-
Rodriguez, R.D.: Kaiser's systematic indexing (1984)
0.02
0.0236993 = product of:
0.0947972 = sum of:
0.0947972 = weight(_text_:headings in 4521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0947972 = score(doc=4521,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22113821 = queryWeight, product of:
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.045596033 = queryNorm
0.42867854 = fieldWeight in 4521, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4521)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- J. Kaiser (1868-1927) developed a system of subject indexing based on what he called "concretes" and "processes" to govern the form of subject headings and subdivisions. Although Kaiser applied his systematic indexing to specialized technical and business collections, his ideas are entirely applicable to all book collections and catalogs. Though largely ignored, Kaiser's system is of permanent interest in the study of the development of subject analysis
-
Dahlberg, I.: ¬The future of classification in libraries and networks : a theoretical point of view (1995)
0.01
0.014812064 = product of:
0.059248257 = sum of:
0.059248257 = weight(_text_:headings in 5563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.059248257 = score(doc=5563,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22113821 = queryWeight, product of:
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.045596033 = queryNorm
0.2679241 = fieldWeight in 5563, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5563)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Some time ago, some people said classification is dead, we don't need it any more. They probably thought that subject headings could do the job of the necessary subject analysis and shelving of books. However, all of a sudden in 1984 the attitude changed, when an OCLC study of Karen Markey started to show what could be done even with an "outdated system" such as the Dewey Decimal Classification in the computer, once it was visible on a screen to show the helpfulness of a classified library catalogue called an OPAC; classification was brought back into the minds of doubtful librarians and of all those who thought they would not need it any longer. But the problem once phrased: "We are stuck with the two old systems, LCC and DDC" would not find a solution and is still with us today. We know that our systems are outdated but we seem still to be unable to replace them with better ones. What then should one do and advise, knowing that we need something better? Perhaps a new universal ordering system which more adequately represents and mediates the world of our present day knowledge? If we were to develop it from scratch, how would we create it and implement it in such a way that it would be acceptable to the majority of the present intellectual world population?
-
Szostak, R.: Facet analysis using grammar (2017)
0.01
0.014812064 = product of:
0.059248257 = sum of:
0.059248257 = weight(_text_:headings in 3866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.059248257 = score(doc=3866,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22113821 = queryWeight, product of:
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.045596033 = queryNorm
0.2679241 = fieldWeight in 3866, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3866)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Basic grammar can achieve most/all of the goals of facet analysis without requiring the use of facet indicators. Facet analysis is thus rendered far simpler for classificationist, classifier, and user. We compare facet analysis and grammar, and show how various facets can be represented grammatically. We then address potential challenges in employing grammar as subject classification. A detailed review of basic grammar supports the hypothesis that it is feasible to usefully employ grammatical construction in subject classification. A manageable - and programmable - set of adjustments is required as classifiers move fairly directly from sentences in a document (or object or idea) description to formulating a subject classification. The user likewise can move fairly quickly from a query to the identification of relevant works. A review of theories in linguistics indicates that a grammatical approach should reduce ambiguity while encouraging ease of use. This paper applies the recommended approach to a small sample of recently published books. It finds that the approach is feasible and results in a more precise subject description than the subject headings assigned at present. It then explores PRECIS, an indexing system developed in the 1970s. Though our approach differs from PRECIS in many important ways, the experience of PRECIS supports our conclusions regarding both feasibility and precision.
-
Broughton, V.: ¬A faceted classification as the basis of a faceted terminology : conversion of a classified structure to thesaurus format in the Bliss Bibliographic Classification, 2nd Edition (2008)
0.01
0.010514337 = product of:
0.042057347 = sum of:
0.042057347 = product of:
0.08411469 = sum of:
0.08411469 = weight(_text_:terminology in 1857) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08411469 = score(doc=1857,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24053115 = queryWeight, product of:
5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
0.045596033 = queryNorm
0.34970397 = fieldWeight in 1857, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1857)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
-
Broughton, V.: Facet analysis as a tool for modelling subject domains and terminologies (2011)
0.01
0.008761947 = product of:
0.03504779 = sum of:
0.03504779 = product of:
0.07009558 = sum of:
0.07009558 = weight(_text_:terminology in 4826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07009558 = score(doc=4826,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24053115 = queryWeight, product of:
5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
0.045596033 = queryNorm
0.29141995 = fieldWeight in 4826, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4826)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Facet analysis is proposed as a general theory of knowledge organization, with an associated methodology that may be applied to the development of terminology tools in a variety of contexts and formats. Faceted classifications originated as a means of representing complexity in semantic content that facilitates logical organization and effective retrieval in a physical environment. This is achieved through meticulous analysis of concepts, their structural and functional status (based on fundamental categories), and their inter-relationships. These features provide an excellent basis for the general conceptual modelling of domains, and for the generation of KOS other than systematic classifications. This is demonstrated by the adoption of a faceted approach to many web search and visualization tools, and by the emergence of a facet based methodology for the construction of thesauri. Current work on the Bliss Bibliographic Classification (Second Edition) is investigating the ways in which the full complexity of faceted structures may be represented through encoded data, capable of generating intellectually and mechanically compatible forms of indexing tools from a single source. It is suggested that a number of research questions relating to the Semantic Web could be tackled through the medium of facet analysis.
-
Green, R.: Facet analysis and semantic frames (2017)
0.01
0.008761947 = product of:
0.03504779 = sum of:
0.03504779 = product of:
0.07009558 = sum of:
0.07009558 = weight(_text_:terminology in 3849) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07009558 = score(doc=3849,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24053115 = queryWeight, product of:
5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
0.045596033 = queryNorm
0.29141995 = fieldWeight in 3849, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3849)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Various fields, each with its own theories, techniques, and tools, are concerned with identifying and representing the conceptual structure of specific knowledge domains. This paper compares facet analysis, an analytic technique coming out of knowledge organization (especially as undertaken by members of the Classification Research Group (CRG)), with semantic frame analysis, an analytic technique coming out of lexical semantics (especially as undertaken by the developers of Frame-Net) The investigation addresses three questions: 1) how do CRG-style facet analysis and semantic frame analysis characterize the conceptual structures that they identify?; 2) how similar are the techniques they use?; and, 3) how similar are the conceptual structures they produce? Facet analysis is concerned with the logical categories underlying the terminology of an entire field, while semantic frame analysis is concerned with the participant-and-prop structure manifest in sentences about a type of situation or event. When their scope of application is similar, as, for example, in the areas of the performing arts or education, the resulting facets and semantic frame elements often bear striking resemblance, without being the same; facets are more often expressed as semantic types, while frame elements are more often expressed as roles.
-
Szostak, R.: Basic Concepts Classification (BCC) (2020)
0.01
0.008761947 = product of:
0.03504779 = sum of:
0.03504779 = product of:
0.07009558 = sum of:
0.07009558 = weight(_text_:terminology in 5883) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07009558 = score(doc=5883,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24053115 = queryWeight, product of:
5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
0.045596033 = queryNorm
0.29141995 = fieldWeight in 5883, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5883)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- The Basics Concept Classification (BCC) is a "universal" scheme: it attempts to encompass all areas of human understanding. Whereas most universal schemes are organized around scholarly disciplines, the BCC is instead organized around phenomena (things), the relationships that exist among phenomena, and the properties that phenomena and relators may possess. This structure allows the BCC to apply facet analysis without requiring the use of "facet indicators." The main motivation for the BCC was a recognition that existing classifications that are organized around disciplines serve interdisciplinary scholarship poorly. Complex concepts that might be understood quite differently across groups and individuals can generally be broken into basic concepts for which there is enough shared understanding for the purposes of classification. Documents, ideas, and objects are classified synthetically by combining entries from the schedules of phenomena, relators, and properties. The inclusion of separate schedules of-generally verb-like-relators is one of the most unusual aspects of the BCC. This (and the schedules of properties that serve as adjectives or adverbs) allows the production of sentence-like subject strings. Documents can then be classified in terms of the main arguments made in the document. BCC provides very precise descriptors of documents by combining phenomena, relators, and properties synthetically. The terminology employed in the BCC reduces terminological ambiguity. The BCC is still being developed and it needs to be fleshed out in certain respects. Yet it also needs to be applied; only in application can the feasibility and desirability of the classification be adequately assessed.
