Search (40 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Universale Facettenklassifikationen"
  1. Heuvel, C. van den: Multidimensional classifications : past and future conceptualizations and visualizations (2012) 0.01
    0.014872484 = product of:
      0.04461745 = sum of:
        0.026105028 = product of:
          0.052210055 = sum of:
            0.052210055 = weight(_text_:theory in 632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.052210055 = score(doc=632,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.32160926 = fieldWeight in 632, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=632)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.018512422 = product of:
          0.037024844 = sum of:
            0.037024844 = weight(_text_:22 in 632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037024844 = score(doc=632,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1367084 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    This paper maps the concepts "space" and "dimensionality" in classifications, in particular in visualizations hereof, from a historical perspective. After a historical excursion in the domain of classification theory of what in mathematics is known as dimensionality reduction in representations of a single universe of knowledge, its potentiality will be explored for information retrieval and navigation in the multiverse of the World Wide Web.
    Date
    22. 2.2013 11:31:25
  2. Beghtol, C.: From the universe of knowledge to the universe of concepts : the structural revolution in classification for information retrieval (2008) 0.01
    0.014599875 = product of:
      0.043799624 = sum of:
        0.02637006 = product of:
          0.05274012 = sum of:
            0.05274012 = weight(_text_:theory in 1856) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05274012 = score(doc=1856,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.3248744 = fieldWeight in 1856, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1856)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.017429566 = product of:
          0.034859132 = sum of:
            0.034859132 = weight(_text_:methods in 1856) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034859132 = score(doc=1856,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15695344 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.22209854 = fieldWeight in 1856, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1856)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    During the twentieth century, bibliographic classification theory underwent a structural revolution. The first modern bibliographic classifications were top-down systems that started at the universe of knowledge and subdivided that universe downward to minute subclasses. After the invention of faceted classification by S.R. Ranganathan, the ideal was to build bottom-up classifications that started with the universe of concepts and built upward to larger and larger faceted classes. This ideal has not been achieved, and the two kinds of classification systems are not mutually exclusive. This paper examines the process by which this structural revolution was accomplished by looking at the spread of facet theory after 1924 when Ranganathan attended the School of Librarianship, London, through selected classification textbooks that were published after that date. To this end, the paper examines the role of W.C.B. Sayers as a teacher and author of three editions of The Manual of Classification for Librarians and Bibliographers. Sayers influenced both Ranganathan and the various members of the Classification Research Group (CRG) who were his students. Further, the paper contrasts the methods of evaluating classification systems that arose between Sayers's Canons of Classification in 1915- 1916 and J. Mills's A Modern Outline of Library Classification in 1960 in order to demonstrate the speed with which one kind of classificatory structure was overtaken by another.
  3. 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
    0.012795856 = product of:
      0.07677513 = sum of:
        0.07677513 = sum of:
          0.044751476 = weight(_text_:theory in 1857) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.044751476 = score(doc=1857,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03903913 = queryNorm
              0.27566507 = fieldWeight in 1857, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1857)
          0.032023653 = weight(_text_:29 in 1857) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.032023653 = score(doc=1857,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.13732746 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03903913 = queryNorm
              0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 1857, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1857)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Facet analysis is an established methodology for building classifications and subject indexing systems, but has been less rigorously applied to thesauri. The process of creating a compatible thesaurus from the schedules of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification 2nd edition highlights the ways in which the conceptual relationships in a subject field are handled in the two types of retrieval languages. An underlying uniformity of theory is established, and the way in which software can manage the relationships is discussed. The manner of displaying verbal expressions of concepts (vocabulary control) is also considered, but is found to be less well controlled in the classification than in the thesaurus. Nevertheless, there is good reason to think that facet analysis provides a sound basis for structuring a variety of knowledge organization tools.
