Search (29 results, page 1 of 2)

0.016061917 = product of:
  0.05621671 = sum of:
    0.017519152 = weight(_text_:based in 664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017519152 = score(doc=664,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.1488738 = fieldWeight in 664, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=664)
    0.03869756 = weight(_text_:great in 664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03869756 = score(doc=664,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.21992016 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.17596185 = fieldWeight in 664, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=664)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Footnote

Rez. in: Knowledge organization 34(2007) no.1, S.58-60 (P. Buizza): "This Nuovo soggettario is the first sign of subject indexing renewal in Italy. Italian subject indexing has been based until now on Soggettario per i cataloghi delle biblioteche italiane (Firenze, 1956), a list of preferred terms and see references, with suitable hierarchical subdivisions and cross references, derived from the subject catalogue of the National Library in Florence (BNCF). New headings later used in Bibliografia nazionale italiana (BNI) were added without references, nor indeed with any real maintenance. Systematic instructions on how to combine the terms are lacking: the indexer using this instrument is obliged to infer the order of terms absent from the lists by consulting analogous entries. Italian libraries are suffering from the limits of this subject catalogue: vocabulary is inadequate, obsolete and inconsistent, the syndetic structure incomplete and inaccurate, and the syntax ill-defined, poorly explained and unable to reflect complex subjects. In the nineties, the Subject Indexing Research Group (Gruppo di ricerca sull'indicizzazione per soggetto, GRIS) of the AIB (Italian Library Association) developed the indexing theory and some principles of PRECIS and drew up guidelines based on consistent principles for vocabulary, semantic relationships and subject string construction, the latter according to role syntax (Guida 1997). In overhauling the Soggettario, the National Library in Florence aimed at a comprehensive indexing system. (A report on the method and evolution of the work has been published in Knowledge Organization (Lucarelli 2005), while the feasibility study is available in Italian (Per un nuovo Soggettario 2002). Any usable terms from the old Soggettario will be transferred to the new system, while taking into consideration international norms and interlinguistic compatibility, as well as applications outside the immediate library context. The terms will be accessible via a suitable OPAC operating on the most advanced software.
An entry is structured so as to present all the essential elements of the indexing system. For each term are given: category, facet, related terms, Dewey interdisciplinary class number and, if necessary; definition or scope notes. Sources used are referenced (an appendix in the book lists those used in the current work). Historical notes indicate whenever a change of term has occurred, thus smoothing the transition from the old lists. In chapter 5, the longest one, detailed instructions with practical examples show how to create entries and how to relate terms; upper relationships must always be complete, right up to the top term, whereas hierarchies of related terms not yet fully developed may remain unfinished. Subject string construction consists in a double operation: analysis and synthesis. The former is the analysis of logical functions performed by single concepts in the definition of the subject (e.g., transitive actions, object, agent, etc.) or in syntactic relationships (transitive relationships and belonging relationship), so that each term for those concepts is assigned its role (e.g., key concept, transitive element, agent, instrument, etc.) in the subject string, where the core is distinct from the complementary roles (e.g., place, time, form, etc.). Synthesis is based on a scheme of nuclear and complementary roles, and citation order follows agreed-upon principles of one-to-one relationships and logical dependence. There is no standard citation order based on facets, in a categorial logic, but a flexible one, although thorough. For example, it is possible for a time term (subdivision) to precede an action term, when the former is related to the latter as the object of action: "Arazzi - Sec. 16.-17. - Restauro" [Tapestry - 16th-17th century - Restoration] (p. 126). So, even with more complex subjects, it is possible to produce perfectly readable strings covering the whole of the subject matter without splitting it into two incomplete and complementary headings. To this end, some unusual connectives are adopted, giving the strings a more discursive style.
Thesaurus software is based on AgroVoc (http:// www.fao.org/aims/ag_intro.htm) provided by the FAO, but in modified form. Many searching options and contextualization within the full hierarchies are possible, so that the choice of morphology and syntax of terms and strings is made easier by the complete overview of semantic relationships. New controlled terms will be available soon, thanks to the work in progress - there are now 13,000 terms, of which 40 percent are non-preferred. In three months, free Internet access by CD-ROM will cease and a subscription will be needed. The digital version of old Soggettario and the corresponding unstructured lists of headings adopted in 1956-1985 are accessible together with the thesaurus, so that the whole vocabulary, old and new, will be at the fingertips of the indexer, who is forced to work with both tools during this transition period. In the future, it will be possible to integrate the thesaurus into library OPACs. The two parts form a very consistent and detailed resource. The guide is filled with examples; the accurate, clearly-expressed and consistent instructions are further enhanced by good use of fonts and type size, facilitating reading. The thesaurus is simple and quick to use, very rich, albeit only a prototype; see, for instance, a list of DDC numbers and related terms with their category and facet, and then entries, hierarchies and so on, and the capacity of the structure to show organized knowledge. The excellent outcome of a demanding experimentation, the intended guide welcomes in a new era of subject indexing in Italy and is highly recommended. The new method has been designed to be easily teachable to new and experimented indexers.
Now BNI is beginning to use the new language, pointing the way for the adoption of Nuovo soggettario in Italian libraries: a difficult challenge whose success is not assured. To name only one issue: including all fields of study requires particular care in treating terms with different specialized meanings; cooperation of other libraries and institutions is foreseen. At the same time, efforts are being made to assure the system's interoperability outside the library world. It is clear that a great commitment is required. "Too complex a system!" say the naysayers. "Only at the beginning," the proponents reply. The new system goes against the mainstream, compared with the imitation of the easy way offered by search engines - but we know that they must enrich their devices to improve quality, just repeating the work on semantic and syntactic relationships that leads formal expressions to the meanings they are intended to communicate - and also compared with research to create automated devices supporting human work, for the need to simplify cataloguing. Here AI is not involved, but automation is widely used to facilitate and to support the conscious work of indexers guided by rules as clear as possible. The advantage of Nuovo soggettario is its combination of a thesaurus (a much-appreciated tool used across the world) with the equally widespread technique of subject-string construction, which is to say: the rational and predictable combination of the terms used. The appearance of this original, unparalleled working model may well be a great occasion in the international development of indexing, as, on one hand, the Nuovo soggettario uses a recognized tool (the thesaurus) and, on the other, by permitting both pre-coordination and post-coordination, it attempts to overcome the fragmentation of increasingly complex and specialized subjects into isolated, single-term descriptors. This is a serious proposition that merits consideration from both theoretical and practical points of view - and outside Italy, too."

