-
Raieli, R.: ¬The semantic hole : enthusiasm and caution around multimedia information retrieval (2012)
0.04
0.044376425 = product of:
0.08875285 = sum of:
0.019843826 = weight(_text_:information in 4888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019843826 = score(doc=4888,freq=12.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.23754507 = fieldWeight in 4888, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4888)
0.06890903 = sum of:
0.02331961 = weight(_text_:technology in 4888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02331961 = score(doc=4888,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 4888, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4888)
0.045589417 = weight(_text_:22 in 4888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.045589417 = score(doc=4888,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16663991 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = 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(2/4)
- 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
-
Baxendale, P.: Content analysis, specification and control (1966)
0.03
0.031617623 = product of:
0.063235246 = sum of:
0.025923865 = weight(_text_:information in 218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025923865 = score(doc=218,freq=2.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 218, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=218)
0.03731138 = product of:
0.07462276 = sum of:
0.07462276 = weight(_text_:technology in 218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07462276 = score(doc=218,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.5265094 = fieldWeight in 218, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=218)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 1(1966), S.71-106
-
Sharp, J.R.: Content analysis, specification, and control (1967)
0.03
0.031617623 = product of:
0.063235246 = sum of:
0.025923865 = weight(_text_:information in 226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025923865 = score(doc=226,freq=2.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 226, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=226)
0.03731138 = product of:
0.07462276 = sum of:
0.07462276 = weight(_text_:technology in 226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07462276 = score(doc=226,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.5265094 = fieldWeight in 226, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=226)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 2(1967), S.87-122
-
Taulbee, O.E.: Content analysis, specification, and control (1968)
0.03
0.031617623 = product of:
0.063235246 = sum of:
0.025923865 = weight(_text_:information in 232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025923865 = score(doc=232,freq=2.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 232, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=232)
0.03731138 = product of:
0.07462276 = sum of:
0.07462276 = weight(_text_:technology in 232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07462276 = score(doc=232,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.5265094 = fieldWeight in 232, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=232)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 3(1968), S.105-136
-
Fairthorne, R.A.: Content analysis, specification, and control (1969)
0.03
0.031617623 = product of:
0.063235246 = sum of:
0.025923865 = weight(_text_:information in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025923865 = score(doc=238,freq=2.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
0.03731138 = product of:
0.07462276 = sum of:
0.07462276 = weight(_text_:technology in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07462276 = score(doc=238,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.5265094 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 4(1969), S.73-110
-
Pejtersen, A.M.: Design of a classification scheme for fiction based on an analysis of actual user-librarian communication, and use of the scheme for control of librarians' search strategies (1980)
0.03
0.027575132 = product of:
0.055150263 = sum of:
0.022913676 = weight(_text_:information in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022913676 = score(doc=5835,freq=4.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
0.032236587 = product of:
0.064473175 = sum of:
0.064473175 = weight(_text_:22 in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.064473175 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16663991 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = 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)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Date
- 5. 8.2006 13:22:44
- Source
- Theory and application of information research. Proc. of the 2nd Int. Research Forum on Information Science, 3.-6.8.1977, Copenhagen. Ed.: O. Harbo u, L. Kajberg
-
Shaw, R.: Information organization and the philosophy of history (2013)
0.02
0.020842262 = product of:
0.041684523 = sum of:
0.025360793 = weight(_text_:information in 946) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025360793 = score(doc=946,freq=10.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.3035872 = fieldWeight in 946, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=946)
0.016323728 = product of:
0.032647457 = sum of:
0.032647457 = weight(_text_:technology in 946) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032647457 = score(doc=946,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 946, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=946)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- The philosophy of history can help articulate problems relevant to information organization. One such problem is "aboutness": How do texts relate to the world? In response to this problem, philosophers of history have developed theories of colligation describing how authors bind together phenomena under organizing concepts. Drawing on these ideas, I present a theory of subject analysis that avoids the problematic illusion of an independent "landscape" of subjects. This theory points to a broad vision of the future of information organization and some specific challenges to be met.
- Series
- Advances in information science
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.6, S.1092-1103
-
Hjoerland, B.: Towards a theory of aboutness, subject, topicality, theme, domain, field, content ... and relevance (2001)
0.02
0.019503556 = product of:
0.039007112 = sum of:
0.022683382 = weight(_text_:information in 6032) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022683382 = score(doc=6032,freq=8.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 6032, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6032)
0.016323728 = product of:
0.032647457 = sum of:
0.032647457 = weight(_text_:technology in 6032) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032647457 = score(doc=6032,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 6032, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6032)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Theories of aboutness and theories of subject analysis and of related concepts such as topicality are often isolated from each other in the literature of information science (IS) and related disciplines. In IS it is important to consider the nature and meaning of these concepts, which is closely related to theoretical and metatheoretical issues in information retrieval (IR). A theory of IR must specify which concepts should be regarded as synonymous concepts and explain how the meaning of the nonsynonymous concepts should be defined
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.9, S.774-778
- Theme
- Information
-
Beghtol, C.: Toward a theory of fiction analysis for information storage and retrieval (1992)
0.02
0.019375602 = product of:
0.038751204 = sum of:
0.012961932 = weight(_text_:information in 5830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012961932 = score(doc=5830,freq=2.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 5830, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5830)
0.02578927 = product of:
0.05157854 = sum of:
0.05157854 = weight(_text_:22 in 5830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05157854 = score(doc=5830,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16663991 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = 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)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Date
- 5. 8.2006 13:22:08
-
Rorissa, A.; Iyer, H.: Theories of cognition and image categorization : what category labels reveal about basic level theory (2008)
0.02
0.018902179 = product of:
0.037804358 = sum of:
0.02381259 = weight(_text_:information in 1958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02381259 = score(doc=1958,freq=12.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.2850541 = fieldWeight in 1958, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1958)
0.013991767 = product of:
0.027983533 = sum of:
0.027983533 = weight(_text_:technology in 1958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027983533 = score(doc=1958,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 1958, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1958)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Information search and retrieval interactions usually involve information content in the form of document collections, information retrieval systems and interfaces, and the user. To fully understand information search and retrieval interactions between users' cognitive space and the information space, researchers need to turn to cognitive models and theories. In this article, the authors use one of these theories, the basic level theory. Use of the basic level theory to understand human categorization is both appropriate and essential to user-centered design of taxonomies, ontologies, browsing interfaces, and other indexing tools and systems. Analyses of data from two studies involving free sorting by 105 participants of 100 images were conducted. The types of categories formed and category labels were examined. Results of the analyses indicate that image category labels generally belong to superordinate to the basic level, and are generic and interpretive. Implications for research on theories of cognition and categorization, and design of image indexing, retrieval and browsing systems are discussed.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.9, S.1383-1392
-
Fremery, W. De; Buckland, M.K.: Context, relevance, and labor (2022)
0.02
0.017864795 = product of:
0.03572959 = sum of:
0.021737823 = weight(_text_:information in 4240) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021737823 = score(doc=4240,freq=10.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 4240, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4240)
0.013991767 = product of:
0.027983533 = sum of:
0.027983533 = weight(_text_:technology in 4240) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027983533 = score(doc=4240,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 4240, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4240)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Since information science concerns the transmission of records, it concerns context. The transmission of documents ensures their arrival in new contexts. Documents and their copies are spread across times and places. The amount of labor required to discover and retrieve relevant documents is also formulated by context. Thus, any serious consideration of communication and of information technologies quickly leads to a concern with context, relevance, and labor. Information scientists have developed many theories of context, relevance, and labor but not a framework for organizing them and describing their relationship with one another. We propose the words context and relevance can be used to articulate a useful framework for considering the diversity of approaches to context and relevance in information science, as well as their relations with each other and with labor.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.9, S.1268-1278
-
Chen, S.-J.; Lee, H.-L.: Art images and mental associations : a preliminary exploration (2014)
0.01
0.0145317 = product of:
0.0290634 = sum of:
0.00972145 = weight(_text_:information in 1416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.00972145 = score(doc=1416,freq=2.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1416, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1416)
0.019341951 = product of:
0.038683902 = sum of:
0.038683902 = weight(_text_:22 in 1416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038683902 = score(doc=1416,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16663991 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = 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)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- 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.
