-
Morrison, P.J.: Tagging and searching : search retrieval effectiveness of folksonomies on the World Wide Web (2008)
0.13
0.1337841 = product of:
0.20067614 = sum of:
0.055176124 = weight(_text_:wide in 2109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055176124 = score(doc=2109,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18785246 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.29372054 = fieldWeight in 2109, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2109)
0.059868045 = weight(_text_:web in 2109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.059868045 = score(doc=2109,freq=8.0), product of:
0.13836423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 2109, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2109)
0.036369424 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036369424 = score(doc=2109,freq=4.0), product of:
0.12824841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 2109, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2109)
0.049262546 = product of:
0.073893815 = sum of:
0.03942828 = weight(_text_:system in 2109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03942828 = score(doc=2109,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13353272 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.29527056 = fieldWeight in 2109, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2109)
0.034465536 = weight(_text_:22 in 2109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034465536 = score(doc=2109,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14846832 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2109, 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=2109)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.6666667 = coord(4/6)
- Abstract
- Many Web sites have begun allowing users to submit items to a collection and tag them with keywords. The folksonomies built from these tags are an interesting topic that has seen little empirical research. This study compared the search information retrieval (IR) performance of folksonomies from social bookmarking Web sites against search engines and subject directories. Thirty-four participants created 103 queries for various information needs. Results from each IR system were collected and participants judged relevance. Folksonomy search results overlapped with those from the other systems, and documents found by both search engines and folksonomies were significantly more likely to be judged relevant than those returned by any single IR system type. The search engines in the study had the highest precision and recall, but the folksonomies fared surprisingly well. Del.icio.us was statistically indistinguishable from the directories in many cases. Overall the directories were more precise than the folksonomies but they had similar recall scores. Better query handling may enhance folksonomy IR performance further. The folksonomies studied were promising, and may be able to improve Web search performance.
- Date
- 1. 8.2008 12:39:22
-
Peters, I.: Folksonomies : indexing and retrieval in Web 2.0 (2009)
0.07
0.071449205 = product of:
0.14289841 = sum of:
0.052020553 = weight(_text_:wide in 4203) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052020553 = score(doc=4203,freq=4.0), product of:
0.18785246 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.2769224 = fieldWeight in 4203, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4203)
0.048882056 = weight(_text_:web in 4203) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048882056 = score(doc=4203,freq=12.0), product of:
0.13836423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.35328537 = fieldWeight in 4203, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4203)
0.041995794 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4203) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041995794 = score(doc=4203,freq=12.0), product of:
0.12824841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.32745665 = fieldWeight in 4203, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4203)
0.5 = coord(3/6)
- Abstract
- Kollaborative Informationsdienste im Web 2.0 werden von den Internetnutzern nicht nur dazu genutzt, digitale Informationsressourcen zu produzieren, sondern auch, um sie inhaltlich mit eigenen Schlagworten, sog. Tags, zu erschließen. Dabei müssen die Nutzer nicht wie bei Bibliothekskatalogen auf Regeln achten. Die Menge an nutzergenerierten Tags innerhalb eines Kollaborativen Informationsdienstes wird als Folksonomy bezeichnet. Die Folksonomies dienen den Nutzern zum Wiederauffinden eigener Ressourcen und für die Recherche nach fremden Ressourcen. Das Buch beschäftigt sich mit Kollaborativen Informationsdiensten, Folksonomies als Methode der Wissensrepräsentation und als Werkzeug des Information Retrievals.
