Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  • × author_ss:"Stock, W.G."
  1. Stock, W.G.: Informational cities : analysis and construction of cities in the knowledge society (2011) 0.02
    0.020915726 = product of:
      0.083662905 = sum of:
        0.083662905 = sum of:
          0.052280862 = weight(_text_:aspects in 4452) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.052280862 = score(doc=4452,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
                4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046325076 = queryNorm
              0.2496898 = fieldWeight in 4452, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4452)
          0.031382043 = weight(_text_:22 in 4452) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.031382043 = score(doc=4452,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046325076 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4452, 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=4452)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Informational cities are prototypical cities of the knowledge society. If they are informational world cities, they are new centers of power. According to Manuel Castells (1989), in those cities space of flows (flows of money, power, and information) tend to override space of places. Information and communication technology infrastructures, cognitive infrastructures (as groundwork of knowledge cities and creative cities), and city-level knowledge management are of great importance. Digital libraries provide access to the global explicit knowledge. The informational city consists of creative clusters and spaces for personal contacts to stimulate sharing of implicit information. In such cities, we can observe job polarization in favor of well-trained employees. The corporate structure of informational cities is made up of financial services, knowledge-intensive high-tech industrial enterprises, companies of the information economy, and further creative and knowledge-intensive service enterprises. Weak location factors are facilities for culture, recreational activities, and consumption. Political willingness to create an informational city and e-governance activities are crucial aspects for the development of such cities. This conceptual article frames indicators which are able to mark the degree of "informativeness" of a city. Finally, based upon findings of network economy, we try to explain why certain cities master the transition to informational cities and others (lagging to relative insignificance) do not. The article connects findings of information science and of urbanistics and urban planning.
    Date
    3. 7.2011 19:22:49
  2. Fietkiewicz, K.J.; Stock, W.G.: Jedem seine eigene "Truman Show" : YouNow, Periscope, Ustream und ihre Nutzer - "Social Live"-Streaming Services (2017) 0.02
    0.020141546 = product of:
      0.08056618 = sum of:
        0.08056618 = weight(_text_:social in 3770) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08056618 = score(doc=3770,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.43614143 = fieldWeight in 3770, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3770)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Die seinerzeit 19-jährige Studentin Katrin Scheibe war 2015 Teilnehmerin an einem Seminar der Uni Düsseldorf über "Social Live"-Streaming Services und hat mit anderen Studenten zusammen eine Live-Übertragung einer Sitzung über YouNow durchgeführt. Innerhalb des rund einstündigen Programms schnellte die Zuschauerzahl auf weit über 200 hoch. Die meist jugendlichen Zuseher empfanden es als höchst interessant, eine Uni-Lehrveranstaltung hautnah miterleben zu dürfen. Ebenso waren die Studenten von dem aktuellen und zeitnahen Thema begeistert und publizierten ihre Forschungsresultate unter einem Pseudonym (Mathilde B. Friedländer) in internationalen Fachzeitschriften.
  3. Gremm, J.; Barth, J.; Fietkiewicz, K.J.; Stock, W.G.: Transitioning towards knowledge society : Qatar as a case study (2018) 0.02
    0.020141546 = product of:
      0.08056618 = sum of:
        0.08056618 = weight(_text_:social in 4251) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08056618 = score(doc=4251,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.43614143 = fieldWeight in 4251, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4251)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    LCSH
    Social sciences
    Subject
    Social sciences
  4. Stock, W.G.: Concepts and semantic relations in information science (2010) 0.01
    0.010173016 = product of:
      0.040692065 = sum of:
        0.040692065 = weight(_text_:social in 4008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040692065 = score(doc=4008,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.22028469 = fieldWeight in 4008, 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=4008)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Concept-based information retrieval and knowledge representation are in need of a theory of concepts and semantic relations. Guidelines for the construction and maintenance of knowledge organization systems (KOS) (such as ANSI/NISO Z39.19-2005 in the U.S.A. or DIN 2331:1980 in Germany) do not consider results of concept theory and theory of relations to the full extent. They are not able to unify the currently different worlds of traditional controlled vocabularies, of the social web (tagging and folksonomies) and of the semantic web (ontologies). Concept definitions as well as semantic relations are based on epistemological theories (empiricism, rationalism, hermeneutics, pragmatism, and critical theory). A concept is determined via its intension and extension as well as by definition. We will meet the problem of vagueness by introducing prototypes. Some important definitions are concept explanations (after Aristotle) and the definition of family resemblances (in the sense of Wittgenstein). We will model concepts as frames (according to Barsalou). The most important paradigmatic relation in KOS is hierarchy, which must be arranged into different classes: Hyponymy consists of taxonomy and simple hyponymy, meronymy consists of many different part-whole-relations. For practical application purposes, the transitivity of the given relation is very important. Unspecific associative relations are of little help to our focused applications and should be replaced by generalizable and domain-specific relations. We will discuss the reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity of paradigmatic relations as well as the appearance of specific semantic relations in the different kinds of KOS (folksonomies, nomenclatures, classification systems, thesauri, and ontologies). Finally, we will pick out KOS as a central theme of the Semantic Web.
  5. Knautz, K.; Stock, W.G.: Collective indexing of emotions in videos (2011) 0.01
    0.010173016 = product of:
      0.040692065 = sum of:
        0.040692065 = weight(_text_:social in 295) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040692065 = score(doc=295,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.22028469 = fieldWeight in 295, 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=295)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Theme
    Social tagging
  6. Stock, W.G.; Stock, M.: Handbook of information science : a comprehensive handbook (2013) 0.01
    0.010173016 = product of:
      0.040692065 = sum of:
        0.040692065 = weight(_text_:social in 2784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040692065 = score(doc=2784,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.22028469 = fieldWeight in 2784, 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=2784)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Dealing with information is one of the vital skills in the 21st century. It takes a fair degree of information savvy to create, represent and supply information as well as to search for and retrieve relevant knowledge. How does information (documents, pieces of knowledge) have to be organized in order to be retrievable? What role does metadata play? What are search engines on the Web, or in corporate intranets, and how do they work? How must one deal with natural language processing and tools of knowledge organization, such as thesauri, classification systems, and ontologies? How useful is social tagging? How valuable are intellectually created abstracts and automatically prepared extracts? Which empirical methods allow for user research and which for the evaluation of information systems? This Handbook is a basic work of information science, providing a comprehensive overview of the current state of information retrieval and knowledge representation. It addresses readers from all professions and scientific disciplines, but particularly scholars, practitioners and students of Information Science, Library Science, Computer Science, Information Management, and Knowledge Management. This Handbook is a suitable reference work for Public and Academic Libraries.
  7. Linde, F.; Stock, W.G.: Informationsmarkt : Informationen im I-Commerce anbieten und nachfragen (2011) 0.01
    0.006276408 = product of:
      0.025105633 = sum of:
        0.025105633 = product of:
          0.050211266 = sum of:
            0.050211266 = weight(_text_:22 in 291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.050211266 = score(doc=291,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046325076 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 291, 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=291)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    23. 9.2010 11:15:22
  8. Schumann, L.; Stock, W.G.: ¬Ein umfassendes ganzheitliches Modell für Evaluation und Akzeptanzanalysen von Informationsdiensten : Das Information Service Evaluation (ISE) Modell (2014) 0.01
    0.005491857 = product of:
      0.021967428 = sum of:
        0.021967428 = product of:
          0.043934856 = sum of:
            0.043934856 = weight(_text_:22 in 1492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043934856 = score(doc=1492,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046325076 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1492, 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=1492)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    22. 9.2014 18:56:46