- 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
-
White, M.D.; Marsh, E.E.: Content analysis : a flexible methodology (2006)
0.01
0.0145317 = product of:
0.0290634 = sum of:
0.00972145 = weight(_text_:information in 5589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.00972145 = score(doc=5589,freq=2.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 5589, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5589)
0.019341951 = product of:
0.038683902 = sum of:
0.038683902 = weight(_text_:22 in 5589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038683902 = score(doc=5589,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16663991 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = 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)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- 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
-
Chen, H.: ¬An analysis of image queries in the field of art history (2001)
0.01
0.01383271 = product of:
0.02766542 = sum of:
0.011341691 = weight(_text_:information in 5187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011341691 = score(doc=5187,freq=2.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 5187, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5187)
0.016323728 = product of:
0.032647457 = sum of:
0.032647457 = weight(_text_:technology in 5187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032647457 = score(doc=5187,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 5187, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5187)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.3, S.260-273
-
Sauperl, A.: Catalogers' common ground and shared knowledge (2004)
0.01
0.012845755 = product of:
0.02569151 = sum of:
0.0140317045 = weight(_text_:information in 2069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0140317045 = score(doc=2069,freq=6.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 2069, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2069)
0.011659805 = product of:
0.02331961 = sum of:
0.02331961 = weight(_text_:technology in 2069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02331961 = score(doc=2069,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 2069, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2069)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- The problem of multiple interpretations of meaning in the indexing process has been mostly avoided by information scientists. Among the few who have addressed this question are Clare Beghtol and Jens Erik Mai. Their findings and findings of other researchers in the area of information science, social psychology, and psycholinguistics indicate that the source of the problem might lie in the background and culture of each indexer or cataloger. Are the catalogers aware of the problem? A general model of the indexing process was developed from observations and interviews of 12 catalogers in three American academic libraries. The model is illustrated with a hypothetical cataloger's process. The study with catalogers revealed that catalogers are aware of the author's, the user's, and their own meaning, but do not try to accommodate them all. On the other hand, they make every effort to build common ground with catalog users by studying documents related to the document being cataloged, and by considering catalog records and subject headings related to the subject identified in the document being cataloged. They try to build common ground with other catalogers by using cataloging tools and by inferring unstated rules of cataloging from examples in the catalogs.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 55(2004) no.1, S.55-63
-
Wilson, M.J.; Wilson, M.L.: ¬A comparison of techniques for measuring sensemaking and learning within participant-generated summaries (2013)
0.01
0.012845755 = product of:
0.02569151 = sum of:
0.0140317045 = weight(_text_:information in 612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0140317045 = score(doc=612,freq=6.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 612, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=612)
0.011659805 = product of:
0.02331961 = sum of:
0.02331961 = weight(_text_:technology in 612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02331961 = score(doc=612,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 612, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=612)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- While it is easy to identify whether someone has found a piece of information during a search task, it is much harder to measure how much someone has learned during the search process. Searchers who are learning often exhibit exploratory behaviors, and so current research is often focused on improving support for exploratory search. Consequently, we need effective measures of learning to demonstrate better support for exploratory search. Some approaches, such as quizzes, measure recall when learning from a fixed source of information. This research, however, focuses on techniques for measuring open-ended learning, which often involve analyzing handwritten summaries produced by participants after a task. There are two common techniques for analyzing such summaries: (a) counting facts and statements and (b) judging topic coverage. Both of these techniques, however, can be easily confounded by simple variables such as summary length. This article presents a new technique that measures depth of learning within written summaries based on Bloom's taxonomy (B.S. Bloom & M.D. Engelhart, 1956). This technique was generated using grounded theory and is designed to be less susceptible to such confounding variables. Together, these three categories of measure were compared by applying them to a large collection of written summaries produced in a task-based study, and our results provide insights into each of their strengths and weaknesses. Both fact-to-statement ratio and our own measure of depth of learning were effective while being less affected by confounding variables. Recommendations and clear areas of future work are provided to help continued research into supporting sensemaking and learning.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.2, S.291-306
