Search (123 results, page 1 of 7)

0.039046686 = product of:
  0.058570027 = sum of:
    0.008369626 = weight(_text_:in in 639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008369626 = score(doc=639,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.069613084 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051176514 = queryNorm
        0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 639, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=639)
    0.050200403 = product of:
      0.100400805 = sum of:
        0.100400805 = weight(_text_:education in 639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.100400805 = score(doc=639,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24110512 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051176514 = queryNorm
            0.4164192 = fieldWeight in 639, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=639)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Footnote

Bericht von einer Tagung "Genre 2001. Genres and Discourses in Education, Work and Cultural Life: Encounters of Academic Disciplines on Theories and Practices", May 13th to 16th, 2001, Oslo University College, Olso, Norway

0.03445773 = product of:
  0.05168659 = sum of:
    0.014036291 = weight(_text_:in in 4444) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014036291 = score(doc=4444,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.069613084 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051176514 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 4444, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4444)
    0.0376503 = product of:
      0.0753006 = sum of:
        0.0753006 = weight(_text_:education in 4444) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0753006 = score(doc=4444,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24110512 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051176514 = queryNorm
            0.3123144 = fieldWeight in 4444, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4444)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The paper establishes a taxonomy of image-text relationships that reflects the ways that images and text interact. It is applicable to all subject areas and document types. The taxonomy was developed to answer the research question: how does an illustration relate to the text with which it is associated, or, what are the functions of illustration? Developed in a two-stage process - first, analysis of relevant research in children's literature, dictionary development, education, journalism, and library and information design and, second, subsequent application of the first version of the taxonomy to 954 image-text pairs in 45 Web pages (pages with educational content for children, online newspapers, and retail business pages) - the taxonomy identifies 49 relationships and groups them in three categories according to the closeness of the conceptual relationship between image and text. The paper uses qualitative content analysis to illustrate use of the taxonomy to analyze four image-text pairs in government publications and discusses the implications of the research for information retrieval and document design.

0.026380857 = product of:
  0.039571285 = sum of:
    0.011836439 = weight(_text_:in in 5830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011836439 = score(doc=5830,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.069613084 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051176514 = queryNorm
        0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 5830, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5830)
    0.027734846 = product of:
      0.05546969 = sum of:
        0.05546969 = weight(_text_:22 in 5830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05546969 = score(doc=5830,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17921144 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051176514 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5830, 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=5830)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This paper examnines various isues that arise in establishing a theoretical basis for an experimental fiction analysis system. It analyzes the warrants of fiction and of works about fiction. From this analysis, it derives classificatory requirements for a fiction system. Classificatory techniques that may contribute to the specification of data elements in fiction are suggested

Date

5. 8.2006 13:22:08

0.024118079 = product of:
  0.036177117 = sum of:
    0.015375986 = weight(_text_:in in 5589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015375986 = score(doc=5589,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.069613084 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051176514 = queryNorm
        0.22087781 = fieldWeight in 5589, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5589)
    0.020801133 = product of:
      0.041602265 = sum of:
        0.041602265 = weight(_text_:22 in 5589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041602265 = score(doc=5589,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17921144 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051176514 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5589, 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=5589)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Content analysis is a highly flexible research method that has been widely used in library and information science (LIS) studies with varying research goals and objectives. The research method is applied in qualitative, quantitative, and sometimes mixed modes of research frameworks and employs a wide range of analytical techniques to generate findings and put them into context. This article characterizes content analysis as a systematic, rigorous approach to analyzing documents obtained or generated in the course of research. It briefly describes the steps involved in content analysis, differentiates between quantitative and qualitative content analysis, and shows that content analysis serves the purposes of both quantitative research and qualitative research. The authors draw on selected LIS studies that have used content analysis to illustrate the concepts addressed in the article. The article also serves as a gateway to methodological books and articles that provide more detail about aspects of content analysis discussed only briefly in the article.

