Search (26 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Social tagging"
  1. Chopin, K.: Finding communities : alternative viewpoints through weblogs and tagging (2008) 0.02
    0.02336838 = product of:
      0.04673676 = sum of:
        0.04673676 = product of:
          0.09347352 = sum of:
            0.09347352 = weight(_text_:searching in 2341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09347352 = score(doc=2341,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.44694576 = fieldWeight in 2341, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2341)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - This paper aims to discuss and test the claim that user-based tagging allows for access to a wider variety of viewpoints than is found using other forms of online searching. Design/methodology/approach - A general overview of the nature of weblogs and user-based tagging is given, along with other relevant concepts. A case is then analyzed where viewpoints towards a specific issue are searched for using both tag searching (Technorati) and general search engine searching (Google and Google Blog Search). Findings - The claim to greater accessibility through user-based tagging is not overtly supported with these experiments. Further results for both general and tag-specific searching goes against some common assumptions about the types of content found on weblogs as opposed to more general web sites. Research limitations/implications - User-based tagging is still not widespread enough to give conclusive data for analysis. As this changes, further research in this area, using a variety of search subjects, is warranted. Originality/value - Although proponents of user-based tagging attribute many qualities to the practice, these qualities have not been properly documented or demonstrated. This paper partially rectifies this gap by testing one of the claims made, that of accessibility to alternate views, thus adding to the discussion on tagging for both researchers and other interested parties.
  2. Kipp, M.E.I.; Campbell, D.G.: Searching with tags : do tags help users find things? (2010) 0.02
    0.020237612 = product of:
      0.040475223 = sum of:
        0.040475223 = product of:
          0.08095045 = sum of:
            0.08095045 = weight(_text_:searching in 4064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08095045 = score(doc=4064,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.38706642 = fieldWeight in 4064, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4064)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The question of whether tags can be useful in the process of information retrieval was examined in this pilot study. Many tags are subject related and could work well as index terms or entry vocabulary; however, folksonomies also include relationships that are traditionally not included in controlled vocabularies including affective or time and task related tags and the user name of the tagger. Participants searched a social bookmarking tool, specialising in academic articles (CiteULike), and an online journal database (Pubmed) for articles relevant to a given information request. Screen capture software was used to collect participant actions and a semi-structured interview asked them to describe their search process. Preliminary results showed that participants did use tags in their search process, as a guide to searching and as hyperlinks to potentially useful articles. However, participants also used controlled vocabularies in the journal database to locate useful search terms and links to related articles supplied by Pubmed. Additionally, participants reported using user names of taggers and group names to help select resources by relevance. The inclusion of subjective and social information from the taggers is very different from the traditional objectivity of indexing and was reported as an asset by a number of participants. This study suggests that while users value social and subjective factors when searching, they also find utility in objective factors such as subject headings. Most importantly, users are interested in the ability of systems to connect them with related articles whether via subject access or other means.
  3. Kipp, M.E.I.: Searching with tags : do tags help users find things? (2008) 0.02
    0.019828727 = product of:
      0.039657455 = sum of:
        0.039657455 = product of:
          0.07931491 = sum of:
            0.07931491 = weight(_text_:searching in 2278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07931491 = score(doc=2278,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.37924606 = fieldWeight in 2278, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2278)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Content
    This study examines the question of whether tags can be useful in the process of information retrieval. Participants were asked to search a social bookmarking tool specialising in academic articles (CiteULike) and an online journal database (Pubmed) in order to determine if users found tags were useful in their search process. The actions of each participants were captured using screen capture software and they were asked to describe their search process. The preliminary study showed that users did indeed make use of tags in their search process, as a guide to searching and as hyperlinks to potentially useful articles. However, users also made use of controlled vocabularies in the journal database.
  4. Watters, C.; Nizam, N.: Knowledge organization on the Web : the emergent role of social classification (2012) 0.02
    0.016357865 = product of:
      0.03271573 = sum of:
        0.03271573 = product of:
          0.06543146 = sum of:
            0.06543146 = weight(_text_:searching in 828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06543146 = score(doc=828,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.31286204 = fieldWeight in 828, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=828)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    There are close to a billion websites on the Internet with approximately 400 million users worldwide [www.internetworldstats.com]. People go to websites for a wide variety of different information tasks, from finding a restaurant to serious research. Many of the difficulties with searching the Web, as it is structured currently, can be attributed to increases to scale. The content of the Web is now so large that we only have a rough estimate of the number of sites and the range of information is extremely diverse, from blogs and photos to research articles and news videos.