- Footnote
- Zugl.: Düsseldorf, Univ., Diss., 2009 u.d.T.: Peters, Isabella: Folksonomies in Wissensrepräsentation und Information Retrieval Rez. in: IWP - Information Wissenschaft & Praxis, 61(2010) Heft 8, S.469-470 (U. Spree): "... Nachdem sich die Rezensentin durch 418 Seiten Text hindurch gelesen hat, bleibt sie unentschieden, wie der auffällige Einsatz langer Zitate (im Durchschnitt drei Zitate, die länger als vier kleingedruckte Zeilen sind, pro Seite) zu bewerten ist, zumal die Zitate nicht selten rein illustrativen Charakter haben bzw. Isabella Peters noch einmal zitiert, was sie bereits in eigenen Worten ausgedrückt hat. Redundanz und Verlängerung der Lesezeit halten sich hier die Waage mit der Möglichkeit, dass sich die Leserin einen unmittelbaren Eindruck von Sprache und Duktus der zitierten Literatur verschaffen kann. Eindeutig unschön ist das Beenden eines Gedankens oder einer Argumentation durch ein Zitat (z. B. S. 170). Im deutschen Original entstehen auf diese Weise die für deutsche wissenschaftliche Qualifikationsarbeiten typischen denglischen Texte. Für alle, die sich für Wissensrepräsentation, Information Retrieval und kollaborative Informationsdienste interessieren, ist "Folksonomies : Indexing and Retrieval in Web 2.0" trotz der angeführten kleinen Mängel zur Lektüre und Anschaffung - wegen seines beinahe enzyklopädischen Charakters auch als Nachschlage- oder Referenzwerk geeignet - unbedingt zu empfehlen. Abschließend möchte ich mich in einem Punkt der Produktinfo von de Gruyter uneingeschränkt anschließen: ein "Grundlagenwerk für Folksonomies".
- Object
- Web 2.0
- RSWK
- Information Retrieval
World Wide Web 2.0
- Subject
- Information Retrieval
World Wide Web 2.0
-
Peters, I.: Folksonomies und kollaborative Informationsdienste : eine Alternative zur Websuche? (2011)
0.05
0.05309531 = product of:
0.10619062 = sum of:
0.05644414 = weight(_text_:web in 343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05644414 = score(doc=343,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13836423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.4079388 = fieldWeight in 343, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=343)
0.034289423 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034289423 = score(doc=343,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12824841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 343, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=343)
0.015457064 = product of:
0.04637119 = sum of:
0.04637119 = weight(_text_:29 in 343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04637119 = score(doc=343,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14914064 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 343, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=343)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(3/6)
- Abstract
- Folksonomies ermöglichen den Nutzern in Kollaborativen Informationsdiensten den Zugang zu verschiedenartigen Informationsressourcen. In welchen Fällen beide Bestandteile des Web 2.0 am besten für das Information Retrieval geeignet sind und wo sie die Websuche ggf. ersetzen können, wird in diesem Beitrag diskutiert. Dazu erfolgt eine detaillierte Betrachtung der Reichweite von Social-Bookmarking-Systemen und Sharing-Systemen sowie der Retrievaleffektivität von Folksonomies innerhalb von Kollaborativen Informationsdiensten.
- Pages
- S.29-53
- Source
- Handbuch Internet-Suchmaschinen, 2: Neue Entwicklungen in der Web-Suche. Hrsg.: D. Lewandowski
-
Peters, I.; Stock, W.G.: Power tags in information retrieval (2010)
0.04
0.04259211 = product of:
0.08518422 = sum of:
0.02494502 = weight(_text_:web in 865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02494502 = score(doc=865,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13836423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 865, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=865)
0.052494746 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052494746 = score(doc=865,freq=12.0), product of:
0.12824841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.40932083 = fieldWeight in 865, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=865)
0.007744446 = product of:
0.023233337 = sum of:
0.023233337 = weight(_text_:system in 865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023233337 = score(doc=865,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13353272 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 865, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=865)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(3/6)
- Abstract
- Purpose - Many Web 2.0 services (including Library 2.0 catalogs) make use of folksonomies. The purpose of this paper is to cut off all tags in the long tail of a document-specific tag distribution. The remaining tags at the beginning of a tag distribution are considered power tags and form a new, additional search option in information retrieval systems. Design/methodology/approach - In a theoretical approach the paper discusses document-specific tag distributions (power law and inverse-logistic shape), the development of such distributions (Yule-Simon process and shuffling theory) and introduces search tags (besides the well-known index tags) as a possibility for generating tag distributions. Findings - Search tags are compatible with broad and narrow folksonomies and with all knowledge organization systems (e.g. classification systems and thesauri), while index tags are only applicable in broad folksonomies. Based on these findings, the paper presents a sketch of an algorithm for mining and processing power tags in information retrieval systems. Research limitations/implications - This conceptual approach is in need of empirical evaluation in a concrete retrieval system. Practical implications - Power tags are a new search option for retrieval systems to limit the amount of hits. Originality/value - The paper introduces power tags as a means for enhancing the precision of search results in information retrieval systems that apply folksonomies, e.g. catalogs in Library 2.0environments.