Source

Library trends. 55(2006) no.1, S.22-45

0.024069648 = product of:
  0.03610447 = sum of:
    0.008369626 = weight(_text_:in in 251) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008369626 = score(doc=251,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.069613084 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051176514 = queryNorm
        0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 251, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=251)
    0.027734846 = product of:
      0.05546969 = sum of:
        0.05546969 = weight(_text_:22 in 251) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05546969 = score(doc=251,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17921144 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051176514 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 251, 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=251)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Die dritte Session, die von Michael Vielhaber vom Österreichischen Rundfunk moderiert wurde, machte die Teilnehmerinnen und Teilnehmer mit zukunftsweisenden Werkzeugen und Konzepten zur KI-unterstützten Erschließung von Audio- und Videodateien bekannt. Alle vier vorgestellten Technologien bewähren sich bereits in ihren praktischen Anwendungsumgebungen.

Date

22. 5.2021 12:43:05

0.02322495 = product of:
  0.034837425 = sum of:
    0.014036291 = weight(_text_:in in 6525) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014036291 = score(doc=6525,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.069613084 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051176514 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 6525, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6525)
    0.020801133 = product of:
      0.041602265 = sum of:
        0.041602265 = weight(_text_:22 in 6525) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041602265 = score(doc=6525,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17921144 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051176514 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 6525, 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=6525)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Examines the goals of bibliographic control, subject analysis and their relationship for audiovisual materials in general and multipart videotape recordings in particular. Concludes that intellectual access to multipart works is not adequately provided for when these materials are catalogues in collective set records. An alternative is to catalogue the parts separately. This method increases intellectual access by providing more detailed descriptive notes and subject analysis. As evidenced by the large number of records in the national database for parts of multipart videos, cataloguers have made the intellectual content of multipart videos more accessible by cataloguing the parts separately rather than collectively. This reverses the traditional cataloguing process to begin with subject analysis, resulting in the intellectual content of these materials driving the bibliographic description. Suggests ways of determining when multipart videos are best catalogued as sets or separately

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) no.2, S.5-18

0.022383174 = product of:
  0.03357476 = sum of:
    0.0090603875 = weight(_text_:in in 4888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0090603875 = score(doc=4888,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.069613084 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051176514 = queryNorm
        0.1301535 = fieldWeight in 4888, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4888)
    0.024514372 = product of:
      0.049028743 = sum of:
        0.049028743 = weight(_text_:22 in 4888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049028743 = score(doc=4888,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17921144 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051176514 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 4888, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4888)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This paper centres on the tools for the management of new digital documents, which are not only textual, but also visual-video, audio or multimedia in the full sense. Among the aims is to demonstrate that operating within the terms of generic Information Retrieval through textual language only is limiting, and it is instead necessary to consider ampler criteria, such as those of MultiMedia Information Retrieval, according to which, every type of digital document can be analyzed and searched by the proper elements of language for its proper nature. MMIR is presented as the organic complex of the systems of Text Retrieval, Visual Retrieval, Video Retrieval, and Audio Retrieval, each of which has an approach to information management that handles the concrete textual, visual, audio, or video content of the documents directly, here defined as content-based. In conclusion, the limits of this content-based objective access to documents is underlined. The discrepancy known as the semantic gap is that which occurs between semantic-interpretive access and content-based access. Finally, the integration of these conceptions is explained, gathering and composing the merits and the advantages of each of the approaches and of the systems to access to information.

Date

22. 1.2012 13:02:10

Footnote

Bezugnahme auf: Enser, P.G.B.: Visual image retrieval. In: Annual review of information science and technology. 42(2008), S.3-42.

Source

Knowledge organization. 39(2012) no.1, S.13-22

0.022237048 = product of:
  0.03335557 = sum of:
    0.012554439 = weight(_text_:in in 1416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012554439 = score(doc=1416,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.069613084 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051176514 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 1416, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1416)
    0.020801133 = product of:
      0.041602265 = sum of:
        0.041602265 = weight(_text_:22 in 1416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041602265 = score(doc=1416,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17921144 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051176514 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1416, 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=1416)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This paper reports on the preliminary findings of a study that explores mental associations made by novices viewing art images. In a controlled environment, 20 Taiwanese college students responded to the question "What does the painting remind you of?" after viewing each digitized image of 15 oil paintings by a famous Taiwanese artist. Rather than focusing on the representation or interpretation of art, the study attempted to solicit information about how non-experts are stimulated by art. This paper reports on the analysis of participant responses to three of the images, and describes a12-type taxonomy of association emerged from the analysis. While 9 of the types are derived and adapted from facets in the Art & Architecture Thesaurus, three new types - Artistic Influence Association, Reactive Association, and Prototype Association - are discovered. The conclusion briefly discusses both the significance of the findings and the implications for future research.

