-
Quinn, B.: Recent theoretical approaches in classification and indexing (1994)
0.05
0.047749437 = product of:
0.16712302 = sum of:
0.112790324 = weight(_text_:united in 8276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.112790324 = score(doc=8276,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.4958686 = fieldWeight in 8276, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8276)
0.0543327 = product of:
0.1086654 = sum of:
0.1086654 = weight(_text_:states in 8276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1086654 = score(doc=8276,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.48671678 = fieldWeight in 8276, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8276)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Abstract
- This article is a selective review of recent studies in classification and indexing theory. A number of important problems are discussed, including subjectivity versus objectivity, theories of indexing, the theoretical role of automation, and theoretical approaches to a universal classification scheme. Interestingly, much of the work appears to have been done outside the United States. After reviewing the theoretical work itself, some possible reasons for the non-American origins of the work are explored
-
McCool, M.; St. Amant, K.: Field dependence and classification : implications for global information systems (2009)
0.04
0.041780755 = product of:
0.14623263 = sum of:
0.09869153 = weight(_text_:united in 2854) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09869153 = score(doc=2854,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.433885 = fieldWeight in 2854, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2854)
0.04754111 = product of:
0.09508222 = sum of:
0.09508222 = weight(_text_:states in 2854) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09508222 = score(doc=2854,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.42587718 = fieldWeight in 2854, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2854)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Abstract
- This article describes research designed to assess the interaction between culture and classification. Mounting evidence in cross-cultural psychology has indicated that culture may affect classification, which is an important dimension to global information systems. Data were obtained through three classification tasks, two of which were adapted from recent studies in cross-cultural psychology. Data were collected from 36 participants, 19 from China and 17 from the United States. The results of this research indicate that Chinese participants appear to be more field dependent, which may be related to a cultural preference for relationships instead of categories.
-
Broughton, V.: Faceted classification as a basis for knowledge organization in a digital environment : the Bliss Bibliographic Classification as a model for vocabulary management and the creation of multidimensional knowledge structures (2003)
0.03
0.032893836 = product of:
0.11512842 = sum of:
0.030535674 = weight(_text_:management in 2631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030535674 = score(doc=2631,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 2631, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2631)
0.084592745 = weight(_text_:united in 2631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.084592745 = score(doc=2631,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.37190145 = fieldWeight in 2631, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2631)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Abstract
- The paper examines the way in which classification schemes can be applied to the organization of digital resources. The case is argued for the particular suitability of schemes based an faceted principles for the organization of complex digital objects. Details are given of a co-operative project between the School of Library Archive & Information Studies, University College London, and the United Kingdom Higher Education gateways Arts and Humanities Data Service and Humbul, in which a faceted knowledge structure is being developed for the indexing and display of digital materials within a new combined humanities portal.
-
Qin, J.: Evolving paradigms of knowledge representation and organization : a comparative study of classification, XML/DTD and ontology (2003)
0.03
0.027617939 = product of:
0.09666278 = sum of:
0.020357117 = weight(_text_:management in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020357117 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.14896142 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
0.076305665 = sum of:
0.0543327 = weight(_text_:states in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0543327 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.24335839 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
0.021972965 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021972965 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14198048 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2763, 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=2763)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Abstract
- The different points of views an knowledge representation and organization from various research communities reflect underlying philosophies and paradigms in these communities. This paper reviews differences and relations in knowledge representation and organization and generalizes four paradigms-integrative and disintegrative pragmatism and integrative and disintegrative epistemologism. Examples such as classification, XML schemas, and ontologies are compared based an how they specify concepts, build data models, and encode knowledge organization structures. 1. Introduction Knowledge representation (KR) is a term that several research communities use to refer to somewhat different aspects of the same research area. The artificial intelligence (AI) community considers KR as simply "something to do with writing down, in some language or communications medium, descriptions or pictures that correspond in some salient way to the world or a state of the world" (Duce & Ringland, 1988, p. 3). It emphasizes the ways in which knowledge can be encoded in a computer program (Bench-Capon, 1990). For the library and information science (LIS) community, KR is literally the synonym of knowledge organization, i.e., KR is referred to as the process of organizing knowledge into classifications, thesauri, or subject heading lists. KR has another meaning in LIS: it "encompasses every type and method of indexing, abstracting, cataloguing, classification, records management, bibliography and the creation of textual or bibliographic databases for information retrieval" (Anderson, 1996, p. 336). Adding the social dimension to knowledge organization, Hjoerland (1997) states that knowledge is a part of human activities and tied to the division of labor in society, which should be the primary organization of knowledge. Knowledge organization in LIS is secondary or derived, because knowledge is organized in learned institutions and publications. These different points of views an KR suggest that an essential difference in the understanding of KR between both AI and LIS lies in the source of representationwhether KR targets human activities or derivatives (knowledge produced) from human activities. This difference also decides their difference in purpose-in AI KR is mainly computer-application oriented or pragmatic and the result of representation is used to support decisions an human activities, while in LIS KR is conceptually oriented or abstract and the result of representation is used for access to derivatives from human activities.
