005)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Subject indexing is an intellectually intensive process that has many inherent uncertainties. Existing manual subject indexing systems generally produce binary outcomes for whether or not to assign an indexing term. This does not sufficiently reflect the extent to which the indexing terms are associated with the documents. On the other hand, the idea of probabilistic or weighted indexing was proposed a long time ago and has seen success in capturing uncertainties in the automatic indexing process. One hurdle to overcome in implementing weighted indexing in manual subject indexing systems is the practical burden that could be added to the already intensive indexing process. This study proposes a method to infer automatically the associations between subject terms and documents through text mining. By uncovering the connections between MeSH descriptors and document text, we are able to derive the weights of MeSH descriptors manually assigned to documents. Our initial results suggest that the inference method is feasible and promising. The study has practical implications for improving subject indexing practice and providing better support for information retrieval.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.9, S.1776-1784
-
Harter, S.P.; Cheng, Y.-R.: Colinked descriptors : improving vocabulary selection for end-user searching (1996)
0.02
0.02085415 = product of:
0.031281225 = sum of:
0.015013612 = weight(_text_:information in 4216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015013612 = score(doc=4216,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 4216, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4216)
0.016267613 = product of:
0.032535225 = sum of:
0.032535225 = weight(_text_:systems in 4216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032535225 = score(doc=4216,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 4216, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4216)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- This article introduces a new concept and technique for information retrieval called 'colinked descriptors'. Borrowed from an analogous idea in bibliometrics - cocited references - colinked descriptors provide a theory and method for identifying search terms that, by hypothesis, will be superior to those entered initially by a searcher. The theory suggests a means of moving automatically from 2 or more initial search terms, to other terms that should be superior in retrieval performance to the 2 original terms. A research project designed to test this colinked descriptor hypothesis is reported. The results suggest that the approach is effective, although methodological problems in testing the idea are reported. Algorithms to generate colinked descriptors can be incorporated easily into system interfaces, front-end or pre-search systems, or help software, in any database that employs a thesaurus. The potential use of colinked descriptors is a strong argument for building richer and more complex thesauri that reflect as many legitimate links among descriptors as possible
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 47(1996) no.4, S.311-325
-
Lu, K.; Mao, J.; Li, G.: Toward effective automated weighted subject indexing : a comparison of different approaches in different environments (2018)
0.02
0.020833371 = product of:
0.031250056 = sum of:
0.017693711 = weight(_text_:information in 4292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017693711 = score(doc=4292,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 4292, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4292)
0.013556344 = product of:
0.027112689 = sum of:
0.027112689 = weight(_text_:systems in 4292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027112689 = score(doc=4292,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 4292, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4292)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Subject indexing plays an important role in supporting subject access to information resources. Current subject indexing systems do not make adequate distinctions on the importance of assigned subject descriptors. Assigning numeric weights to subject descriptors to distinguish their importance to the documents can strengthen the role of subject metadata. Automated methods are more cost-effective. This study compares different automated weighting methods in different environments. Two evaluation methods were used to assess the performance. Experiments on three datasets in the biomedical domain suggest the performance of different weighting methods depends on whether it is an abstract or full text environment. Mutual information with bag-of-words representation shows the best average performance in the full text environment, while cosine with bag-of-words representation is the best in an abstract environment. The cosine measure has relatively consistent and robust performance. A direct weighting method, IDF (Inverse Document Frequency), can produce quick and reasonable estimates of the weights. Bag-of-words representation generally outperforms the concept-based representation. Further improvement in performance can be obtained by using the learning-to-rank method to integrate different weighting methods. This study follows up Lu and Mao (Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66, 1776-1784, 2015), in which an automated weighted subject indexing method was proposed and validated. The findings from this study contribute to more effective weighted subject indexing.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 69(2018) no.1, S.121-133