Series

Advances in knowledge organization; vol. 14

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.015303336 = product of:
  0.022955004 = sum of:
    0.012554439 = weight(_text_:in in 2293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012554439 = score(doc=2293,freq=32.0), product of:
        0.069613084 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051176514 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 2293, product of:
          5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
            32.0 = termFreq=32.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2293)
    0.010400566 = product of:
      0.020801133 = sum of:
        0.020801133 = weight(_text_:22 in 2293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020801133 = score(doc=2293,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17921144 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051176514 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 2293, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2293)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Date

27. 9.2005 14:22:19

Footnote

Rez. in: Knowledge organization 30(2003) no.2, S.114-115 (M. Hudon); "This most interesting contribution to the literature of subject cataloguing originates in the author's doctoral dissertation, prepared under the direction of jerry Saye at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. In seven highly readable chapters, Alenka Sauperl develops possible answers to her principal research question: How do cataloguers determine or identify the topic of a document and choose appropriate subject representations? Specific questions at the source of this research an a process which has not been a frequent object of study include: Where do cataloguers look for an overall sense of what a document is about? How do they get an overall sense of what a document is about, especially when they are not familiar with the discipline? Do they consider only one or several possible interpretations? How do they translate meanings in appropriate and valid class numbers and subject headings? Using a strictly qualitative methodology, Dr. Sauperl's research is a study of twelve cataloguers in reallife situation. The author insists an the holistic rather than purely theoretical understanding of the process she is targeting. Participants in the study were professional cataloguers, with at least one year experience in their current job at one of three large academic libraries in the Southeastern United States. All three libraries have a large central cataloguing department, and use OCLC sources and the same automated system; the context of cataloguing tasks is thus considered to be reasonably comparable. All participants were volunteers in this study which combined two datagathering techniques: the think-aloud method and time-line interviews. A model of the subject cataloguing process was first developed from observations of a group of six cataloguers who were asked to independently perform original cataloguing an three nonfiction, non-serial items selected from materials regularly assigned to them for processing. The model was then used for follow-up interviews. Each participant in the second group of cataloguers was invited to reflect an his/her work process for a recent challenging document they had catalogued. Results are presented in 12 stories describing as many personal approaches to subject cataloguing. From these stories a summarization is offered and a theoretical model of subject cataloguing is developed which, according to the author, represents a realistic approach to subject cataloguing. Stories alternate comments from the researcher and direct quotations from the observed or interviewed cataloguers. Not surprisingly, the participants' stories reveal similarities in the sequence and accomplishment of several tasks in the process of subject cataloguing. Sauperl's proposed model, described in Chapter 5, includes as main stages: 1) Examination of the book and subject identification; 2) Search for subject headings; 3) Classification. Chapter 6 is a hypothetical Gase study, using the proposed model to describe the various stages of cataloguing a hypothetical resource. ...
This document will be particularly useful to subject cataloguing teachers and trainers who could use the model to design case descriptions and exercises. We believe it is an accurate description of the reality of subject cataloguing today. But now that we know how things are dope, the next interesting question may be: Is that the best way? Is there a better, more efficient, way to do things? We can only hope that Dr. Sauperl will soon provide her own view of methods and techniques that could improve the flow of work or address the cataloguers' concern as to the lack of feedback an their work. Her several excellent suggestions for further research in this area all build an bits and pieces of what is done already, and stay well away from what could be done by the various actors in the area, from the designers of controlled vocabularies and authority files to those who use these tools an a daily basis to index, classify, or search for information."

0.014286887 = product of:
  0.02143033 = sum of:
    0.014496619 = weight(_text_:in in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014496619 = score(doc=1858,freq=96.0), product of:
        0.069613084 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051176514 = queryNorm
        0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 1858, product of:
          9.797959 = tf(freq=96.0), with freq of:
            96.0 = termFreq=96.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1858)
    0.0069337115 = product of:
      0.013867423 = sum of:
        0.013867423 = weight(_text_:22 in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013867423 = score(doc=1858,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17921144 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051176514 = queryNorm
            0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 1858, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1858)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