  5. Ding, Y.; Jacob, E.K.; Zhang, Z.; Foo, S.; Yan, E.; George, N.L.; Guo, L.: Perspectives on social tagging (2009) 0.01
    0.014021028 = product of:
      0.028042056 = sum of:
        0.028042056 = product of:
          0.05608411 = sum of:
            0.05608411 = weight(_text_:searching in 3290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05608411 = score(doc=3290,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.26816747 = fieldWeight in 3290, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3290)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Social tagging is one of the major phenomena transforming the World Wide Web from a static platform into an actively shared information space. This paper addresses various aspects of social tagging, including different views on the nature of social tagging, how to make use of social tags, and how to bridge social tagging with other Web functionalities; it discusses the use of facets to facilitate browsing and searching of tagging data; and it presents an analogy between bibliometrics and tagometrics, arguing that established bibliometric methodologies can be applied to analyze tagging behavior on the Web. Based on the Upper Tag Ontology (UTO), a Web crawler was built to harvest tag data from Delicious, Flickr, and YouTube in September 2007. In total, 1.8 million objects, including bookmarks, photos, and videos, 3.1 million taggers, and 12.1 million tags were collected and analyzed. Some tagging patterns and variations are identified and discussed.
  6. Ding, Y.; Jacob, E.K.; Fried, M.; Toma, I.; Yan, E.; Foo, S.; Milojevicacute, S.: Upper tag ontology for integrating social tagging data (2010) 0.01
    0.014021028 = product of:
      0.028042056 = sum of:
        0.028042056 = product of:
          0.05608411 = sum of:
            0.05608411 = weight(_text_:searching in 3421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05608411 = score(doc=3421,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.26816747 = fieldWeight in 3421, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3421)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Data integration and mediation have become central concerns of information technology over the past few decades. With the advent of the Web and the rapid increases in the amount of data and the number of Web documents and users, researchers have focused on enhancing the interoperability of data through the development of metadata schemes. Other researchers have looked to the wealth of metadata generated by bookmarking sites on the Social Web. While several existing ontologies have capitalized on the semantics of metadata created by tagging activities, the Upper Tag Ontology (UTO) emphasizes the structure of tagging activities to facilitate modeling of tagging data and the integration of data from different bookmarking sites as well as the alignment of tagging ontologies. UTO is described and its utility in modeling, harvesting, integrating, searching, and analyzing data is demonstrated with metadata harvested from three major social tagging systems (Delicious, Flickr, and YouTube).
  7. Kipp, M.E.I.: Tagging of biomedical articles on CiteULike : a comparison of user, author and professional indexing (2011) 0.01
    0.014021028 = product of:
      0.028042056 = sum of:
        0.028042056 = product of:
          0.05608411 = sum of:
            0.05608411 = weight(_text_:searching in 4557) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05608411 = score(doc=4557,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.26816747 = fieldWeight in 4557, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4557)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This paper examines the context of online indexing from the viewpoint of three different groups: users, authors, and professional indexers. User tags, author keywords, and descriptors were collected from academic journal articles, which were both indexed in PubMed and tagged on CiteULike, and analysed. Descriptive statistics, informetric measures, and thesaural term comparison shows that there are important differences in the use of keywords among the three groups in addition to similarities, which can be used to enhance support for search and browse. While tags and author keywords were found that matched descriptors exactly, other terms which did not match but provided important expansion to the indexing lexicon were found. These additional terms could be used to enhance support for searching and browsing in article databases as well as to provide invaluable data for entry vocabulary and emergent terminology for regular updates to indexing systems. Additionally, the study suggests that tags support organisation by association to task, projects, and subject while making important connections to traditional systems which classify into subject categories.