-
Yi, K.; Chan, L.M.: Linking folksonomy to Library of Congress subject headings : an exploratory study (2009)
0.04
0.042220794 = product of:
0.08444159 = sum of:
0.019956015 = weight(_text_:web in 3616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019956015 = score(doc=3616,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13836423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.14422815 = fieldWeight in 3616, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3616)
0.024246283 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024246283 = score(doc=3616,freq=4.0), product of:
0.12824841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.18905719 = fieldWeight in 3616, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3616)
0.040239293 = product of:
0.060358938 = sum of:
0.037173342 = weight(_text_:system in 3616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037173342 = score(doc=3616,freq=8.0), product of:
0.13353272 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 3616, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3616)
0.023185596 = weight(_text_:29 in 3616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023185596 = score(doc=3616,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14914064 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.15546128 = fieldWeight in 3616, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3616)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(3/6)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to investigate the linking of a folksonomy (user vocabulary) and LCSH (controlled vocabulary) on the basis of word matching, for the potential use of LCSH in bringing order to folksonomies. Design/methodology/approach - A selected sample of a folksonomy from a popular collaborative tagging system, Delicious, was word-matched with LCSH. LCSH was transformed into a tree structure called an LCSH tree for the matching. A close examination was conducted on the characteristics of folksonomies, the overlap of folksonomies with LCSH, and the distribution of folksonomies over the LCSH tree. Findings - The experimental results showed that the total proportion of tags being matched with LC subject headings constituted approximately two-thirds of all tags involved, with an additional 10 percent of the remaining tags having potential matches. A number of barriers for the linking as well as two areas in need of improving the matching are identified and described. Three important tag distribution patterns over the LCSH tree were identified and supported: skewedness, multifacet, and Zipfian-pattern. Research limitations/implications - The results of the study can be adopted for the development of innovative methods of mapping between folksonomy and LCSH, which directly contributes to effective access and retrieval of tagged web resources and to the integration of multiple information repositories based on the two vocabularies. Practical implications - The linking of controlled vocabularies can be applicable to enhance information retrieval capability within collaborative tagging systems as well as across various tagging system information depositories and bibliographic databases. Originality/value - This is among frontier works that examines the potential of linking a folksonomy, extracted from a collaborative tagging system, to an authority-maintained subject heading system. It provides exploratory data to support further advanced mapping methods for linking the two vocabularies.
- Date
- 20. 6.2010 14:29:15
-
Watters, C.; Nizam, N.: Knowledge organization on the Web : the emergent role of social classification (2012)
0.04
0.041620206 = product of:
0.124860615 = sum of:
0.06437215 = weight(_text_:wide in 828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06437215 = score(doc=828,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18785246 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.342674 = fieldWeight in 828, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=828)
0.060488462 = weight(_text_:web in 828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060488462 = score(doc=828,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13836423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.43716836 = fieldWeight in 828, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=828)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- There are close to a billion websites on the Internet with approximately 400 million users worldwide [www.internetworldstats.com]. People go to websites for a wide variety of different information tasks, from finding a restaurant to serious research. Many of the difficulties with searching the Web, as it is structured currently, can be attributed to increases to scale. The content of the Web is now so large that we only have a rough estimate of the number of sites and the range of information is extremely diverse, from blogs and photos to research articles and news videos.
-
Peters, I.: Folksonomies & Social Tagging (2023)
0.04
0.041620206 = product of:
0.124860615 = sum of:
0.06437215 = weight(_text_:wide in 796) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06437215 = score(doc=796,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18785246 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.342674 = fieldWeight in 796, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=796)
0.060488462 = weight(_text_:web in 796) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060488462 = score(doc=796,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13836423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.43716836 = fieldWeight in 796, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=796)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Die Erforschung und der Einsatz von Folksonomies und Social Tagging als nutzerzentrierte Formen der Inhaltserschließung und Wissensrepräsentation haben in den 10 Jahren ab ca. 2005 ihren Höhenpunkt erfahren. Motiviert wurde dies durch die Entwicklung und Verbreitung des Social Web und der wachsenden Nutzung von Social-Media-Plattformen (s. Kapitel E 8 Social Media und Social Web). Beides führte zu einem rasanten Anstieg der im oder über das World Wide Web auffindbaren Menge an potenzieller Information und generierte eine große Nachfrage nach skalierbaren Methoden der Inhaltserschließung.