Footnote

Rez. in JASIST 54(2003) no.4, S.356-357 (S.J. Lincicum): "Reliance upon shared cataloging in academic libraries in the United States has been driven largely by the need to reduce the expense of cataloging operations without muck regard for the Impact that this approach might have an the quality of the records included in local catalogs. In recent years, ever increasing pressures have prompted libraries to adopt practices such as "rapid" copy cataloging that purposely reduce the scrutiny applied to bibliographic records downloaded from shared databases, possibly increasing the number of errors that slip through unnoticed. Errors in bibliographic records can lead to serious problems for library catalog users. If the data contained in bibliographic records is inaccurate, users will have difficulty discovering and recognizing resources in a library's collection that are relevant to their needs. Thus, it has become increasingly important to understand the extent and nature of errors that occur in the records found in large shared bibliographic databases, such as OCLC WorldCat, to develop cataloging practices optimized for the shared cataloging environment. Although this monograph raises a few legitimate concerns about recent trends in cataloging practice, it fails to provide the "detailed look" at misinformation in library catalogs arising from linguistic errors and mistakes in subject analysis promised by the publisher. A basic premise advanced throughout the text is that a certain amount of linguistic and subject knowledge is required to catalog library materials effectively. The author emphasizes repeatedly that most catalogers today are asked to catalog an increasingly diverse array of materials, and that they are often required to work in languages or subject areas of which they have little or no knowledge. He argues that the records contributed to shared databases are increasingly being created by catalogers with inadequate linguistic or subject expertise. This adversely affects the quality of individual library catalogs because errors often go uncorrected as records are downloaded from shared databases to local catalogs by copy catalogers who possess even less knowledge. Calling misinformation an "evil phenomenon," Bade states that his main goal is to discuss, "two fundamental types of misinformation found in bibliographic and authority records in library catalogs: that arising from linguistic errors, and that caused by errors in subject analysis, including missing or wrong subject headings" (p. 2). After a superficial discussion of "other" types of errors that can occur in bibliographic records, such as typographical errors and errors in the application of descriptive cataloging rules, Bade begins his discussion of linguistic errors. He asserts that sharing bibliographic records created by catalogers with inadequate linguistic or subject knowledge has, "disastrous effects an the library community" (p. 6). To support this bold assertion, Bade provides as evidence little more than a laundry list of errors that he has personally observed in bibliographic records over the years. When he eventually cites several studies that have addressed the availability and quality of records available for materials in languages other than English, he fails to describe the findings of these studies in any detail, let alone relate the findings to his own observations in a meaningful way. Bade claims that a lack of linguistic expertise among catalogers is the "primary source for linguistic misinformation in our databases" (p. 10), but he neither cites substantive data from existing studies nor provides any new data regarding the overall level of linguistic knowledge among catalogers to support this claim. The section concludes with a brief list of eight sensible, if unoriginal, suggestions for coping with the challenge of cataloging materials in unfamiliar languages.
Bade begins his discussion of errors in subject analysis by summarizing the contents of seven records containing what he considers to be egregious errors. The examples were drawn only from items that he has encountered in the course of his work. Five of the seven records were full-level ("I" level) records for Eastern European materials created between 1996 and 2000 in the OCLC WorldCat database. The final two examples were taken from records created by Bade himself over an unspecified period of time. Although he is to be commended for examining the actual items cataloged and for examining mostly items that he claims to have adequate linguistic and subject expertise to evaluate reliably, Bade's methodology has major flaws. First and foremost, the number of examples provided is completely inadequate to draw any conclusions about the extent of the problem. Although an in-depth qualitative analysis of a small number of records might have yielded some valuable insight into factors that contribute to errors in subject analysis, Bade provides no Information about the circumstances under which the live OCLC records he critiques were created. Instead, he offers simplistic explanations for the errors based solely an his own assumptions. He supplements his analysis of examples with an extremely brief survey of other studies regarding errors in subject analysis, which consists primarily of criticism of work done by Sheila Intner. In the end, it is impossible to draw any reliable conclusions about the nature or extent of errors in subject analysis found in records in shared bibliographic databases based an Bade's analysis. In the final third of the essay, Bade finally reveals his true concern: the deintellectualization of cataloging. It would strengthen the essay tremendously to present this as the primary premise from the very beginning, as this section offers glimpses of a compelling argument. Bade laments, "Many librarians simply do not sec cataloging as an intellectual activity requiring an educated mind" (p. 20). Commenting an recent trends in copy cataloging practice, he declares, "The disaster of our time is that this work is being done more and more by people who can neither evaluate nor correct imported errors and offen are forbidden from even thinking about it" (p. 26). Bade argues that the most valuable content found in catalog records is the intellectual content contributed by knowledgeable catalogers, and he asserts that to perform intellectually demanding tasks such as subject analysis reliably and effectively, catalogers must have the linguistic and subject knowledge required to gain at least a rudimentary understanding of the materials that they describe. He contends that requiring catalogers to quickly dispense with materials in unfamiliar languages and subjects clearly undermines their ability to perform the intellectual work of cataloging and leads to an increasing number of errors in the bibliographic records contributed to shared databases.
Arguing that catalogers need to work both quickly and accurately, Bade maintains that employing specialists is the most efficient and effective way to achieve this outcome. Far less compelling than these arguments are Bade's concluding remarks, in which he offers meager suggestions for correcting the problems as he sees them. Overall, this essay is little more than a curmudgeon's diatribe. Addressed primarily to catalogers and library administrators, the analysis presented is too superficial to assist practicing catalogers or cataloging managers in developing solutions to any systemic problems in current cataloging practice, and it presents too little evidence of pervasive problems to convince budget-conscious library administrators of a need to alter practice or to increase their investment in local cataloging operations. Indeed, the reliance upon anecdotal evidence and the apparent nit-picking that dominate the essay might tend to reinforce a negative image of catalogers in the minds of some. To his credit, Bade does provide an important reminder that it is the intellectual contributions made by thousands of erudite catalogers that have made shared cataloging a successful strategy for improving cataloging efficiency. This is an important point that often seems to be forgotten in academic libraries when focus centers an cutting costs. Had Bade focused more narrowly upon the issue of deintellectualization of cataloging and written a carefully structured essay to advance this argument, this essay might have been much more effective." - KO 29(2002) nos.3/4, S.236-237 (A. Sauperl)

