Search (25 results, page 1 of 2)

0.07557623 = product of:
  0.12596038 = sum of:
    0.054384537 = weight(_text_:policy in 2659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.054384537 = score(doc=2659,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22950763 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.23696178 = fieldWeight in 2659, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2659)
    0.05997715 = weight(_text_:great in 2659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05997715 = score(doc=2659,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24101958 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.24884763 = fieldWeight in 2659, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2659)
    0.011598689 = product of:
      0.023197377 = sum of:
        0.023197377 = weight(_text_:22 in 2659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023197377 = score(doc=2659,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2659, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2659)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)

Abstract

The Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) has been developed over the course of more than a century, predating the semantic web by some time. Until the 1986, the only concept-toconcept relationship available was an undifferentiated "See Also" reference, which was used for both associative (RT) and hierarchical (BT/NT) connections. In that year, in preparation for the first release of the headings in machine readable MARC Authorities form, an attempt was made to automatically convert these "See Also" links into the standardized thesaural relations. Unfortunately, the rule used to determine the type of reference to generate relied on the presence of symmetric links to detect associatively related terms; "See Also" references that were only present in one of the related terms were assumed to be hierarchical. This left the process vulnerable to inconsistent use of references in the pre-conversion data, with a marked bias towards promoting relationships to hierarchical status. The Library of Congress was aware that the results of the conversion contained many inconsistencies, and intended to validate and correct the results over the course of time. Unfortunately, twenty years later, less than 40% of the converted records have been evaluated. The converted records, being the earliest encountered during the Library's cataloging activities, represent the most basic concepts within LCSH; errors in the syndetic structure for these records affect far more subordinate concepts than those nearer the periphery. Worse, a policy of patterning new headings after pre-existing ones leads to structural errors arising from the conversion process being replicated in these newer headings, perpetuating and exacerbating the errors. As the LCSH prepares for its second great conversion, from MARC to SKOS, it is critical to address these structural problems. As part of the work on converting the headings into SKOS, I have experimented with different visualizations of the tangled web of broader terms embedded in LCSH. This poster illustrates several of these renderings, shows how they can help users to judge which relationships might not be correct, and shows just exactly how Doorbells and Mammals are related.

Source

Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas

0.04316639 = product of:
  0.21583195 = sum of:
    0.21583195 = weight(_text_:policy in 4969) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21583195 = score(doc=4969,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.22950763 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.940413 = fieldWeight in 4969, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4969)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This study proposes an approach for visualizing knowledge structures that creates a "research-focused parallelship network," "keyword co-occurrence network," and a knowledge map to visualize Sci-Tech policy research structure. A total of 1,125 Sci-Tech policy-related papers (873 journal papers [78%], 205 conference papers [18%], and 47 review papers [4%]) have been retrieved from the Web of Science database for quantitative analysis and mapping. Different network and contour maps based on these 1,125 papers can be constructed by choosing different information as the main actor, such as the paper title, the institute, the country, or the author keywords, to reflect Sci-Tech policy research structures in micro-, meso-, and macro-levels, respectively. The quantitative way of exploring Sci-Tech policy research papers is investigated to unveil important or emerging Sci-Tech policy implications as well as to demonstrate the dynamics and visualization of the evolution of Sci-Tech policy research.

0.017993147 = product of:
  0.08996573 = sum of:
    0.08996573 = weight(_text_:great in 1718) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08996573 = score(doc=1718,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24101958 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.37327147 = fieldWeight in 1718, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1718)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This review describes experimental designs (users, search tasks, measures, etc.) used by 31 controlled user studies of information visualization (IV) tools for textual information retrieval (IR) and a meta-analysis of the reported statistical effects. Comparable experimental designs allow research designers to compare their results with other reports, and support the development of experimentally verified design guidelines concerning which IV techniques are better suited to which types of IR tasks. The studies generally use a within-subject design with 15 or more undergraduate students performing browsing to known-item tasks on sets of at least 1,000 full-text articles or Web pages on topics of general interest/news. Results of the meta-analysis (N = 8) showed no significant effects of the IV tool as compared with a text-only equivalent, but the set shows great variability suggesting an inadequate basis of comparison. Experimental design recommendations are provided which would support comparison of existing IV tools for IR usability testing.

0.016315361 = product of:
  0.0815768 = sum of:
    0.0815768 = weight(_text_:policy in 3987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0815768 = score(doc=3987,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22950763 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.35544267 = fieldWeight in 3987, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3987)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.014994288 = product of:
  0.07497144 = sum of:
    0.07497144 = weight(_text_:great in 4068) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07497144 = score(doc=4068,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24101958 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.31105953 = fieldWeight in 4068, 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=4068)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This paper proposes a novel methodology to visualize a classification scheme. It is demonstrated with the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) Computing Classification System (CCS). The collection derived from the ACM digital library, containing 37,543 documents classified by CCS. The assigned classes, subject descriptors, and keywords were processed in a dataset to produce a graphical representation of the documents. The general conception is based on the similarity of co-classes (themes) proportional to the number of common publications. The final number of all possible classes and subclasses in the collection was 353 and therefore the similarity matrix of co-classes had the same dimension. A spherical surface was chosen as the target information space. Classes and documents' node locations on the sphere were obtained by means of Multidimensional Scaling coordinates. By representing the surface on a plane like a map projection, it is possible to analyze the visualization layout. The graphical patterns were organized in some colour clusters. For evaluation of given visualization maps, graphics filtering was applied. This proposed method can be very useful in interdisciplinary research fields. It allows for a great amount of heterogeneous information to be conveyed in a compact display, including topics, relationships among topics, frequency of occurrence, importance and changes of these properties over time.

0.013596135 = product of:
  0.06798068 = sum of:
    0.06798068 = weight(_text_:policy in 82) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06798068 = score(doc=82,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22950763 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.29620224 = fieldWeight in 82, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=82)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Aggregated journal-journal citation networks based on the Journal Citation Reports 2004 of the Science Citation Index (5,968 journals) and the Social Science Citation Index (1,712 journals) are made accessible from the perspective of any of these journals. A vector-space model Is used for normalization, and the results are brought online at http://www.leydesdorff.net/jcr04 as input files for the visualization program Pajek. The user is thus able to analyze the citation environment in terms of links and graphs. Furthermore, the local impact of a journal is defined as its share of the total citations in the specific journal's citation environments; the vertical size of the nodes is varied proportionally to this citation impact. The horizontal size of each node can be used to provide the same information after correction for within-journal (self-)citations. In the "citing" environment, the equivalents of this measure can be considered as a citation activity index which maps how the relevant journal environment is perceived by the collective of authors of a given journal. As a policy application, the mechanism of Interdisciplinary developments among the sciences is elaborated for the case of nanotechnology journals.

0.013596135 = product of:
  0.06798068 = sum of:
    0.06798068 = weight(_text_:policy in 3758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06798068 = score(doc=3758,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22950763 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.29620224 = fieldWeight in 3758, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3758)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Whereas traditional science maps emphasize citation statistics and static relationships, this paper presents a term-based method to identify and visualize the evolutionary pathways of scientific topics in a series of time slices. First, we create a data preprocessing model for accurate term cleaning, consolidating, and clustering. Then we construct a simulated data streaming function and introduce a learning process to train a relationship identification function to adapt to changing environments in real time, where relationships of topic evolution, fusion, death, and novelty are identified. The main result of the method is a map of scientific evolutionary pathways. The visual routines provide a way to indicate the interactions among scientific subjects and a version in a series of time slices helps further illustrate such evolutionary pathways in detail. The detailed outline offers sufficient statistical information to delve into scientific topics and routines and then helps address meaningful insights with the assistance of expert knowledge. This empirical study focuses on scientific proposals granted by the United States National Science Foundation, and demonstrates the feasibility and reliability. Our method could be widely applied to a range of science, technology, and innovation policy research, and offer insight into the evolutionary pathways of scientific activities.

0.01199543 = product of:
  0.05997715 = sum of:
    0.05997715 = weight(_text_:great in 3646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05997715 = score(doc=3646,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24101958 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.24884763 = fieldWeight in 3646, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3646)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The use of diagrams to express relationships in classification is not new. Many classificationists have used this approach, but usually in a minor display to make a point or for part of a difficult relational situation. Ranganathan, for example, used diagrams for some of his more elusive concepts. The thesaurus in particular and subject headings in general, with direct and indirect crossreferences or equivalents, need many more diagrams than normally are included to make relationships and even semantics clear. A picture very often is worth a thousand words. Rolling has used directed graphs (arrowgraphs) to join terms as a practical method for rendering relationships between indexing terms lucid. He has succeeded very weIl in this endeavor. Four diagrams in this selection are all that one needs to explain how to employ the system; from initial listing to completed arrowgraph. The samples of his work include illustration of off-page connectors between arrowgraphs. The great advantage to using diagrams like this is that they present relations between individual terms in a format that is easy to comprehend. But of even greater value is the fact that one can use his arrowgraphs as schematics for making three-dimensional wire-and-ball models, in which the relationships may be seen even more clearly. In fact, errors or gaps in relations are much easier to find with this methodology. One also can get across the notion of the threedimensionality of classification systems with such models. Pettee's "hand reaching up and over" (q.v.) is not a figment of the imagination. While the actual hand is a wire or stick, the concept visualized is helpful in illuminating the three-dimensional figure that is latent in all systems that have cross-references or "broader," "narrower," or, especially, "related" terms. Classification schedules, being hemmed in by the dimensions of the printed page, also benefit from such physical illustrations. Rolling, an engineer by conviction, was the developer of information systems for the Cobalt Institute, the European Atomic Energy Community, and European Coal and Steel Community. He also developed and promoted computer-aided translation at the Commission of the European Communities in Luxembourg. One of his objectives has always been to increase the efficiency of mono- and multilingual thesauri for use in multinational information systems.

0.010876908 = product of:
  0.054384537 = sum of:
    0.054384537 = weight(_text_:policy in 595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.054384537 = score(doc=595,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22950763 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042803947 = queryNorm
        0.23696178 = fieldWeight in 595, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=595)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Science maps are visual representations of the structure and dynamics of scholarly knowl­edge. They aim to show how fields, disciplines, journals, scientists, publications, and scientific terms relate to each other. Science mapping is the body of methods and techniques that have been developed for generating science maps. This entry is an introduction to science maps and science mapping. It focuses on the conceptual, theoretical, and methodological issues of science mapping, rather than on the mathematical formulation of science mapping techniques. After a brief history of science mapping, we describe the general procedure for building a science map, presenting the data sources and the methods to select, clean, and pre-process the data. Next, we examine in detail how the most common types of science maps, namely the citation-based and the term-based, are generated. Both are based on networks: the former on the network of publications connected by citations, the latter on the network of terms co-occurring in publications. We review the rationale behind these mapping approaches, as well as the techniques and methods to build the maps (from the extraction of the network to the visualization and enrichment of the map). We also present less-common types of science maps, including co-authorship networks, interlocking editorship networks, maps based on patents' data, and geographic maps of science. Moreover, we consider how time can be represented in science maps to investigate the dynamics of science. We also discuss some epistemological and sociological topics that can help in the interpretation, contextualization, and assessment of science maps. Then, we present some possible applications of science maps in science policy. In the conclusion, we point out why science mapping may be interesting for all the branches of meta-science, from knowl­edge organization to epistemology.

0.0057993443 = product of:
  0.02899672 = sum of:
    0.02899672 = product of:
      0.05799344 = sum of:
        0.05799344 = weight(_text_:22 in 3406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05799344 = score(doc=3406,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3406, 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=3406)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

30. 5.2010 16:22:35

0.0057993443 = product of:
  0.02899672 = sum of:
    0.02899672 = product of:
      0.05799344 = sum of:
        0.05799344 = weight(_text_:22 in 2755) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05799344 = score(doc=2755,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2755, 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=2755)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

1. 2.2016 18:25:22

0.004920907 = product of:
  0.024604535 = sum of:
    0.024604535 = product of:
      0.04920907 = sum of:
        0.04920907 = weight(_text_:22 in 3355) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04920907 = score(doc=3355,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 3355, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3355)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 1.2017 16:54:03
22. 1.2017 17:10:56

0.004059541 = product of:
  0.020297704 = sum of:
    0.020297704 = product of:
      0.04059541 = sum of:
        0.04059541 = weight(_text_:22 in 2500) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04059541 = score(doc=2500,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2500, 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=2500)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

30. 1.2007 18:22:41

0.0034796062 = product of:
  0.017398031 = sum of:
    0.017398031 = product of:
      0.034796063 = sum of:
        0.034796063 = weight(_text_:22 in 1289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034796063 = score(doc=1289,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1289, 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=1289)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".

0.0034796062 = product of:
  0.017398031 = sum of:
    0.017398031 = product of:
      0.034796063 = sum of:
        0.034796063 = weight(_text_:22 in 1781) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034796063 = score(doc=1781,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1781, 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=1781)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 3.2008 14:35:21

0.0034796062 = product of:
  0.017398031 = sum of:
    0.017398031 = product of:
      0.034796063 = sum of:
        0.034796063 = weight(_text_:22 in 3693) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034796063 = score(doc=3693,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3693, 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=3693)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 7.2010 19:36:46

0.0034796062 = product of:
  0.017398031 = sum of:
    0.017398031 = product of:
      0.034796063 = sum of:
        0.034796063 = weight(_text_:22 in 1709) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034796063 = score(doc=1709,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1709, 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=1709)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

4. 2.2015 9:22:39

0.0028996721 = product of:
  0.01449836 = sum of:
    0.01449836 = product of:
      0.02899672 = sum of:
        0.02899672 = weight(_text_:22 in 1397) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02899672 = score(doc=1397,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1397, 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=1397)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 3.2008 14:29:25

0.0028996721 = product of:
  0.01449836 = sum of:
    0.01449836 = product of:
      0.02899672 = sum of:
        0.02899672 = weight(_text_:22 in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02899672 = score(doc=5272,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5272, 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=5272)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 7.2006 16:11:05

0.0028996721 = product of:
  0.01449836 = sum of:
    0.01449836 = product of:
      0.02899672 = sum of:
        0.02899672 = weight(_text_:22 in 3070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02899672 = score(doc=3070,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14989214 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042803947 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3070, 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=3070)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22