  8. Huang, S.-L.; Lin, S.-C.; Chan, Y.-C.: Investigating effectiveness and user acceptance of semantic social tagging for knowledge sharing (2012) 0.01
    0.014021028 = product of:
      0.028042056 = sum of:
        0.028042056 = product of:
          0.05608411 = sum of:
            0.05608411 = weight(_text_:searching in 2732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05608411 = score(doc=2732,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.26816747 = fieldWeight in 2732, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2732)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Social tagging systems enable users to assign arbitrary tags to various digital resources. However, they face vague-meaning problems when users retrieve or present resources with the keyword-based tags. In order to solve these problems, this study takes advantage of Semantic Web technology and the topological characteristics of knowledge maps to develop a system that comprises a semantic tagging mechanism and triple-pattern and visual searching mechanisms. A field experiment was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness and user acceptance of these mechanisms in a knowledge sharing context. The results show that the semantic social tagging system is more effective than a keyword-based system. The visualized knowledge map helps users capture an overview of the knowledge domain, reduce cognitive effort for the search, and obtain more enjoyment. Traditional keyword tagging with a keyword search still has the advantage of ease of use and the users had higher intention to use it. This study also proposes directions for future development of semantic social tagging systems.
  9. Müller-Prove, M.: Modell und Anwendungsperspektive des Social Tagging (2008) 0.01
    0.01400906 = product of:
      0.02801812 = sum of:
        0.02801812 = product of:
          0.05603624 = sum of:
            0.05603624 = weight(_text_:22 in 2882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05603624 = score(doc=2882,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2882, 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=2882)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Pages
    S.15-22
  10. Catarino, M.E.; Baptista, A.A.: Relating folksonomies with Dublin Core (2008) 0.01
    0.012382377 = product of:
      0.024764754 = sum of:
        0.024764754 = product of:
          0.049529508 = sum of:
            0.049529508 = weight(_text_:22 in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049529508 = score(doc=2652,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2652, 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=2652)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Pages
    S.14-22
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
  11. Harrer, A.; Lohmann, S.: Potenziale von Tagging als partizipative Methode für Lehrportale und E-Learning-Kurse (2008) 0.01
    0.012257928 = product of:
      0.024515856 = sum of:
        0.024515856 = product of:
          0.049031712 = sum of:
            0.049031712 = weight(_text_:22 in 2889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049031712 = score(doc=2889,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2889, 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=2889)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    21. 6.2009 12:22:44
  12. Huang, C.; Fu, T.; Chen, H.: Text-based video content classification for online video-sharing sites (2010) 0.01
    0.01168419 = product of:
      0.02336838 = sum of:
        0.02336838 = product of:
          0.04673676 = sum of:
            0.04673676 = weight(_text_:searching in 3452) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04673676 = score(doc=3452,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.22347288 = fieldWeight in 3452, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3452)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    With the emergence of Web 2.0, sharing personal content, communicating ideas, and interacting with other online users in Web 2.0 communities have become daily routines for online users. User-generated data from Web 2.0 sites provide rich personal information (e.g., personal preferences and interests) and can be utilized to obtain insight about cyber communities and their social networks. Many studies have focused on leveraging user-generated information to analyze blogs and forums, but few studies have applied this approach to video-sharing Web sites. In this study, we propose a text-based framework for video content classification of online-video sharing Web sites. Different types of user-generated data (e.g., titles, descriptions, and comments) were used as proxies for online videos, and three types of text features (lexical, syntactic, and content-specific features) were extracted. Three feature-based classification techniques (C4.5, Naïve Bayes, and Support Vector Machine) were used to classify videos. To evaluate the proposed framework, user-generated data from candidate videos, which were identified by searching user-given keywords on YouTube, were first collected. Then, a subset of the collected data was randomly selected and manually tagged by users as our experiment data. The experimental results showed that the proposed approach was able to classify online videos based on users' interests with accuracy rates up to 87.2%, and all three types of text features contributed to discriminating videos. Support Vector Machine outperformed C4.5 and Naïve Bayes techniques in our experiments. In addition, our case study further demonstrated that accurate video-classification results are very useful for identifying implicit cyber communities on video-sharing Web sites.