0.011556186 = product of:
  0.034668557 = sum of:
    0.034668557 = product of:
      0.069337115 = sum of:
        0.069337115 = weight(_text_:22 in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.069337115 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17921144 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051176514 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5835, 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=5835)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

5. 8.2006 13:22:44

0.0069746887 = product of:
  0.020924065 = sum of:
    0.020924065 = weight(_text_:in in 2386) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020924065 = score(doc=2386,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.069613084 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051176514 = queryNorm
        0.30057663 = fieldWeight in 2386, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=2386)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.00690459 = product of:
  0.020713769 = sum of:
    0.020713769 = weight(_text_:in in 1841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020713769 = score(doc=1841,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.069613084 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051176514 = queryNorm
        0.29755569 = fieldWeight in 1841, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1841)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Übers. des Titels: Trends in subject indexing: contents analysis

0.0064586527 = product of:
  0.019375958 = sum of:
    0.019375958 = weight(_text_:in in 1961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019375958 = score(doc=1961,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.069613084 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051176514 = queryNorm
        0.27833787 = fieldWeight in 1961, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1961)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The common view of the 'aboutness' of documents is that the index entries (or classifications) assigned to documents represent or indicate in some way the total contents of documents; indexing and classifying are seen as processes involving the 'summerization' of the texts of documents. In this paper an alternative concept of 'aboutness' is proposed based on an analysis of the linguistic organization of texts, which is felt to be more appropriate in many indexing environments (particularly in non-specialized libraries and information services) and which has implications for the evaluation of the effectiveness of indexing systems

Footnote

Wiederabgedruckt in: Readings in information retrieval. Ed.: K. Sparck Jones u. P. Willett. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann 1997. S.93-97.

0.0064586527 = product of:
  0.019375958 = sum of:
    0.019375958 = weight(_text_:in in 5139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019375958 = score(doc=5139,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.069613084 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051176514 = queryNorm
        0.27833787 = fieldWeight in 5139, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5139)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The article is an introduction to the development of Andersen's concept of textual tools used in knowledge organization (KO) in light of the theory of genres and activity systems. In particular, the question is based on the concepts of genre connectivity and genre group, in addition to previously established concepts such as genre hierarchy, set, system, and repertoire. Five genre groups used in KO are described. The analysis of groups, systems, and selected genres used in KO is provided, based on the method proposed by Yates and Orlikowski. The aim is to show the genre system as a part of the activity system, and thus as a framework for KO.