    Date
    31. 5.2008 19:11:29
  4. Gnoli, C.; Merli, G.; Pavan, G.; Bernuzzi, E.; Priano, M.: Freely faceted classification for a Web-based bibliographic archive : the BioAcoustic Reference Database (2010) 0.01
    0.012624096 = product of:
      0.07574458 = sum of:
        0.07574458 = sum of:
          0.049298257 = weight(_text_:methods in 3739) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.049298257 = score(doc=3739,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.15695344 = queryWeight, product of:
                4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03903913 = queryNorm
              0.31409478 = fieldWeight in 3739, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3739)
          0.026446318 = weight(_text_:22 in 3739) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.026446318 = score(doc=3739,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1367084 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03903913 = 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)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    The Integrative Level Classification (ILC) research project is experimenting with a knowledge organization system based on phenomena rather than disciplines. Each phenomenon has a constant notation, which can be combined with that of any other phenomenon in a freely faceted structure. Citation order can express differential focality of the facets. Very specific subjects can have long classmarks, although their complexity is reduced by various devices. Freely faceted classification is being tested by indexing a corpus of about 3300 papers in the interdisciplinary domain of bioacoustics. The subjects of these papers often include phenomena from a wide variety of integrative levels (mechanical waves, animals, behaviour, vessels, fishing, law, ...) as well as information about the methods of study, as predicted in the León Manifesto. The archive is recorded in a MySQL database, and can be fed and searched through PHP Web interfaces. Indexer's work is made easier by mechanisms that suggest possible classes on the basis of matching title words with terms in the ILC schedules, and synthesize automatically the verbal caption corresponding to the classmark being edited. Users can search the archive by selecting and combining values in each facet. Search refinement should be improved, especially for the cases where no record, or too many records, match the faceted query. However, experience is being gained progressively, showing that freely faceted classification by phenomena, theories, and methods is feasible and successfully working.
    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
  5. Broughton, V.: ¬The need for a faceted classification as the basis of all methods of information retrieval (2006) 0.01
    0.0120253395 = product of:
      0.036076017 = sum of:
        0.018646449 = product of:
          0.037292898 = sum of:
            0.037292898 = weight(_text_:theory in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037292898 = score(doc=2874,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.2297209 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.017429566 = product of:
          0.034859132 = sum of:
            0.034859132 = weight(_text_:methods in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034859132 = score(doc=2874,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15695344 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.22209854 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The aim of this article is to estimate the impact of faceted classification and the faceted analytical method on the development of various information retrieval tools over the latter part of the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. Design/methodology/approach - The article presents an examination of various subject access tools intended for retrieval of both print and digital materials to determine whether they exhibit features of faceted systems. Some attention is paid to use of the faceted approach as a means of structuring information on commercial web sites. The secondary and research literature is also surveyed for commentary on and evaluation of facet analysis as a basis for the building of vocabulary and conceptual tools. Findings - The study finds that faceted systems are now very common, with a major increase in their use over the last 15 years. Most LIS subject indexing tools (classifications, subject heading lists and thesauri) now demonstrate features of facet analysis to a greater or lesser degree. A faceted approach is frequently taken to the presentation of product information on commercial web sites, and there is an independent strand of theory and documentation related to this application. There is some significant research on semi-automatic indexing and retrieval (query expansion and query formulation) using facet analytical techniques. Originality/value - This article provides an overview of an important conceptual approach to information retrieval, and compares different understandings and applications of this methodology.
  6. Kaiser, J.O.: Systematic indexing (1985) 0.01
    0.011679901 = product of:
      0.0350397 = sum of:
        0.021096049 = product of:
          0.042192098 = sum of:
            0.042192098 = weight(_text_:theory in 571) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.042192098 = score(doc=571,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.25989953 = fieldWeight in 571, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=571)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.013943653 = product of:
          0.027887305 = sum of:
            0.027887305 = weight(_text_:methods in 571) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027887305 = score(doc=571,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15695344 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.17767884 = fieldWeight in 571, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=571)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    A native of Germany and a former teacher of languages and music, Julius Otto Kaiser (1868-1927) came to the Philadelphia Commercial Museum to be its librarian in 1896. Faced with the problem of making "information" accessible, he developed a method of indexing he called systematic indexing. The first draft of his scheme, published in 1896-97, was an important landmark in the history of subject analysis. R. K. Olding credits Kaiser with making the greatest single advance in indexing theory since Charles A. Cutter and John Metcalfe eulogizes him by observing that "in sheer capacity for really scientific and logical thinking, Kaiser's was probably the best mind that has ever applied itself to subject indexing." Kaiser was an admirer of "system." By systematic indexing he meant indicating information not with natural language expressions as, for instance, Cutter had advocated, but with artificial expressions constructed according to formulas. Kaiser grudged natural language its approximateness, its vagaries, and its ambiguities. The formulas he introduced were to provide a "machinery for regularising or standardising language" (paragraph 67). Kaiser recognized three categories or "facets" of index terms: (1) terms of concretes, representing things, real or imaginary (e.g., money, machines); (2) terms of processes, representing either conditions attaching to things or their actions (e.g., trade, manufacture); and (3) terms of localities, representing, for the most part, countries (e.g., France, South Africa). Expressions in Kaiser's index language were called statements. Statements consisted of sequences of terms, the syntax of which was prescribed by formula. These formulas specified sequences of terms by reference to category types. Only three citation orders were permitted: a term in the concrete category followed by one in the process category (e.g., Wool-Scouring); (2) a country term followed by a process term (e.g., Brazil - Education); and (3) a concrete term followed by a country term, followed by a process term (e.g., Nitrate-Chile-Trade). Kaiser's system was a precursor of two of the most significant developments in twentieth-century approaches to subject access-the special purpose use of language for indexing, thus the concept of index language, which was to emerge as a generative idea at the time of the second Cranfield experiment (1966) and the use of facets to categorize subject indicators, which was to become the characterizing feature of analytico-synthetic indexing methods such as the Colon classification. In addition to its visionary quality, Kaiser's work is notable for its meticulousness and honesty, as can be seen, for instance, in his observations about the difficulties in facet definition.