-
Peters, I.: Folksonomies, social tagging and information retrieval (2011)
0.04
0.03710073 = product of:
0.11130218 = sum of:
0.059868045 = weight(_text_:web in 4907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.059868045 = score(doc=4907,freq=8.0), product of:
0.13836423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 4907, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4907)
0.051434137 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.051434137 = score(doc=4907,freq=8.0), product of:
0.12824841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 4907, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4907)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Services in Web 2.0 generate a large quantity of information, distributed over a range of resources (e.g. photos, URLs, videos) and integrated into different platforms (e.g. social bookmarking systems, sharing platforms (Peters, 2009). To adequately use this mass of information and to extract it from the platforms, users must be equipped with suitable tools and knowledge. After all, the best information is useless if users cannot find it: 'The model of information consumption relies on the information being found' (Vander Wal, 2004). In Web 2.0, the retrieval component has been established through so-called folksonomies (Vander Wal, 2005a), which are considered as several combinations of an information resource, one or more freely chosen keywords ('tags') and a user. Web 2.0 services that use folksonomies as an indexing and retrieval tool are defined as 'collaborative information services' because they allow for the collaborative creation of a public database that is accessible to all users (registered, where necessary) via the tags of the folksonomy (Ding et al., 2009; Heymann, Paepcke and Garcia-Molina, 2010).
- Object
- Web 2.0
- Source
- Innovations in information retrieval: perspectives for theory and practice. Eds.: A. Foster, u. P. Rafferty
-
Bar-Ilan, J.; Belous, Y.: Children as architects of Web directories : an exploratory study (2007)
0.04
0.036664944 = product of:
0.07332989 = sum of:
0.035277586 = weight(_text_:web in 289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035277586 = score(doc=289,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13836423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 289, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=289)
0.030307854 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030307854 = score(doc=289,freq=4.0), product of:
0.12824841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 289, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=289)
0.007744446 = product of:
0.023233337 = sum of:
0.023233337 = weight(_text_:system in 289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023233337 = score(doc=289,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13353272 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 289, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=289)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(3/6)
- Abstract
- Children are increasingly using the Web. Cognitive theory tells us that directory structures are especially suited for information retrieval by children; however, empirical results show that they prefer keyword searching. One of the reasons for these findings could be that the directory structures and terminology are created by grown-ups. Using a card-sorting method and an enveloping system, we simulated the structure of a directory. Our goal was to try to understand what browsable, hierarchical subject categories children create when suggested terms are supplied and they are free to add or delete terms. Twelve groups of four children each (fourth and fifth graders) participated in our exploratory study. The initial terminology presented to the children was based on names of categories used in popular directories, in the sections on Arts, Television, Music, Cinema, and Celebrities. The children were allowed to introduce additional cards and change the terms appearing on the 61 cards. Findings show that the different groups reached reasonable consensus; the majority of the category names used by existing directories were acceptable by them and only a small minority of the terms caused confusion. Our recommendation is to include children in the design process of directories, not only in designing the interface but also in designing the content structure as well.
- Theme
- Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
-
Noruzi, A.: Folksonomies : (un)controlled vocabulary? (2006)
0.03
0.034413293 = product of:
0.10323988 = sum of:
0.09239765 = weight(_text_:web in 404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09239765 = score(doc=404,freq=14.0), product of:
0.13836423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.6677857 = fieldWeight in 404, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=404)
0.010842225 = product of:
0.032526672 = sum of:
0.032526672 = weight(_text_:system in 404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032526672 = score(doc=404,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13353272 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 404, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=404)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Folksonomy, a free-form tagging, is a user-generated classification system of web contents that allows users to tag their favorite web resources with their chosen words or phrases selected from natural language. These tags (also called concepts, categories, facets or entities) can be used to classify web resources and to express users' preferences. Folksonomy-based systems allow users to classify web resources through tagging bookmarks, photos or other web resources and saving them to a public web site like Del.icio.us. Thus information about web resources and online articles can be shared in an easy way. The purpose of this study is to provide an overview of the folksonomy tagging phenomenon (also called social tagging and social bookmarking) and explore some of the reasons why we need controlled vocabularies, discussing the problems associated with folksonomy.
