-
Ward, M.L.: ¬The future of the human indexer (1996)
0.05
0.04750511 = product of:
0.071257666 = sum of:
0.050856233 = weight(_text_:electronic in 7244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050856233 = score(doc=7244,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
0.05019314 = queryNorm
0.259166 = fieldWeight in 7244, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7244)
0.020401431 = product of:
0.040802862 = sum of:
0.040802862 = weight(_text_:22 in 7244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040802862 = score(doc=7244,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05019314 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 7244, 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=7244)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Considers the principles of indexing and the intellectual skills involved in order to determine what automatic indexing systems would be required in order to supplant or complement the human indexer. Good indexing requires: considerable prior knowledge of the literature; judgement as to what to index and what depth to index; reading skills; abstracting skills; and classification skills, Illustrates these features with a detailed description of abstracting and indexing processes involved in generating entries for the mechanical engineering database POWERLINK. Briefly assesses the possibility of replacing human indexers with specialist indexing software, with particular reference to the Object Analyzer from the InTEXT automatic indexing system and using the criteria described for human indexers. At present, it is unlikely that the automatic indexer will replace the human indexer, but when more primary texts are available in electronic form, it may be a useful productivity tool for dealing with large quantities of low grade texts (should they be wanted in the database)
- Date
- 9. 2.1997 18:44:22
-
Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.; Blurton, A.: Obtaining information accurately and quickly : are structured abstracts more efficient? (1996)
0.04
0.039587595 = product of:
0.059381388 = sum of:
0.042380195 = weight(_text_:electronic in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042380195 = score(doc=7673,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
0.05019314 = queryNorm
0.21597168 = fieldWeight in 7673, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=7673)
0.017001195 = product of:
0.03400239 = sum of:
0.03400239 = weight(_text_:22 in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03400239 = score(doc=7673,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05019314 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 7673, 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=7673)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Reports results of 2 studies to determine if structured abstracts offer any advantage to users in terms of whether they are easier to search. In study 1, using a specially prepared electronic database of abstracts in either their original format or the structured format, 52 users were asked to find the answers to 2 questions for each of 8 abstracts in traditional format followed by 2 questions for each of 8 abstracts set in the structured format. Time and error data were recorded automatically. In study 2, using a printed database, 56 users were asked to to find 5 abstracts that reprted a particular kind of study and then find 5 more references that reported another kind of study. In study 1 users performed significantly faster and made fewer errors with structured abstracts but there were some unexplainable practice effects. In study 2, the users again performed significantly faster and made fewer errors with structured abstracts. However, there were asymmetrical transfer effects: users who responded first to the structured abstracts responded more quickly to the following traditional abstracts than did those users who responded first to the traditional abstracts. Nevertheless, the overall findings support the hypothesis that it is easier for user to search structured abstracts than it is to search traditional abstracts
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.5, S.349-356
-
Armstrong, C.J.; Wheatley, A.: Writing abstracts for online databases : results of database producers' guidelines (1998)
0.03
0.027969502 = product of:
0.083908506 = sum of:
0.083908506 = weight(_text_:electronic in 3295) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.083908506 = score(doc=3295,freq=4.0), product of:
0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
0.05019314 = queryNorm
0.4276021 = fieldWeight in 3295, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3295)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Reports on one area of research in an Electronic Libraries Programme (eLib) MODELS (MOving to Distributed Environments for Library Services) supporting study in 3 investigative areas: examination of current database producers' guidelines for their abstract writers; a brief survey of abstracts in some traditional online databases; and a detailed survey of abstracts from 3 types of electronic database (print sourced online databases, Internet subject trees or directories, and Internet gateways). Examination of database producers' guidelines, reported here, gave a clear view of the intentions behind professionally produced traditional (printed index based) database abstracts and provided a benchmark against which to judge the conclusions of the larger investigations into abstract style, readability and content
-
Hartley, J.: Is it appropriate to use structured abstracts in social science journals? (1997)
0.02
0.017649466 = product of:
0.052948397 = sum of:
0.052948397 = product of:
0.10589679 = sum of:
0.10589679 = weight(_text_:publishing in 2749) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10589679 = score(doc=2749,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
0.05019314 = queryNorm
0.4318339 = fieldWeight in 2749, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2749)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Learned publishing. 10(1997) no.4, S.313-317
-
Lancaster, F.W.: Indexing and abstracting in theory and practice (1998)
0.02
0.016952079 = product of:
0.050856233 = sum of:
0.050856233 = weight(_text_:electronic in 4141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050856233 = score(doc=4141,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
0.05019314 = queryNorm
0.259166 = fieldWeight in 4141, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4141)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Footnote
- Rez. in: JASIS 50(1999) no.8, S.728-730 (J.-E. Mai); Indexer 21(1999) no.3, S.148 (P.F. Booth); Managing information 6(1999) no.1, S.48 (S.T. Clarke); Electronic library 17(1999) no.3, S.193 (F. Parry)
-
Pinto, M.: Abstracting/abstract adaptation to digital environments : research trends (2003)
0.02
0.016952079 = product of:
0.050856233 = sum of:
0.050856233 = weight(_text_:electronic in 4446) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050856233 = score(doc=4446,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
0.05019314 = queryNorm
0.259166 = fieldWeight in 4446, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4446)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- The technological revolution is affecting the structure, form and content of documents, reducing the effectiveness of traditional abstracts that, to some extent, are inadequate to the new documentary conditions. Aims to show the directions in which abstracting/abstracts can evolve to achieve the necessary adequacy in the new digital environments. Three researching trends are proposed: theoretical, methodological and pragmatic. Theoretically, there are some needs for expanding the document concept, reengineering abstracting and designing interdisciplinary models. Methodologically, the trend is toward the structuring, automating and qualifying of the abstracts. Pragmatically, abstracts networking, combined with alternative and complementary models, open a new and promising horizon. Automating, structuring and qualifying abstracting/abstract offer some short-term prospects for progress. Concludes that reengineering, networking and visualising would be middle-term fruitful areas of research toward the full adequacy of abstracting in the new electronic age.
-
Koltay, T.: ¬A hypertext tutorial on abstracting for library science students (1995)
0.01
0.011334131 = product of:
0.03400239 = sum of:
0.03400239 = product of:
0.06800478 = sum of:
0.06800478 = weight(_text_:22 in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06800478 = score(doc=3061,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05019314 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3061, 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=3061)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 27. 1.1996 18:22:06
-
Palais, E.S.: Abstracting for reference librarians (1988)
0.01
0.0090673035 = product of:
0.02720191 = sum of:
0.02720191 = product of:
0.05440382 = sum of:
0.05440382 = weight(_text_:22 in 2832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05440382 = score(doc=2832,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05019314 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2832, 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=2832)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Reference librarian. 1988, no.22, S.297-308
-
Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.: Which layout do you prefer? : an analysis of readers' preferences for different typographic layouts of structured abstracts (1996)
0.01
0.0068004774 = product of:
0.020401431 = sum of:
0.020401431 = product of:
0.040802862 = sum of:
0.040802862 = weight(_text_:22 in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040802862 = score(doc=4411,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05019314 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4411, 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=4411)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.1, S.27-37
-
Wan, X.; Yang, J.; Xiao, J.: Incorporating cross-document relationships between sentences for single document summarizations (2006)
0.01
0.0068004774 = product of:
0.020401431 = sum of:
0.020401431 = product of:
0.040802862 = sum of:
0.040802862 = weight(_text_:22 in 2421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040802862 = score(doc=2421,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05019314 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2421, 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=2421)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006
