Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.014641746 = product of:
  0.043925237 = sum of:
    0.043925237 = product of:
      0.06588785 = sum of:
        0.023671897 = weight(_text_:science in 364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023671897 = score(doc=364,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11619691 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044112243 = queryNorm
            0.20372227 = fieldWeight in 364, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=364)
        0.04221596 = weight(_text_:29 in 364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04221596 = score(doc=364,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15517308 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044112243 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 364, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=364)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Conducting a literature review is an important activity for postgraduates and many undergraduates. Librarians can play an important role, directing students to digital libraries, compiling online subject reSource lists, and educating about the need to evaluate the quality of online resources. In order to conduct an effective literature search in a new area, however, in some subjects it is necessary to gain basic topic knowledge, including specialist vocabularies. Google's link-based page ranking algorithm makes this search engine an ideal tool for finding specialist topic introductory material, particularly in computer science, and so librarians should be teaching this as part of a strategic literature review approach.

Date

3. 6.2007 16:37:29

0.004020568 = product of:
  0.012061703 = sum of:
    0.012061703 = product of:
      0.036185108 = sum of:
        0.036185108 = weight(_text_:29 in 2536) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036185108 = score(doc=2536,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15517308 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044112243 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 2536, 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=2536)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

14. 8.2004 10:30:29

0.00371968 = product of:
  0.01115904 = sum of:
    0.01115904 = product of:
      0.03347712 = sum of:
        0.03347712 = weight(_text_:science in 6098) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03347712 = score(doc=6098,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.11619691 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044112243 = queryNorm
            0.2881068 = fieldWeight in 6098, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6098)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Ethical aspects of the employment of Web crawlers for information science research and other contexts are reviewed. The difference between legal and ethical uses of communications technologies is emphasized as well as the changing boundary between ethical and unethical conduct. A review of the potential impacts on Web site owners is used to underpin a new framework for ethical crawling, and it is argued that delicate human judgment is required for each individual case, with verdicts likely to change over time. Decisions can be based upon an approximate cost-benefit analysis, but it is crucial that crawler owners find out about the technological issues affecting the owners of the sites being crawled in order to produce an informed assessment.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.13, S.1771-1779

0.0022544665 = product of:
  0.0067633996 = sum of:
    0.0067633996 = product of:
      0.020290198 = sum of:
        0.020290198 = weight(_text_:science in 674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020290198 = score(doc=674,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11619691 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044112243 = queryNorm
            0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 674, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=674)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Introduces several new versions of PageRank (the link based Web page ranking algorithm), based on an information science perspective on the concept of the Web document. Although the Web page is the typical indivisible unit of information in search engine results and most Web information retrieval algorithms, other research has suggested that aggregating pages based on directories and domains gives promising alternatives, particularly when Web links are the object of study. The new algorithms introduced based on these alternatives were used to rank four sets of Web pages. The ranking results were compared with human subjects' rankings. The results of the tests were somewhat inconclusive: the new approach worked well for the set that includes pages from different Web sites; however, it does not work well in ranking pages that are from the same site. It seems that the new algorithms may be effective for some tasks but not for others, especially when only low numbers of links are involved or the pages to be ranked are from the same site or directory.

0.0022544665 = product of:
  0.0067633996 = sum of:
    0.0067633996 = product of:
      0.020290198 = sum of:
        0.020290198 = weight(_text_:science in 1338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020290198 = score(doc=1338,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11619691 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044112243 = queryNorm
            0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 1338, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1338)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.1, S.38-50

0.0018787221 = product of:
  0.0056361663 = sum of:
    0.0056361663 = product of:
      0.016908498 = sum of:
        0.016908498 = weight(_text_:science in 2350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016908498 = score(doc=2350,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11619691 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044112243 = queryNorm
            0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 2350, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2350)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.11, S.1702-1710