Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.069843456 = product of:
  0.10476518 = sum of:
    0.05940771 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05940771 = score(doc=5177,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19731061 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05068286 = queryNorm
        0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 5177, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5177)
    0.04535747 = product of:
      0.09071494 = sum of:
        0.09071494 = weight(_text_:searching in 5177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09071494 = score(doc=5177,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.20502694 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05068286 = queryNorm
            0.44245374 = fieldWeight in 5177, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5177)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Bibliofile is a CD-ROM cataloguing product that provides LC MARC records. Available databases include English only, foreign language materials, audio-visual materials, as well as several that are more specialized. Bibliofile runs on a PC that may be connected to a network. Advantages over an online utility include lower cost, no telecommunication problems, no slow response times, fixed subscription rates with no hourly use charges, easy installation, searching and editing and good phone support. Disadvantages include no member-contributed records and no member holdings to use for interlibrary loan. A library should consider type and level of materials catalogued, existence of an interface with a local OPAC, total cataloguing time used, and other sources for ILL searching when considering bibliofile as a cataloguing alternative

0.02449933 = product of:
  0.07349799 = sum of:
    0.07349799 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 6105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07349799 = score(doc=6105,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.19731061 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05068286 = queryNorm
        0.3724989 = fieldWeight in 6105, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6105)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Die Deutsche Bibliothek, the Library of Congress, and OCLC Online Computer Library Center are jointly developing a virtual international authority file (VIAF) for personal names which links authority records from the world's national bibliographic agencies and will be made freely available on the Web. The goals of the project are to prove the viability of automatically linking authority records from different national authority files and to demonstrate its benefits. The authority and bibliographic files from the Library of Congress and Die Deutsche Bibliothek were used to create the initial VIAF which contains over six million names with over a half million links. A key aspect of the project was the development of automated name matching algorithms which use information from both authority records and the corresponding bibliographic records. The practicality of algorithmically linking the personal names between national authority files was demonstrated; seventy percent of the authority records for personal names common to both files were automatically linked with an error rate of less than one percent. The long-term goal of the VIAF project is to combine the authoritative names from many national libraries and other significant sources into a shared global authority service.

0.010690859 = product of:
  0.032072574 = sum of:
    0.032072574 = product of:
      0.06414515 = sum of:
        0.06414515 = weight(_text_:searching in 6106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06414515 = score(doc=6106,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20502694 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05068286 = queryNorm
            0.31286204 = fieldWeight in 6106, 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=6106)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Living Memory is an interdisciplinary project running for two years, which is realised in cooperation of several institutions. It aims at developing an information system for a digital collection of different types of visual resources and will combine classical methods of image indexing and retrieval with innovative approaches like content-based image retrieval and the use of topic maps for semantic searching and browsing. This work-in-progress-report outlines the aims of the project and present first results after the period of fifteen months.

0.0034334138 = product of:
  0.010300241 = sum of:
    0.010300241 = product of:
      0.020600483 = sum of:
        0.020600483 = weight(_text_:22 in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020600483 = score(doc=3035,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17748274 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05068286 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3035, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3035)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

As the team describe in a paper posted (http://arxiv.org/abs/1605.04951) on arXiv, they found that figures did indeed matter-but not all in the same way. An average paper in PubMed Central has about one diagram for every three pages and gets 1.67 citations. Papers with more diagrams per page and, to a lesser extent, plots per page tended to be more influential (on average, a paper accrued two more citations for every extra diagram per page, and one more for every extra plot per page). By contrast, including photographs and equations seemed to decrease the chances of a paper being cited by others. That agrees with a study from 2012, whose authors counted (by hand) the number of mathematical expressions in over 600 biology papers and found that each additional equation per page reduced the number of citations a paper received by 22%. This does not mean that researchers should rush to include more diagrams in their next paper. Dr Howe has not shown what is behind the effect, which may merely be one of correlation, rather than causation. It could, for example, be that papers with lots of diagrams tend to be those that illustrate new concepts, and thus start a whole new field of inquiry. Such papers will certainly be cited a lot. On the other hand, the presence of equations really might reduce citations. Biologists (as are most of those who write and read the papers in PubMed Central) are notoriously mathsaverse. If that is the case, looking in a physics archive would probably produce a different result.