0.015636176 = product of:
  0.10945322 = sum of:
    0.10945322 = weight(_text_:great in 749) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10945322 = score(doc=749,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21992016 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.49769527 = fieldWeight in 749, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=749)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Claims that there is no clear plan, comprehensive philosophy, or macro approach to the revision of Library of Congress Subject Headings. Having missed a great opportunity in the mid-1980s to develop a subject analog of AACR2, LC is now in a period of decline. Discusses alternatives to LC subject access such as PRECIS and keyword searching. Urges LC to halt and reverse the decline by bold, decisive action in the 1990s

0.00977261 = product of:
  0.068408266 = sum of:
    0.068408266 = weight(_text_:great in 3341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.068408266 = score(doc=3341,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21992016 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.31105953 = fieldWeight in 3341, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3341)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Footnote

Rez. in: KO 36(2009) nos.2/3, S.180-181 (N.K. Swain): " ... The User's Guide will undoubtedly be of great help to practitioners and tutors, as each chapter includes a summary and exercises. The purpose suggested by the title is fulfilled, serving as a companion to the 19th edition of the Sears List. It is designed a a manual for beginners who will realize the importance of vocabulary control and subject analysis, and start to comprehend the structure and organization of the Sears List as well as the methods and techniques to locate, specify, and construct subject headings. The book, however, lacks a good number of examples for practice. The emphasis seems to have been put more on the theoretical than the practical aspects. Despite this criticism, I unreservedly value the authors' efforts. At the same time, I can't help but wonder if the book will have wide access as the place of publication, the cost and the availability will especially affect the users in developing countries. The User's Guide will be a valuable tool to technical services librarians, subject catalogers, students and teachers of library and information science. It is intended for college and university libraries in general, but more particularly for library schools. The authors produced a work of high quality that stands out in its category.

0.006840827 = product of:
  0.047885787 = sum of:
    0.047885787 = weight(_text_:great in 5042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047885787 = score(doc=5042,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21992016 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.21774168 = fieldWeight in 5042, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5042)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Testing on the syntactic component of the language is in progress, carried out by a team working on the basis of some terms of the Thesaurus which have been identified for possessing some special features. This will maybe lead to some changes and simplifications in the original structures coming from the GRIS model <http://wwwaib.it/aib/commiss/gris/ guida.htm> and the Feasibility Study. Within June 2006, two basic documents will be published: - a paper volume containing the Rules, concerning both terminology and syntax, explanations of the Thesaurus, criteria, choices made about the categories and the width of the semantic network, etc.; - a CD containing the Thesaurus. One side of great interest will be the c-learning process of the indexing language of the new Soggettario. This has to be undertaken only after the prototype stage is done. At that time, once the text of the Rules will have been published, it will be possible for the system to spread, to be learned, and to be tested by various indexers and partners.

0.005596288 = product of:
  0.039174013 = sum of:
    0.039174013 = weight(_text_:based in 2809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039174013 = score(doc=2809,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.33289194 = fieldWeight in 2809, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2809)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

0.005596288 = product of:
  0.039174013 = sum of:
    0.039174013 = weight(_text_:based in 1653) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039174013 = score(doc=1653,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.33289194 = fieldWeight in 1653, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1653)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

0.005540042 = product of:
  0.038780294 = sum of:
    0.038780294 = weight(_text_:based in 1636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038780294 = score(doc=1636,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.3295462 = fieldWeight in 1636, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1636)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

The Deep Structure Indexing System is based on: (1) a set of postulated elementary categories of the elements fit to form componentes of names of subjects; (2) a set of syntax rules with reference to the categories; (3) a vocabulary control tool such as Classaurus; (4) a set of indicator digits to denote the categories and their subdivisions; and (5) a set of codes to denote a few of the decisions of the indexer. Names of subjects formulated on the basis mentioned above are input to a set of computer programs to generate several different types of subject index entires. This paper describes briefly the Deep Structure Index System

0.004535705 = product of:
  0.031749934 = sum of:
    0.031749934 = product of:
      0.06349987 = sum of:
        0.06349987 = weight(_text_:22 in 3985) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06349987 = score(doc=3985,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13677022 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03905679 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3985, 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=3985)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Date

25.11.2005 18:37:22

0.003957173 = product of:
  0.02770021 = sum of:
    0.02770021 = weight(_text_:based in 2187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02770021 = score(doc=2187,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.23539014 = fieldWeight in 2187, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2187)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

A subject indexing language (SIL) is an artificial language used for formulating names of subjects and is composed of (a) a vocabulary, (b) a list of elementary categories, and (c) the rules of syntax. A string indexing language is an SIL, whose expressions are multiple overlappimg index entries, constructed accordingly to explicit syntax rules. PRECIS, developed by Austin, and POPSI, developed by Bhattacharyya, are two such string indexing languages. DSIS is a more versatile version of the POPSI system, developed by Devadason. There have been several attempts to compare and evaluate the superiority of one system over another, with the exception that none of these tried to compare their performances from the searcher's point of view. This present study tries to compare the efficiency and effectiveness of printed subject indexes produced by PRECIS and DSIS on a non-empirical basis and based on the following five major characteristics of index entries identified by Craven as desirable from the searcher's viewpoint: (1) predicitibility, (2) collocation, (3) clarity, (4) succinctness, and (5) eliminability. A representative sample of 600 documents (both macro and micro), chosen from three different social science subject fields, has been used as the test data. The main points of discussion are (a) the term structure, (b) the term relationships, and (c) the entry structure, generated by the two systems. On the whole, a PRECIS index performs better than a DSIS index in terms of most of the above characteristics. It has been concluded that the user will search the former more efficiently and effectively than the latter

0.0039174017 = product of:
  0.02742181 = sum of:
    0.02742181 = weight(_text_:based in 1368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02742181 = score(doc=1368,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.23302436 = fieldWeight in 1368, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1368)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Footnote

Based on 'Learn subject access', 2nd ed. DocMatrix Ltd 1998, to which has been added new and updated material

0.0033577727 = product of:
  0.023504408 = sum of:
    0.023504408 = weight(_text_:based in 1639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023504408 = score(doc=1639,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.19973516 = fieldWeight in 1639, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1639)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

SIPORbase, the System for Indexing in Portuguese, was developed by the National Library of Portugal, based on the LCSH. In contrast to the Brunet-Parguez system used in France, SIPORbase is a coextensive indexing language. Its initial application in 1989 to current bibliography has been extended to the collection of codices. Experience with manuscripts only indicates a high degree of relevance in retrieval, from the several hundred subject headings created so far

0.0033577727 = product of:
  0.023504408 = sum of:
    0.023504408 = weight(_text_:based in 2323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023504408 = score(doc=2323,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.19973516 = fieldWeight in 2323, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2323)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Partial coordination is a new method for cataloging documents for subject access. It is especially designed to enhance the precision of document searches in online environments. This article reports a preliminary evaluation of partial coordination that shows promising results compared with full-text retrieval. We also report the difficulties in empirically evaluating the effectiveness of automatic full-text retrieval in contrast to mixed methods such as partial coordination which combine human cataloging with computerized retrieval. Based on our study, we propose research in this area will substantially benefit from a common framework for failure analysis and a common data set. This will allow information retrieval researchers adapting 'library style'cataloging to large electronic document collections, as well as those developing automated or mixed methods, to directly compare their proposals for indexing and retrieval. This article concludes by suggesting guidelines for constructing such as testbed

0.0033577727 = product of:
  0.023504408 = sum of:
    0.023504408 = weight(_text_:based in 2182) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023504408 = score(doc=2182,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.19973516 = fieldWeight in 2182, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2182)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

This article will look into subject indexing in Sweden today and give some ideas of the future. Our Swedish subject heading system is pre-coordinated and based on Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH). We think subject access is important but it is not always easy to apply correctly and we present some ideas on how to make it easier. We will first give a summary of the creation of the Swedish subject heading system and how it works today. We will also describe a new project, the TGM project, that was completed at the end of 2007. Another work that will be described is the indexing of fiction and children's literature.