0.00627722 = product of:
  0.01883166 = sum of:
    0.01883166 = weight(_text_:in in 2258) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01883166 = score(doc=2258,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.069613084 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051176514 = queryNorm
        0.27051896 = fieldWeight in 2258, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2258)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

This paper examines three themes in the design of search support services: linking different genres of reference resources (e.g. bibliographies, biographical dictionaries, catalogs, encyclopedias, place name gazetteers); the division of vocabularies by facet (e.g. What, Where, When, and Who); and mapping between both similar and dissimilar vocabularies. Different vocabularies within a facet can be used in conjunction, e.g. a place name combined with spatial coordinates for Where. In practice, vocabularies of different facets are used in combination in the representation or description of complex topics. Rich opportunities arise from mapping across vocabularies of dissimilar reference genres to recreate the amenities of a reference library. In a network environment, in which vocabulary control cannot be imposed, semantic correspondence across diverse vocabularies is a challenge and an opportunity.

Series

Advances in knowledge organization; vol.11

Source

Culture and identity in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Tenth International ISKO Conference 5-8 August 2008, Montreal, Canada. Ed. by Clément Arsenault and Joseph T. Tennis

0.0062383516 = product of:
  0.018715054 = sum of:
    0.018715054 = weight(_text_:in in 4707) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018715054 = score(doc=4707,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.069613084 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051176514 = queryNorm
        0.26884392 = fieldWeight in 4707, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4707)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Series

Advances in knowledge organization; vol.16

Source

Challenges and opportunities for knowledge organization in the digital age: proceedings of the Fifteenth International ISKO Conference, 9-11 July 2018, Porto, Portugal / organized by: International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO Spain and Portugal Chapter, University of Porto - Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Research Centre in Communication, Information and Digital Culture (CIC.digital) - Porto. Eds.: F. Ribeiro u. M.E. Cerveira

0.0060402583 = product of:
  0.018120775 = sum of:
    0.018120775 = weight(_text_:in in 2667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018120775 = score(doc=2667,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.069613084 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051176514 = queryNorm
        0.260307 = fieldWeight in 2667, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2667)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Sentiment analysis on Twitter has attracted much attention recently due to its wide applications in both, commercial and public sectors. In this paper we present SentiCircles, a lexicon-based approach for sentiment analysis on Twitter. Different from typical lexicon-based approaches, which offer a fixed and static prior sentiment polarities of words regardless of their context, SentiCircles takes into account the co-occurrence patterns of words in different contexts in tweets to capture their semantics and update their pre-assigned strength and polarity in sentiment lexicons accordingly. Our approach allows for the detection of sentiment at both entity-level and tweet-level. We evaluate our proposed approach on three Twitter datasets using three different sentiment lexicons to derive word prior sentiments. Results show that our approach significantly outperforms the baselines in accuracy and F-measure for entity-level subjectivity (neutral vs. polar) and polarity (positive vs. negative) detections. For tweet-level sentiment detection, our approach performs better than the state-of-the-art SentiStrength by 4-5% in accuracy in two datasets, but falls marginally behind by 1% in F-measure in the third dataset.

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Themenheft "Emotion and sentiment in social and expressive media"

0.0059795505 = product of:
  0.017938651 = sum of:
    0.017938651 = weight(_text_:in in 7296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017938651 = score(doc=7296,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.069613084 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051176514 = queryNorm
        0.2576908 = fieldWeight in 7296, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7296)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Multimedia data can require significant examination time to find desired features ('content analysis'). An alternative is using natural-language captions to describe the data, and matching captions to English queries. But it is hard to include everything in the caption of a complicated datum, so significant content analysis may still seem required. We discuss linguistic clues in captions, both syntactic and semantic, that can simplify or eliminate content analysis. We introduce the notion of content depiction and ruled for depiction inference. Our approach is implemented in an expert system which demonstrated significant increases in recall in experiments

0.0055797505 = product of:
  0.016739251 = sum of:
    0.016739251 = weight(_text_:in in 1877) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016739251 = score(doc=1877,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.069613084 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051176514 = queryNorm
        0.24046129 = fieldWeight in 1877, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1877)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)