-
Carlin, S.A.: Schlagwortvergabe durch Nutzende (Tagging) als Hilfsmittel zur Suche im Web : Ansatz, Modelle, Realisierungen (2006)
0.03
0.033919625 = product of:
0.10175887 = sum of:
0.045980107 = weight(_text_:wide in 2476) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.045980107 = score(doc=2476,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18785246 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 2476, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2476)
0.05577876 = weight(_text_:web in 2476) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05577876 = score(doc=2476,freq=10.0), product of:
0.13836423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.40312994 = fieldWeight in 2476, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2476)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Nach dem zu Beginn der Ära des World Wide Web von Hand gepflegte Linklisten und -Verzeichnisse und an Freunde und Kollegen per E-Mail verschickte Links genügten, um die Informationen zu finden, nach denen man suchte, waren schon bald Volltextsuchmaschinen und halbautomatisch betriebene Kataloge notwendig, um den mehr und mehr anschwellenden Informationsfluten des Web Herr zu werden. Heute bereits sind diese Dämme gebrochen und viele Millionen Websites halten Billionen an Einzelseiten mit Informationen vor, von Datenbanken und anderweitig versteckten Informationen ganz zu schweigen. Mit Volltextsuchmaschinen erreicht man bei dieser Masse keine befriedigenden Ergebnisse mehr. Entweder man erzeugt lange Suchterme mit vielen Ausschließungen und ebenso vielen nicht-exklusiven ODER-Verknüpfungen um verschiedene Schreibweisen für den gleichen Term abzudecken oder man wählt von vornherein die Daten-Quelle, an die man seine Fragen stellt, genau aus. Doch oft bleiben nur klassische Web-Suchmaschinen übrig, zumal wenn der Fragende kein Informationsspezialist mit Kenntnissen von Spezialdatenbanken ist, sondern, von dieser Warte aus gesehenen, ein Laie. Und nicht nur im Web selbst, auch in unternehmensinternen Intranets steht man vor diesem Problem. Tausende von indizierten Dokumente mögen ein Eckdatum sein, nach dem sich der Erfolg der Einführung eines Intranets bemessen lässt, aber eine Aussage über die Nützlichkeit ist damit nicht getroffen. Und die bleibt meist hinter den Erwartungen zurück, vor allem bei denen Mitarbeitern, die tatsächlich mit dem Intranet arbeiten müssen. Entscheidend ist für die Informationsauffindung in Inter- und Intranet eine einfach zu nutzende und leicht anpassbare Möglichkeit, neue interessante Inhalte zu entdecken. Mit Tags steht eine mögliche Lösung bereit.
-
Broughton, V.: Automatic metadata generation : Digital resource description without human intervention (2007)
0.03
0.027615024 = product of:
0.08284507 = sum of:
0.059868045 = weight(_text_:web in 6048) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.059868045 = score(doc=6048,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13836423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 6048, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6048)
0.022977024 = product of:
0.06893107 = sum of:
0.06893107 = weight(_text_:22 in 6048) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06893107 = score(doc=6048,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14846832 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6048, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6048)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Date
- 22. 9.2007 15:41:14
- Theme
- Semantic Web
-
Park, H.: ¬A conceptual framework to study folksonomic interaction (2011)
0.02
0.024018291 = product of:
0.07205487 = sum of:
0.06110257 = weight(_text_:web in 4852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06110257 = score(doc=4852,freq=12.0), product of:
0.13836423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.4416067 = fieldWeight in 4852, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4852)
0.010952301 = product of:
0.032856904 = sum of:
0.032856904 = weight(_text_:system in 4852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032856904 = score(doc=4852,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13353272 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.24605882 = fieldWeight in 4852, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4852)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- This paper proposes a conceptual framework to recast a folksonomy as a Web classification and to use this to explore the ways in which people work with it in assessing, sharing, and navigating Web resources. The author uses information scent and foraging theory as a context to discuss how folksonomy is constructed through interactions among users, a folksonomic system, and a given domain that consists of a group of users who share the same interest or goals. The discussion centers on two dimensions of folksonomies: (1) folksonomy as a Web classification which puts like information together in a Web context; and (2) folksonomy as information scent which helps users to find related resources and users, and obtain desired information. This paper aims to integrate these two dimensions with a conceptual framework that addresses the structure of a folksonomy shaped by users' interactions. A proposed framework consists of three components of users' interactions with a folksonomy: (a) tagging - cognitive categorization of Web accessible resources by an individual user; (b) navigation - exploration and discovery of Web accessible resources in the folksonomic system; and (c) knowledge sharing - representation and communication of knowledge within a domain. This understanding will help us motivate possible future directions of research in folksonomy. This initial framework will frame a number of research questions and help lay the groundwork for future empirical research which focuses on qualitative analysis of a folksonomy and users' tagging behaviors.