    Source
    Theory of subject analysis: a sourcebook. Ed.: L.M. Chan, et al
  7. Green, R.: Facet analysis and semantic frames (2017) 0.01
    0.010663213 = product of:
      0.063979276 = sum of:
        0.063979276 = sum of:
          0.037292898 = weight(_text_:theory in 3849) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037292898 = score(doc=3849,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03903913 = queryNorm
              0.2297209 = fieldWeight in 3849, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3849)
          0.02668638 = weight(_text_:29 in 3849) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.02668638 = score(doc=3849,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.13732746 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03903913 = queryNorm
              0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 3849, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3849)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Content
    Beitrag in einem Special Issue: Selected Papers from the International UDC Seminar 2017, Faceted Classification Today: Theory, Technology and End Users, 14-15 September, London UK.
    Date
    29. 9.2017 18:58:02
  8. Dimensions of knowledge : facets for knowledge organization (2017) 0.01
    0.010663213 = product of:
      0.063979276 = sum of:
        0.063979276 = sum of:
          0.037292898 = weight(_text_:theory in 4154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037292898 = score(doc=4154,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03903913 = queryNorm
              0.2297209 = fieldWeight in 4154, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4154)
          0.02668638 = weight(_text_:29 in 4154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.02668638 = score(doc=4154,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.13732746 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03903913 = queryNorm
              0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 4154, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4154)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Content
    Inhalt: Richard P. Smiraglia: A Brief Introduction to Facets in Knowledge Organization / Kathryn La Barre: Interrogating Facet Theory: Decolonizing Knowledge Organization / Joseph T. Tennis: Never Facets Alone: The Evolving Thought and Persistent Problems in Ranganathan's Theories of Classification / M. P. Satija and Dong-Guen Oh: The DDC and the Knowledge Categories: Dewey did Faceting without Knowing It / Claudio Gnoli: Classifying Phenomena Part 3: Facets / Rick Szostak: Facet Analysis Without Facet Indicators / Elizabeth Milonas: An Examination of Facets within Search Engine Result Pages / Richard P. Smiraglia: Facets for Clustering and Disambiguation: The Domain Discourse of Facets in Knowledge Organization
    Date
    17. 2.2018 19:11:29
  9. Raju, A.A.N.: Colon Classification: theory and practice : a self instructional manual (2001) 0.01
    0.0076123807 = product of:
      0.045674283 = sum of:
        0.045674283 = product of:
          0.091348566 = sum of:
            0.091348566 = weight(_text_:theory in 1482) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.091348566 = score(doc=1482,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.56269896 = fieldWeight in 1482, product of:
                  3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                    12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1482)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Colon Classification (CC) is truly the first freely faceted scheme for library classification devised and propagated by Dr. S.R. Ranganathan. The scheme is being taught in theory and practice to the students in most of the LIS schools in India and abroad also. Many manuals, Guide books and Introductory works have been published on CC in the past. But the present work tread a new path in presenting CC to the student, teaching and professional community. The present work Colon Classification: Theory and Practice; A Self Instructional Manual is the result of author's twenty-five years experience of teaching theory and practice of CC to the students of LIS. For the first ime concerted and systematic attempt has been made to present theory and practice of CC in self-instructional mode, keeping in view the requirements of students learners of Open Universities/ Distance Education Institutions in particular. The other singificant and novel features introduced in this manual are: Presenting the scope of each block consisting certain units bollowed by objectives, introduction, sections, sub-sections, self check exercises, glossary and assignment of each unit. It is hoped that all these features will help the users/readers of this manual to understand and grasp quickly, the intricacies involved in theory and practice of CC(6th Edition). The manual is presented in three blocks and twelve units.
  10. Star, S.L.: Grounded classification : grounded theory and faceted classification (1998) 0.01
    0.0075358725 = product of:
      0.045215234 = sum of:
        0.045215234 = product of:
          0.09043047 = sum of:
            0.09043047 = weight(_text_:theory in 851) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09043047 = score(doc=851,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.55704355 = fieldWeight in 851, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=851)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Comparison between grounded theory (a qualitative social science research methodology of Glaser and Strauss) and facet classification (Ranganathan)
    Content
    This article compares the qualitative method of grounded theory (GT) with Ranganathan's construction of faceted classifications (FC) in library and information science. Both struggle with a core problem-i.e., the representation of vernacular words and processes, empirically discovered, which will, although ethnographically faithful, be powerful beyond the single instance or case study. The article compares Glaser and Strauss's (1967) work with that of Ranganathan(1950).
  11. Austin, D.: ¬The theory of integrative levels reconsidered as the basis of a general classification (1969) 0.01
    0.0074585797 = product of:
      0.044751476 = sum of:
        0.044751476 = product of:
          0.08950295 = sum of:
            0.08950295 = weight(_text_:theory in 1286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08950295 = score(doc=1286,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.55133015 = fieldWeight in 1286, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1286)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
  12. LaBarre, K.: Interrogating facet theory : decolonizing knowledge organization (2017) 0.01
    0.0074585797 = product of:
      0.044751476 = sum of:
        0.044751476 = product of:
          0.08950295 = sum of:
            0.08950295 = weight(_text_:theory in 4155) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08950295 = score(doc=4155,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.55133015 = fieldWeight in 4155, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4155)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
  13. Broughton, V.: Bliss Bibliographic Classification Second Edition (2009) 0.01
    0.0070320163 = product of:
      0.042192098 = sum of:
        0.042192098 = product of:
          0.084384196 = sum of:
            0.084384196 = weight(_text_:theory in 3755) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.084384196 = score(doc=3755,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.51979905 = fieldWeight in 3755, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3755)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    This entry looks at the origins of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification 2nd edition and the theory on which it is built. The reasons for the decision to revise the classification are examined, as are the influences on classification theory of the mid-twentieth century. The process of revision and construction of schedules using facet analysis is described. The use of BC2 is considered along with some recent development work on thesaural and digital formats.
  14. Faceted classification today : International UDC Seminar 2017, 14.-15. Spetember, London, UK. (2017) 0.01
    0.0070320163 = product of:
      0.042192098 = sum of:
        0.042192098 = product of:
          0.084384196 = sum of:
            0.084384196 = weight(_text_:theory in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.084384196 = score(doc=3773,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.51979905 = fieldWeight in 3773, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3773)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Faceted analytical theory is a widely accepted approach for constructing modern classification schemes and other controlled vocabularies. While the advantages of faceted approach are broadly accepted and understood the actual implementation is coupled with many challenges when it comes to data modelling, management and retrieval. UDC Seminar 2017 revisits faceted analytical theory as one of the most influential methodologies in the development of knowledge organization systems.
  15. Dahlberg, I.: ¬The Information Coding Classification (ICC) : a modern, theory-based fully-faceted, universal system of knowledge fields (2008) 0.01
    0.006215483 = product of:
      0.037292898 = sum of:
        0.037292898 = product of:
          0.074585795 = sum of:
            0.074585795 = weight(_text_:theory in 1854) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.074585795 = score(doc=1854,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.4594418 = fieldWeight in 1854, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1854)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Introduction into the structure, contents and specifications (especially the Systematifier) of the Information Coding Classification, developed in the seventies and used in many ways by the author and a few others following its publication in 1982. Its theoretical basis is explained consisting in (1) the Integrative Level Theory, following an evolutionary approach of ontical areas, and integrating also on each level the aspects contained in the sequence of the levels, (2) the distinction between categories of form and categories of being, (3) the application of a feature of Systems Theory (namely the element position plan) and (4) the inclusion of a concept theory, distinguishing four kinds of relationships, originated by the kinds of characteristics (which are the elements of concepts to be derived from the statements on the properties of referents of concepts). Its special Subject Groups on each of its nine levels are outlined and the combinatory facilities at certain positions of the Systematifier are shown. Further elaboration and use have been suggested, be it only as a switching language between the six existing universal classification systems at present in use internationally.