-
Allen, R.B.; Wu, Y.: Metrics for the scope of a collection (2005)
0.01
0.011856608 = product of:
0.023713216 = sum of:
0.00972145 = weight(_text_:information in 4570) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.00972145 = score(doc=4570,freq=2.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4570, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4570)
0.013991767 = product of:
0.027983533 = sum of:
0.027983533 = weight(_text_:technology in 4570) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027983533 = score(doc=4570,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 4570, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4570)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.12, S.1243-1249
-
Bi, Y.: Sentiment classification in social media data by combining triplet belief functions (2022)
0.01
0.011856608 = product of:
0.023713216 = sum of:
0.00972145 = weight(_text_:information in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.00972145 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
0.013991767 = product of:
0.027983533 = sum of:
0.027983533 = weight(_text_:technology in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027983533 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.7, S.968-991
-
From information to knowledge : conceptual and content analysis by computer (1995)
0.01
0.011558321 = product of:
0.023116643 = sum of:
0.011456838 = weight(_text_:information in 5392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011456838 = score(doc=5392,freq=4.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 5392, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5392)
0.011659805 = product of:
0.02331961 = sum of:
0.02331961 = weight(_text_:technology in 5392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02331961 = score(doc=5392,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 5392, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5392)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Content
- SCHMIDT, K.M.: Concepts - content - meaning: an introduction; DUCHASTEL, J. et al.: The SACAO project: using computation toward textual data analysis; PAQUIN, L.-C. u. L. DUPUY: An approach to expertise transfer: computer-assisted text analysis; HOGENRAAD, R., Y. BESTGEN u. J.-L. NYSTEN: Terrorist rhetoric: texture and architecture; MOHLER, P.P.: On the interaction between reading and computing: an interpretative approach to content analysis; LANCASHIRE, I.: Computer tools for cognitive stylistics; MERGENTHALER, E.: An outline of knowledge based text analysis; NAMENWIRTH, J.Z.: Ideography in computer-aided content analysis; WEBER, R.P. u. J.Z. Namenwirth: Content-analytic indicators: a self-critique; McKINNON, A.: Optimizing the aberrant frequency word technique; ROSATI, R.: Factor analysis in classical archaeology: export patterns of Attic pottery trade; PETRILLO, P.S.: Old and new worlds: ancient coinage and modern technology; DARANYI, S., S. MARJAI u.a.: Caryatids and the measurement of semiosis in architecture; ZARRI, G.P.: Intelligent information retrieval: an application in the field of historical biographical data; BOUCHARD, G., R. ROY u.a.: Computers and genealogy: from family reconstitution to population reconstruction; DEMÉLAS-BOHY, M.-D. u. M. RENAUD: Instability, networks and political parties: a political history expert system prototype; DARANYI, S., A. ABRANYI u. G. KOVACS: Knowledge extraction from ethnopoetic texts by multivariate statistical methods; FRAUTSCHI, R.L.: Measures of narrative voice in French prose fiction applied to textual samples from the enlightenment to the twentieth century; DANNENBERG, R. u.a.: A project in computer music: the musician's workbench
-
Thelwall, M.; Buckley, K.; Paltoglou, G.: Sentiment strength detection for the social web (2012)
0.01
0.011558321 = product of:
0.023116643 = sum of:
0.011456838 = weight(_text_:information in 4972) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011456838 = score(doc=4972,freq=4.0), product of:
0.083537094 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 4972, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4972)
0.011659805 = product of:
0.02331961 = sum of:
0.02331961 = weight(_text_:technology in 4972) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02331961 = score(doc=4972,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1417311 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.047586527 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 4972, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4972)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Sentiment analysis is concerned with the automatic extraction of sentiment-related information from text. Although most sentiment analysis addresses commercial tasks, such as extracting opinions from product reviews, there is increasing interest in the affective dimension of the social web, and Twitter in particular. Most sentiment analysis algorithms are not ideally suited to this task because they exploit indirect indicators of sentiment that can reflect genre or topic instead. Hence, such algorithms used to process social web texts can identify spurious sentiment patterns caused by topics rather than affective phenomena. This article assesses an improved version of the algorithm SentiStrength for sentiment strength detection across the social web that primarily uses direct indications of sentiment. The results from six diverse social web data sets (MySpace, Twitter, YouTube, Digg, Runners World, BBC Forums) indicate that SentiStrength 2 is successful in the sense of performing better than a baseline approach for all data sets in both supervised and unsupervised cases. SentiStrength is not always better than machine-learning approaches that exploit indirect indicators of sentiment, however, and is particularly weaker for positive sentiment in news-related discussions. Overall, the results suggest that, even unsupervised, SentiStrength is robust enough to be applied to a wide variety of different social web contexts.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.1, S.163-173