-
Catarino, M.E.; Baptista, A.A.: Relating folksonomies with Dublin Core (2008)
0.02
0.01891513 = product of:
0.056745388 = sum of:
0.043206044 = weight(_text_:web in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043206044 = score(doc=2652,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13836423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 2652, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2652)
0.013539342 = product of:
0.040618025 = sum of:
0.040618025 = weight(_text_:22 in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040618025 = score(doc=2652,freq=4.0), product of:
0.14846832 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2652, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2652)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Folksonomy is the result of describing Web resources with tags created by Web users. Although it has become a popular application for the description of resources, in general terms Folksonomies are not being conveniently integrated in metadata. However, if the appropriate metadata elements are identified, then further work may be conducted to automatically assign tags to these elements (RDF properties) and use them in Semantic Web applications. This article presents research carried out to continue the project Kinds of Tags, which intends to identify elements required for metadata originating from folksonomies and to propose an application profile for DC Social Tagging. The work provides information that may be used by software applications to assign tags to metadata elements and, therefore, means for tags to be conveniently gathered by metadata interoperability tools. Despite the unquestionably high value of DC and the significance of the already existing properties in DC Terms, the pilot study show revealed a significant number of tags for which no corresponding properties yet existed. A need for new properties, such as Action, Depth, Rate, and Utility was determined. Those potential new properties will have to be validated in a later stage by the DC Social Tagging Community.
- Pages
- S.14-22
- Source
- Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
-
Peters, I.; Stock, W.G.: Folksonomies in Wissensrepräsentation und Information Retrieval (2008)
0.02
0.018550364 = product of:
0.05565109 = sum of:
0.029934023 = weight(_text_:web in 1597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029934023 = score(doc=1597,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13836423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 1597, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1597)
0.025717068 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025717068 = score(doc=1597,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12824841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 1597, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1597)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Die populären Web 2.0-Dienste werden von Prosumern - Produzenten und gleichsam Konsumenten - nicht nur dazu genutzt, Inhalte zu produzieren, sondern auch, um sie inhaltlich zu erschließen. Folksonomies erlauben es dem Nutzer, Dokumente mit eigenen Schlagworten, sog. Tags, zu beschreiben, ohne dabei auf gewisse Regeln oder Vorgaben achten zu müssen. Neben einigen Vorteilen zeigen Folksonomies aber auch zahlreiche Schwächen (u. a. einen Mangel an Präzision). Um diesen Nachteilen größtenteils entgegenzuwirken, schlagen wir eine Interpretation der Tags als natürlichsprachige Wörter vor. Dadurch ist es uns möglich, Methoden des Natural Language Processing (NLP) auf die Tags anzuwenden und so linguistische Probleme der Tags zu beseitigen. Darüber hinaus diskutieren wir Ansätze und weitere Vorschläge (Tagverteilungen, Kollaboration und akteurspezifische Aspekte) hinsichtlich eines Relevance Rankings von getaggten Dokumenten. Neben Vorschlägen auf ähnliche Dokumente ("more like this!") erlauben Folksonomies auch Hinweise auf verwandte Nutzer und damit auf Communities ("more like me!").
-
Wesch, M.: Information R/evolution (2006)
0.02
0.016108764 = product of:
0.04832629 = sum of:
0.03492303 = weight(_text_:web in 1267) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03492303 = score(doc=1267,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13836423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 1267, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1267)
0.013403265 = product of:
0.040209793 = sum of:
0.040209793 = weight(_text_:22 in 1267) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040209793 = score(doc=1267,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14846832 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1267, 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=1267)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- This video explores the changes in the way we find, store, create, critique, and share information. This video was created as a conversation starter, and works especially well when brainstorming with people about the near future and the skills needed in order to harness, evaluate, and create information effectively. Ein sehr schöner Kurzfilm von Michael Wesch, dem wir auch den Beitrag zu Web 2.0 (The Machine is Us/ing Us) verdanken (vor einiger Zeit hier besprochen), thematisiert die Veränderung der Handhabung von Information (insbesondere die Strukturierung und Ordnung, aber auch die Generierung und Speicherung), die auf ihre digitale Gestalt zurückzuführen ist. Kernaussage: Da die Informationen keine physikalischen Beschränkungen mehr unterworfen sind, wird die Ordnung der Informationen vielfältiger, flexibler und für jedermann einfacher zugänglich.