0.0033577727 = product of:
  0.023504408 = sum of:
    0.023504408 = weight(_text_:based in 3431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023504408 = score(doc=3431,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.19973516 = fieldWeight in 3431, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3431)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

With the current information environment characterized by the proliferation of digital resources, including collaboratively created and shared resources, Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) is facing the challenges of effective and efficient subject-based organization and retrieval of digital resources. To explore the feasibility of utilizing LCSH in a digital environment, we might need to revisit its basic characteristics. The objectives of our study were to analyze LCSH in both syntactic and relational structures, to discover the structural characteristics of LCSH, and to identify problems and issues for the feasibility of LCSH as an effective subject access tool. This study reports and discusses issues raised by the syntactic and hierarchical structures of LCSH that present challenges to its use in a networked environment. Given the results of this study, we recommend a number of provisional future directions for the development of LCSH towards further becoming a viable system for digital and networked resources.

0.002798144 = product of:
  0.019587006 = sum of:
    0.019587006 = weight(_text_:based in 5922) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019587006 = score(doc=5922,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.16644597 = fieldWeight in 5922, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5922)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Authority control of Spanish-language subject headings is described, with a special focus on Mexico. Efforts currently underway in Colombia, Chile, Spain and Mexico, although they share the same language, are somewhat lacking in standardization and cooperation among countries. In the absence of a national authority for bibliographic control in Mexico, a group of university libraries has initiated a cooperative project to build in the near future a national file of Spanish subject headings for the Social Sciences. The project, based upon the experience and rich collections of El Colegio de Mexico, has attracted support from the U.S. Library of Congress and is being partially financed by the U.S.-Mexican Fund for Culture (sponsored by the Rockefeller and Bancomer Foundations). The paper mentions some of the difficulties found in translating LCSH, which is the main resource for the project. These difficulties can include semantics, syndetic structure, or pragmatic problems; most have been solved by supplementing the LCSH with Spanish-language subject heading lists or thesauri

0.002645828 = product of:
  0.018520795 = sum of:
    0.018520795 = product of:
      0.03704159 = sum of:
        0.03704159 = weight(_text_:22 in 3789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03704159 = score(doc=3789,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13677022 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03905679 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3789, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3789)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Footnote

Rez. in: Knowledge organization 22(1995) no.1, S.45-46 (M.P. Satija)

0.002645828 = product of:
  0.018520795 = sum of:
    0.018520795 = product of:
      0.03704159 = sum of:
        0.03704159 = weight(_text_:22 in 363) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03704159 = score(doc=363,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13677022 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03905679 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 363, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=363)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Date

7. 1.2007 13:22:01

0.002645828 = product of:
  0.018520795 = sum of:
    0.018520795 = product of:
      0.03704159 = sum of:
        0.03704159 = weight(_text_:22 in 3600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03704159 = score(doc=3600,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13677022 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03905679 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3600, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3600)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.0022678524 = product of:
  0.015874967 = sum of:
    0.015874967 = product of:
      0.031749934 = sum of:
        0.031749934 = weight(_text_:22 in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031749934 = score(doc=4411,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13677022 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03905679 = 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)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Source

Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.1, S.27-37

0.0022678524 = product of:
  0.015874967 = sum of:
    0.015874967 = product of:
      0.031749934 = sum of:
        0.031749934 = weight(_text_:22 in 3788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031749934 = score(doc=3788,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13677022 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03905679 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3788, 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=3788)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Content

Vorgänger: 'List of Subject Headings for small libraries, compiled from lists used in nine representative small libraries', Ed.: M.E. Sears. - 1st ed. 1923. - 2nd ed. 1926. - 3rd ed. 1933. - 4th ed. 1939, Ed.: I.S. Monro. - 5th ed. 1944: 'Sears List of Subject Headings', Ed. I. S. Monro. - 6th ed. 1950, Ed.: B.M. Frick. - 7th ed. 1954 - 8th ed. 1959. - 'List of Subject Headings'. - 9th. ed. 1965, Ed.: B.M. Westby. - 10th ed. 1972. - 11th ed. 1977. - 12th ed. 1982. - 13th ed. 1986, Ed.: C. Rovira u. C. Reyes. - 14th ed. 1991. Ed. M.T. Mooney. - 15th ed. 1994, Ed.: J. Miller // Rez. 15th ed.: Knowledge organization 22(1995) no.1, S.45-46 (M.P. Satija)