-
Dahlberg, I.: Grundlagen universaler Wissensordnung : Probleme und Möglichkeiten eines universalen Klassifikationssystems des Wissens (1974)
0.01
0.007722041 = product of:
0.030888164 = sum of:
0.030888164 = product of:
0.06177633 = sum of:
0.06177633 = weight(_text_:22 in 127) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06177633 = score(doc=127,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045596033 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 127, 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=127)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Footnote
- Zugleich Dissertation Univ. Düsseldorf. - Rez. in: ZfBB. 22(1975) S.53-57 (H.-A. Koch)
-
Lin, W.-Y.C.: ¬The concept and applications of faceted classifications (2006)
0.01
0.0061776326 = product of:
0.02471053 = sum of:
0.02471053 = product of:
0.04942106 = sum of:
0.04942106 = weight(_text_:22 in 5083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04942106 = score(doc=5083,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045596033 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5083, 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=5083)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 27. 5.2007 22:19:35
-
Tennis, J.T.: Facets and fugit tempus : considering time's effect on faceted classification schemes (2012)
0.01
0.0061776326 = product of:
0.02471053 = sum of:
0.02471053 = product of:
0.04942106 = sum of:
0.04942106 = weight(_text_:22 in 826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04942106 = score(doc=826,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045596033 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 826, 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=826)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 2. 6.2013 18:33:22
-
Perugini, S.: Supporting multiple paths to objects in information hierarchies : faceted classification, faceted search, and symbolic links (2010)
0.01
0.005405429 = product of:
0.021621715 = sum of:
0.021621715 = product of:
0.04324343 = sum of:
0.04324343 = weight(_text_:22 in 4227) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04324343 = score(doc=4227,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045596033 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4227, 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=4227)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 46(2010) no.1, S.22-43
-
Heuvel, C. van den: Multidimensional classifications : past and future conceptualizations and visualizations (2012)
0.01
0.005405429 = product of:
0.021621715 = sum of:
0.021621715 = product of:
0.04324343 = sum of:
0.04324343 = weight(_text_:22 in 632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04324343 = score(doc=632,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045596033 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 632, 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=632)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 22. 2.2013 11:31:25
-
Facets: a fruitful notion in many domains : special issue on facet analysis (2008)
0.00
0.0043809735 = product of:
0.017523894 = sum of:
0.017523894 = product of:
0.03504779 = sum of:
0.03504779 = weight(_text_:terminology in 3262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03504779 = score(doc=3262,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24053115 = queryWeight, product of:
5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
0.045596033 = queryNorm
0.14570998 = fieldWeight in 3262, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3262)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- 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.
-
Gnoli, C.; Merli, G.; Pavan, G.; Bernuzzi, E.; Priano, M.: Freely faceted classification for a Web-based bibliographic archive : the BioAcoustic Reference Database (2010)
0.00
0.0038610206 = product of:
0.015444082 = sum of:
0.015444082 = product of:
0.030888164 = sum of:
0.030888164 = weight(_text_:22 in 3739) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030888164 = score(doc=3739,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045596033 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3739, 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=3739)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Wissensspeicher in digitalen Räumen: Nachhaltigkeit - Verfügbarkeit - semantische Interoperabilität. Proceedings der 11. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Konstanz, 20. bis 22. Februar 2008. Hrsg.: J. Sieglerschmidt u. H.P.Ohly
-
Dousa, T.M.; Ibekwe-SanJuan, F.: Epistemological and methodological eclecticism in the construction of knowledge organization systems (KOSs) : the case of analytico-synthetic KOSs (2014)
0.00
0.0038610206 = product of:
0.015444082 = sum of:
0.015444082 = product of:
0.030888164 = sum of:
0.030888164 = weight(_text_:22 in 1417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030888164 = score(doc=1417,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045596033 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1417, 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=1417)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- 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
-
Dousa, T.M.: Categories and the architectonics of system in Julius Otto Kaiser's method of systematic indexing (2014)
0.00
0.0038610206 = product of:
0.015444082 = sum of:
0.015444082 = product of:
0.030888164 = sum of:
0.030888164 = weight(_text_:22 in 1418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030888164 = score(doc=1418,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045596033 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1418, 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=1418)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- 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