- Date
- 12. 9.2004 17:22:35
-
Bliss, H.E.: ¬A bibliographic classification : principles and definitions (1985)
0.02
0.023874719 = product of:
0.08356151 = sum of:
0.056395162 = weight(_text_:united in 3621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056395162 = score(doc=3621,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.2479343 = fieldWeight in 3621, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3621)
0.02716635 = product of:
0.0543327 = sum of:
0.0543327 = weight(_text_:states in 3621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0543327 = score(doc=3621,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.24335839 = fieldWeight in 3621, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3621)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Abstract
- Henry Evelyn Bliss (1870-1955) devoted several decades of his life to the study of classification and the development of the Bibliographic Classification scheme while serving as a librarian in the College of the City of New York. In the course of the development of the Bibliographic Classification, Bliss developed a body of classification theory published in a number of articles and books, among which the best known are The Organization of Knowledge and the System of the Sciences (1929), Organization of Knowledge in Libraries and the Subject Approach to Books (1933; 2nd ed., 1939), and the lengthy preface to A Bibliographic Classification (Volumes 1-2, 1940; 2nd ed., 1952). In developing the Bibliographic Classification, Bliss carefully established its philosophical and theoretical basis, more so than was attempted by the makers of other classification schemes, with the possible exception of S. R. Ranganathan (q.v.) and his Colon Classification. The basic principles established by Bliss for the Bibliographic Classification are: consensus, collocation of related subjects, subordination of special to general and gradation in specialty, and the relativity of classes and of classification (hence alternative location and alternative treatment). In the preface to the schedules of A Bibliographic Classification, Bliss spells out the general principles of classification as weIl as principles specifically related to his scheme. The first volume of the schedules appeared in 1940. In 1952, he issued a second edition of the volume with a rewritten preface, from which the following excerpt is taken, and with the addition of a "Concise Synopsis," which is also included here to illustrate the principles of classificatory structure. In the excerpt reprinted below, Bliss discusses the correlation between classes, concepts, and terms, as weIl as the hierarchical structure basic to his classification scheme. In his discussion of cross-classification, Bliss recognizes the "polydimensional" nature of classification and the difficulties inherent in the two-dimensional approach which is characteristic of linear classification. This is one of the earliest works in which the multidimensional nature of classification is recognized. The Bibliographic Classification did not meet with great success in the United States because the Dewey Decimal Classification and the Library of Congress Classification were already weIl ensconced in American libraries by then. Nonetheless, it attracted considerable attention in the British Commonwealth and elsewhere in the world. A committee was formed in Britain which later became the Bliss Classification Association. A faceted edition of the scheme has been in preparation under the direction of J. Mills and V. Broughton. Several parts of this new edition, entitled Bliss Bibliographic Classification, have been published.
-
Loehrlein, A.J.; Lemieux, V.L.; Bennett, M.: ¬The classification of financial products (2014)
0.01
0.012915401 = product of:
0.0904078 = sum of:
0.0904078 = weight(_text_:industry in 1196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0904078 = score(doc=1196,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2351482 = queryWeight, product of:
5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.3844716 = fieldWeight in 1196, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1196)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Abstract
- In the wake of the global financial crisis, the U.S. Dodd- Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank) was enacted to provide increased transparency in financial markets. In response to Dodd-Frank, a series of rules relating to swaps record keeping have been issued, and one such rule calls for the creation of a financial products classification system. The manner in which financial products are classified will have a profound effect on data integration and analysis in the financial industry. This article considers various approaches that can be taken when classifying financial products and recommends the use of facet analysis. The article argues that this type of analysis is flexible enough to accommodate multiple viewpoints and rigorous enough to facilitate inferences that are based on the hierarchical structure. Various use cases are examined that pertain to the organization of financial products. The use cases confirm the practical utility of taxonomies that are designed according to faceted principles.