  13. Kruk, S.R.; Kruk, E.; Stankiewicz, K.: Evaluation of semantic and social technologies for digital libraries (2009) 0.01
    0.010506795 = product of:
      0.02101359 = sum of:
        0.02101359 = product of:
          0.04202718 = sum of:
            0.04202718 = weight(_text_:22 in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04202718 = score(doc=3387,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3387, 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=3387)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    1. 8.2010 12:35:22
  14. Rolla, P.J.: User tags versus Subject headings : can user-supplied data improve subject access to library collections? (2009) 0.01
    0.010506795 = product of:
      0.02101359 = sum of:
        0.02101359 = product of:
          0.04202718 = sum of:
            0.04202718 = weight(_text_:22 in 3601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04202718 = score(doc=3601,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3601, 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=3601)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  15. Strader, C.R.: Author-assigned keywords versus Library of Congress Subject Headings : implications for the cataloging of electronic theses and dissertations (2009) 0.01
    0.010506795 = product of:
      0.02101359 = sum of:
        0.02101359 = product of:
          0.04202718 = sum of:
            0.04202718 = weight(_text_:22 in 3602) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04202718 = score(doc=3602,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3602, 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=3602)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  16. Niemann, C.: Tag-Science : Ein Analysemodell zur Nutzbarkeit von Tagging-Daten (2011) 0.01
    0.010506795 = product of:
      0.02101359 = sum of:
        0.02101359 = product of:
          0.04202718 = sum of:
            0.04202718 = weight(_text_:22 in 164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04202718 = score(doc=164,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 164, 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=164)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    ¬Die Kraft der digitalen Unordnung: 32. Arbeits- und Fortbildungstagung der ASpB e. V., Sektion 5 im Deutschen Bibliotheksverband, 22.-25. September 2009 in der Universität Karlsruhe. Hrsg: Jadwiga Warmbrunn u.a
  17. Wei, W.; Ram, S.: Utilizing sozial bookmarking tag space for Web content discovery : a social network analysis approach (2010) 0.01
    0.009347352 = product of:
      0.018694704 = sum of:
        0.018694704 = product of:
          0.03738941 = sum of:
            0.03738941 = weight(_text_:searching in 1) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03738941 = score(doc=1,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.1787783 = fieldWeight in 1, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Social bookmarking has gained popularity since the advent of Web 2.0. Keywords known as tags are created to annotate web content, and the resulting tag space composed of the tags, the resources, and the users arises as a new platform for web content discovery. Useful and interesting web resources can be located through searching and browsing based on tags, as well as following the user-user connections formed in the social bookmarking community. However, the effectiveness of tag-based search is limited due to the lack of explicitly represented semantics in the tag space. In addition, social connections between users are underused for web content discovery because of the inadequate social functions. In this research, we propose a comprehensive framework to reorganize the flat tag space into a hierarchical faceted model. We also studied the structure and properties of various networks emerging from the tag space for the purpose of more efficient web content discovery. The major research approach used in this research is social network analysis (SNA), together with methodologies employed in design science research. The contribution of our research includes: (i) a faceted model to categorize social bookmarking tags; (ii) a relationship ontology to represent the semantics of relationships between tags; (iii) heuristics to reorganize the flat tag space into a hierarchical faceted model using analysis of tag-tag co-occurrence networks; (iv) an implemented prototype system as proof-of-concept to validate the feasibility of the reorganization approach; (v) a set of evaluations of the social functions of the current networking features of social bookmarking and a series of recommendations as to how to improve the social functions to facilitate web content discovery.
  18. Danowski, P.: Authority files and Web 2.0 : Wikipedia and the PND. An Example (2007) 0.01
    0.008755663 = product of:
      0.017511327 = sum of:
        0.017511327 = product of:
          0.035022654 = sum of:
            0.035022654 = weight(_text_:22 in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.035022654 = score(doc=1291,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1291, 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=1291)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".
  19. Chen, M.; Liu, X.; Qin, J.: Semantic relation extraction from socially-generated tags : a methodology for metadata generation (2008) 0.01
    0.008755663 = product of:
      0.017511327 = sum of:
        0.017511327 = product of:
          0.035022654 = sum of:
            0.035022654 = weight(_text_:22 in 2648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.035022654 = score(doc=2648,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2648, 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=2648)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
  20. Kim, H.L.; Scerri, S.; Breslin, J.G.; Decker, S.; Kim, H.G.: ¬The state of the art in tag ontologies : a semantic model for tagging and folksonomies (2008) 0.01
    0.008755663 = product of:
      0.017511327 = sum of:
        0.017511327 = product of:
          0.035022654 = sum of:
            0.035022654 = weight(_text_:22 in 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.035022654 = score(doc=2650,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051699217 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2650, 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=2650)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas