Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Folksonomies"
  • × type_ss:"el"
  1. Tennis, J.T.: Social tagging and the next steps for indexing (2006) 0.02
    0.02441524 = product of:
      0.09766096 = sum of:
        0.09766096 = weight(_text_:social in 570) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09766096 = score(doc=570,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.52868325 = fieldWeight in 570, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=570)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
  2. Lüth, J.: Inhaltserschließung durch Nutzerinnen und Nutzer : Ergebnisse eines Tests mit Internetquellen der virtuellen Fachbibliothek EconBiz (2007) 0.01
    0.0142422225 = product of:
      0.05696889 = sum of:
        0.05696889 = weight(_text_:social in 411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05696889 = score(doc=411,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.30839854 = fieldWeight in 411, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=411)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    - ViFas können Social Bookmarking nutzen, um neue Quellen zu erschließen (Personalknappheit). - Der Erfolg ist allerdings davon abhängig, dass eine kritische Masse an Nutzerinnen und Nutzern erreicht wird. Bei den zu erwartenden fachlich spezialisierten Nutzerinnen und Nutzern einer ViFa kann diese sicherlich vergleichsweise niedriger sein. - Delicious erfährt derzeit bereits eine intensive Nutzung, so dass hier deutliche Überschneidungen mit den EconBiz Internetquellen erkennbar sind. Bei Mister Wong ist dies noch zu gering ausgeprägt. - Großes Potential ist vorhanden wenn viele Nutzerinnen und Nutzer viele Inhalte einbringen.
  3. Lee, Y.Y.; Yang, S.Q.: Folksonomies as subject access : a survey of tagging in library online catalogs and discovery layers (2012) 0.01
    0.01220762 = product of:
      0.04883048 = sum of:
        0.04883048 = weight(_text_:social in 309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04883048 = score(doc=309,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.26434162 = fieldWeight in 309, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=309)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Theme
    Social tagging
  4. Shirky, C.: Ontology is overrated : categories, links, and tags (2005) 0.01
    0.010173016 = product of:
      0.040692065 = sum of:
        0.040692065 = weight(_text_:social in 1265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040692065 = score(doc=1265,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.22028469 = fieldWeight in 1265, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1265)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Theme
    Social tagging
  5. Broughton, V.: Automatic metadata generation : Digital resource description without human intervention (2007) 0.01
    0.009414612 = product of:
      0.03765845 = sum of:
        0.03765845 = product of:
          0.0753169 = sum of:
            0.0753169 = weight(_text_:22 in 6048) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0753169 = score(doc=6048,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046325076 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6048, 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=6048)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    22. 9.2007 15:41:14
  6. Wesch, M.: Information R/evolution (2006) 0.01
    0.005491857 = product of:
      0.021967428 = sum of:
        0.021967428 = product of:
          0.043934856 = sum of:
            0.043934856 = weight(_text_:22 in 1267) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043934856 = score(doc=1267,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046325076 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1267, 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=1267)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    5. 1.2008 19:22:48