-
Wang, Z.; Chaudhry, A.S.; Khoo, C.S.G.: Using classification schemes and thesauri to build an organizational taxonomy for organizing content and aiding navigation (2008)
0.01
0.008955315 = product of:
0.0313436 = sum of:
0.020357117 = weight(_text_:management in 2346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020357117 = score(doc=2346,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.14896142 = fieldWeight in 2346, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2346)
0.010986483 = product of:
0.021972965 = sum of:
0.021972965 = weight(_text_:22 in 2346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021972965 = score(doc=2346,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14198048 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2346, 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=2346)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Date
- 7.11.2008 15:22:04
- Theme
- Information Resources Management
-
Slavic, A.; Cordeiro, M.I.: Core requirements for automation of analytico-synthetic classifications (2004)
0.01
0.0061691385 = product of:
0.043183967 = sum of:
0.043183967 = weight(_text_:management in 2651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043183967 = score(doc=2651,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.31599492 = fieldWeight in 2651, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2651)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Abstract
- The paper analyses the importance of data presentation and modelling and its role in improving the management, use and exchange of analytico-synthetic classifications in automated systems. Inefficiencies, in this respect, hinder the automation of classification systems that offer the possibility of building compound index/search terms. The lack of machine readable data expressing the semantics and structure of a classification vocabulary has negative effects on information management and retrieval, thus restricting the potential of both automated systems and classifications themselves. The authors analysed the data representation structure of three general analytico-synthetic classification systems (BC2-Bliss Bibliographic Classification; BSO-Broad System of Ordering; UDC-Universal Decimal Classification) and put forward some core requirements for classification data representation
-
Kashyap, M.M.: Likeness between Ranganathan's postulations based approach to knowledge classification and entity relationship data modelling approach (2003)
0.01
0.0058213607 = product of:
0.040749524 = sum of:
0.040749524 = product of:
0.08149905 = sum of:
0.08149905 = weight(_text_:states in 2045) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08149905 = score(doc=2045,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.3650376 = fieldWeight in 2045, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2045)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Abstract
- This paper describes the Postulations Based Approach to Facet Classification as articulated by S. R. Ranganathan for knowledge classification and for the design of a facet scheme of library classification, and the Entity-Relationship Data Modelling and Analysis Approach set by Peter Pin-Sen Chen; both further modified by other experts. Efforts have been made to show the parallelism between the two approaches. It points out that, both the theoretical approaches are concerned with the organisation of knowledge or information, and apply almost similar theoretical principles, concepts, and techniques for the design and development of a framework for the organisation of knowledge, information, or data, in their respective domains. It states that both the approaches are complementary and supplementary to each other. The paper also argues that Ranganathan's postulations based approach or analytico-synthetic approach to knowledge classification can be applied for developing efficient data retrieval systems in addition to the data analysis and modelling domain.
-
Facets: a fruitful notion in many domains : special issue on facet analysis (2008)
0.01
0.0053814175 = product of:
0.03766992 = sum of:
0.03766992 = weight(_text_:industry in 3262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03766992 = score(doc=3262,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2351482 = queryWeight, product of:
5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.1601965 = fieldWeight in 3262, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3262)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Footnote
- Several of the papers are clearly written as primers and neatly address the second agenda item: attracting others to the study and use of facet analysis. The most valuable papers are written in clear, approachable language. Vickery's paper (p. 145-160) is a clarion call for faceted classification and facet analysis. The heart of the paper is a primer for central concepts and techniques. Vickery explains the value of using faceted classification in document retrieval. Also provided are potential solutions to thorny interface and display issues with facets. Vickery looks to complementary themes in knowledge organization, such as thesauri and ontologies as potential areas for extending the facet concept. Broughton (p. 193-210) describes a rigorous approach to the application of facet analysis in the creation of a compatible thesaurus from the schedules of the 2nd edition of the Bliss Classification (BC2). This discussion of exemplary faceted thesauri, recent standards work, and difficulties encountered in the project will provide valuable guidance for future research in this area. Slavic (p. 257-271) provides a challenge to make faceted classification come 'alive' through promoting the use of machine-readable formats for use and exchange in applications such as Topic Maps and SKOS (Simple Knowledge Organization Systems), and as supported by the standard BS8723 (2005) Structured Vocabulary for Information Retrieval. She also urges designers of faceted classifications to get involved in standards work. Cheti and Paradisi (p. 223-241) outline a basic approach to converting an existing subject indexing tool, the Nuovo Soggetario, into a faceted thesaurus through the use of facet analysis. This discussion, well grounded in the canonical literature, may well serve as a primer for future efforts. Also useful for those who wish to construct faceted thesauri is the article by Tudhope and Binding (p. 211-222). This contains an outline of basic elements to be found in exemplar faceted thesauri, and a discussion of project FACET (Faceted Access to Cultural heritage Terminology) with algorithmically-based semantic query expansion in a dataset composed of items from the National Museum of Science and Industry indexed with AAT (Art and Architecture Thesaurus). This paper looks to the future hybridization of ontologies and facets through standards developments such as SKOS because of the "lightweight semantics" inherent in facets.
-
Satija, M.P.: Relationships in Ranganathan's Colon Classification (2001)
0.01
0.0050892793 = product of:
0.035624955 = sum of:
0.035624955 = weight(_text_:management in 1155) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035624955 = score(doc=1155,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 1155, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1155)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Series
- Information science and knowledge management; vol.2
-
Ullah, A.; Khusro, S.; Ullah, I.: Bibliographic classification in the digital age : current trends & future directions (2017)
0.01
0.0050892793 = product of:
0.035624955 = sum of:
0.035624955 = weight(_text_:management in 5717) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035624955 = score(doc=5717,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 5717, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5717)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Abstract
- Bibliographic classification is among the core activities of Library & Information Science that brings order and proper management to the holdings of a library. Compared to printed media, digital collections present numerous challenges regarding their preservation, curation, organization and resource discovery & access. Therefore, true native perspective is needed to be adopted for bibliographic classification in digital environments. In this research article, we have investigated and reported different approaches to bibliographic classification of digital collections. The article also contributes two evaluation frameworks that evaluate the existing classification schemes and systems. The article presents a bird's-eye view for researchers in reaching a generalized and holistic approach towards bibliographic classification research, where new research avenues have been identified.
-
Maniez, J.: ¬Des classifications aux thesaurus : du bon usage des facettes (1999)
0.00
0.0047084927 = product of:
0.032959446 = sum of:
0.032959446 = product of:
0.06591889 = sum of:
0.06591889 = weight(_text_:22 in 6404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06591889 = score(doc=6404,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14198048 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6404, 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=6404)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
-
Maniez, J.: ¬Du bon usage des facettes : des classifications aux thésaurus (1999)
0.00
0.0047084927 = product of:
0.032959446 = sum of:
0.032959446 = product of:
0.06591889 = sum of:
0.06591889 = weight(_text_:22 in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06591889 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14198048 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3773, 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=3773)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
-
Foskett, D.J.: Systems theory and its relevance to documentary classification (2017)
0.00
0.0047084927 = product of:
0.032959446 = sum of:
0.032959446 = product of:
0.06591889 = sum of:
0.06591889 = weight(_text_:22 in 3176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06591889 = score(doc=3176,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14198048 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3176, 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=3176)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Date
- 6. 5.2017 18:46:22
-
Beghtol, C.: Relationships in classificatory structure and meaning (2001)
0.00
0.0043622395 = product of:
0.030535674 = sum of:
0.030535674 = weight(_text_:management in 1138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030535674 = score(doc=1138,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 1138, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1138)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Series
- Information science and knowledge management; vol.2
-
Advances in classification research. Vol.10 : Proceedings of the 10th ASIS SIG/CR Classification Research Workshop, held at the 62nd ASIS Annual Meeting Nov 1-5, 1999, Washington (2001)
0.00
0.0043622395 = product of:
0.030535674 = sum of:
0.030535674 = weight(_text_:management in 1586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030535674 = score(doc=1586,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 1586, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1586)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Content
- Enthält die Beiträge: DAVENPORT, E.: Implicit orders: documentary genres and organizational practice; ANDERSEN, J. u. F.S. CHRISTENSEN: Wittgenstein and indexing theory; OLSON, H.A.: Cultural discourses of classification: indigeous alternatives to the tradition of Aristotle, Dürkheim, and Foucault; FRÂNCU, V.: A universal classification system going through changes; JACOB, E.K. u. U. PRISS: Nontraditional indexing structures for the management of electronic resources; BROOKS, T.A.: Relevance auras: macro patterns and micro scatter; RUIZ, M.E. u. SRINIVASAN, P.: Combining machine learning and hierarchical indexing structures for text categorization; WEEDMAN, J.: Local practice and the growth of knowledge: decisions in subject access to digitized images
-
Broughton, V.; Slavic, A.: Building a faceted classification for the humanities : principles and procedures (2007)
0.00
0.004112759 = product of:
0.028789312 = sum of:
0.028789312 = weight(_text_:management in 2875) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028789312 = score(doc=2875,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.21066327 = fieldWeight in 2875, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2875)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Abstract
- Purpose - This paper aims to provide an overview of principles and procedures involved in creating a faceted classification scheme for use in resource discovery in an online environment. Design/methodology/approach - Facet analysis provides an established rigorous methodology for the conceptual organization of a subject field, and the structuring of an associated classification or controlled vocabulary. This paper explains how that methodology was applied to the humanities in the FATKS project, where the objective was to explore the potential of facet analytical theory for creating a controlled vocabulary for the humanities, and to establish the requirements of a faceted classification appropriate to an online environment. A detailed faceted vocabulary was developed for two areas of the humanities within a broader facet framework for the whole of knowledge. Research issues included how to create a data model which made the faceted structure explicit and machine-readable and provided for its further development and use. Findings - In order to support easy facet combination in indexing, and facet searching and browsing on the interface, faceted classification requires a formalized data structure and an appropriate tool for its management. The conceptual framework of a faceted system proper can be applied satisfactorily to humanities, and fully integrated within a vocabulary management system. Research limitations/implications - The procedures described in this paper are concerned only with the structuring of the classification, and do not extend to indexing, retrieval and application issues. Practical implications - Many stakeholders in the domain of resource discovery consider developing their own classification system and supporting tools. The methods described in this paper may clarify the process of building a faceted classification and may provide some useful ideas with respect to the vocabulary maintenance tool. Originality/value - As far as the authors are aware there is no comparable research in this area.
-
Jacob, E.K.: ¬The everyday world of work : two approaches to the investigation of classification in context (2001)
0.00
0.0036351997 = product of:
0.025446396 = sum of:
0.025446396 = weight(_text_:management in 4494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025446396 = score(doc=4494,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 4494, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4494)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Abstract
- One major aspect of T.D. Wilson's research has been his insistence on situating the investigation of information behaviour within the context of its occurrence - within the everyday world of work. The significance of this approach is reviewed in light of the notion of embodied cognition that characterises the evolving theoretical episteme in cognitive science research. Embodied cognition employs complex external props such as stigmergic structures and cognitive scaffoldings to reduce the cognitive burden on the individual and to augment human problem-solving activities. The cognitive function of the classification scheme is described as exemplifying both stigmergic structures and cognitive scaffoldings. Two different but complementary approaches to the investigation of situated cognition are presented: cognition-as-scaffolding and cognition-as-infrastructure. Classification-as-scaffolding views the classification scheme as a knowledge storage device supporting and promoting cognitive economy. Classification-as-infrastructure views the classification system as a social convention that, when integrated with technological structures and organisational practices, supports knowledge management work. Both approaches are shown to build upon and extend Wilson's contention that research is most productive when it attends to the social and organisational contexts of cognitive activity by focusing on the everyday world of work.
-
Broughton, V.: Faceted classification as a basis for knowledge organization in a digital environment : the Bliss Bibliographic Classification as a model for vocabulary management and the creation of multi-dimensional knowledge structures (2001)
0.00
0.0036351997 = product of:
0.025446396 = sum of:
0.025446396 = weight(_text_:management in 5895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025446396 = score(doc=5895,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.04054466 = queryNorm
0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 5895, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5895)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