  16. Tomlinson, H.: Report on work for new general classification scheme (1969) 0.01
    0.0053372756 = product of:
      0.032023653 = sum of:
        0.032023653 = product of:
          0.06404731 = sum of:
            0.06404731 = weight(_text_:29 in 1285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06404731 = score(doc=1285,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13732746 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.46638384 = fieldWeight in 1285, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1285)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Pages
    S.29-41
  17. Panigrahi, P.: Ranganathan and Dewey in hierarchical subject classification : some similarities (2015) 0.00
    0.0049723866 = product of:
      0.029834319 = sum of:
        0.029834319 = product of:
          0.059668638 = sum of:
            0.059668638 = weight(_text_:theory in 2789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.059668638 = score(doc=2789,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.36755344 = fieldWeight in 2789, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2789)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    S R Ranganathan and Melvil Dewey devised two types of classification schemes viz., faceted and enumerative. Ranganathan's faceted classification scheme is based on postulates, principles and canons. It has a strong theory. While working with the two schemes, similarities are observed. This paper tries to identify and present some relationships.
  18. Dahlberg, I.: Grundlagen universaler Wissensordnung : Probleme und Möglichkeiten eines universalen Klassifikationssystems des Wissens (1974) 0.00
    0.0044077197 = product of:
      0.026446318 = sum of:
        0.026446318 = product of:
          0.052892637 = sum of:
            0.052892637 = weight(_text_:22 in 127) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.052892637 = score(doc=127,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1367084 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = 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)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Footnote
    Zugleich Dissertation Univ. Düsseldorf. - Rez. in: ZfBB. 22(1975) S.53-57 (H.-A. Koch)
  19. Dousa, T.: Everything Old is New Again : Perspectivism and Polyhierarchy in Julius O. Kaiser's Theory of Systematic Indexing (2007) 0.00
    0.00439501 = product of:
      0.02637006 = sum of:
        0.02637006 = product of:
          0.05274012 = sum of:
            0.05274012 = weight(_text_:theory in 4835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05274012 = score(doc=4835,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.3248744 = fieldWeight in 4835, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4835)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    In the early years of the 20th century, Julius Otto Kaiser (1868-1927), a special librarian and indexer of technical literature, developed a method of knowledge organization (KO) known as systematic indexing. Certain elements of the method-its stipulation that all indexing terms be divided into fundamental categories "concretes", "countries", and "processes", which are then to be synthesized into indexing "statements" formulated according to strict rules of citation order-have long been recognized as precursors to key principles of the theory of faceted classification. However, other, less well-known elements of the method may prove no less interesting to practitioners of KO. In particular, two aspects of systematic indexing seem to prefigure current trends in KO: (1) a perspectivist outlook that rejects universal classifications in favor of information organization systems customized to reflect local needs and (2) the incorporation of index terms extracted from source documents into a polyhierarchical taxonomical structure. Kaiser's perspectivism anticipates postmodern theories of KO, while his principled use of polyhierarchy to organize terms derived from the language of source documents provides a potentially fruitful model that can inform current discussions about harvesting natural-language terms, such as tags, and incorporating them into a flexibly structured controlled vocabulary.
  20. Aparecida Moura, M.: Emerging discursive formations, folksonomy and social semantic information spaces (SSIS) : the contributions of the theory of integrative levels in the studies carried out by the Classification Research Group (CRG) (2014) 0.00
    0.00439501 = product of:
      0.02637006 = sum of:
        0.02637006 = product of:
          0.05274012 = sum of:
            0.05274012 = weight(_text_:theory in 1395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05274012 = score(doc=1395,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.3248744 = fieldWeight in 1395, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1395)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    This paper focuses on the discursive formations emerging from the Social Semantic Information Spaces (SSIS) in light of the concept of emergence in the theory of integrative levels. The study aims to identify the opportunities and challenges of incorporating epistemological considerations in the act of acquiring knowledge into the consolidation of knowledge organization and mediation processes and devices in the emergence of phenomena. The goal was to analyze the effects of that concept on the actions of a sample of researchers registered in an emerging research domain in SSIS in order to understand this type of indexing done by the users and communities as a classification of integrating levels. The methodology was established by triangulation through social network analysis, consensus analysis and archaeology of knowledge. It was possible to conclude that there is a collective effort to settle a semantic interoperability model for the labeling of contents based on best practices regarding the description of the objects shared in SSIS.