- Date
- 5. 1.2008 19:22:48
-
Kim, H.H.: Toward video semantic search based on a structured folksonomy (2011)
0.01
0.014445163 = product of:
0.04333549 = sum of:
0.02143089 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02143089 = score(doc=4350,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12824841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 4350, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4350)
0.021904603 = product of:
0.06571381 = sum of:
0.06571381 = weight(_text_:system in 4350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06571381 = score(doc=4350,freq=16.0), product of:
0.13353272 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.49211764 = fieldWeight in 4350, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4350)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- This study investigated the effectiveness of query expansion using synonymous and co-occurrence tags in users' video searches as well as the effect of visual storyboard surrogates on users' relevance judgments when browsing videos. To do so, we designed a structured folksonomy-based system in which tag queries can be expanded via synonyms or co-occurrence words, based on the use of WordNet 2.1 synonyms and Flickr's related tags. To evaluate the structured folksonomy-based system, we conducted an experiment, the results of which suggest that the mean recall rate in the structured folksonomy-based system is statistically higher than that in a tag-based system without query expansion; however, the mean precision rate in the structured folksonomy-based system is not statistically higher than that in the tag-based system. Next, we compared the precision rates of the proposed system with storyboards (SB), in which SB and text metadata are shown to users when they browse video search results, with those of the proposed system without SB, in which only text metadata are shown. Our result showed that browsing only text surrogates-including tags without multimedia surrogates-is not sufficient for users' relevance judgments.
- Theme
- Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
-
Lee, Y.Y.; Yang, S.Q.: Folksonomies as subject access : a survey of tagging in library online catalogs and discovery layers (2012)
0.01
0.014358928 = product of:
0.043076783 = sum of:
0.029934023 = weight(_text_:web in 309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029934023 = score(doc=309,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13836423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 309, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=309)
0.01314276 = product of:
0.03942828 = sum of:
0.03942828 = weight(_text_:system in 309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03942828 = score(doc=309,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13353272 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.29527056 = fieldWeight in 309, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=309)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- This paper describes a survey on how system vendors and libraries handled tagging in OPACs and discovery layers. Tags are user added subject metadata, also called folksonomies. This survey also investigated user behavior when they face the possibility to tag. The findings indicate that legacy/classic systems have no tagging capability. About 47% of the discovery tools provide tagging function. About 49% of the libraries that have a system with tagging capability have turned the tagging function on in their OPACs and discovery tools. Only 40% of the libraries that turned tagging on actually utilized user added subject metadata as access point to collections. Academic library users are less active in tagging than public library users.
- Source
- Beyond libraries - subject metadata in the digital environment and semantic web. IFLA Satellite Post-Conference, 17-18 August 2012, Tallinn
-
Hayman, S.; Lothian, N.: Taxonomy directed folksonomies : integrating user tagging and controlled vocabularies for Australian education networks (2007)
0.01
0.014097789 = product of:
0.042293366 = sum of:
0.034564834 = weight(_text_:web in 705) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034564834 = score(doc=705,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13836423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.24981049 = fieldWeight in 705, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=705)
0.007728532 = product of:
0.023185596 = sum of:
0.023185596 = weight(_text_:29 in 705) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023185596 = score(doc=705,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14914064 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.15546128 = fieldWeight in 705, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=705)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- What is the role of controlled vocabulary in a Web 2.0 world? Can we have the best of both worlds: balancing folksonomies and controlled vocabularies to help communities of users find and share information and resources most relevant to them? education.au develops and manages Australian online services for education and training. Its goal is to bring people, learning and technology together. education.au projects are increasingly involved in exploring the use of Web 2.0 developments building on user ideas, knowledge and experience, and how these might be integrated with existing information management systems. This paper presents work being undertaken in this area, particularly in relation to controlled vocabularies, and discusses the challenges faced. Education Network Australia (edna) is a leading online resource collection and collaborative network for education, with an extensive repository of selected educational resources with metadata created by educators and information specialists. It uses controlled vocabularies for metadata creation and searching, where users receive suggested related terms from an education thesaurus, with their results. We recognise that no formal thesaurus can keep pace with user needs so are interested in exploiting the power of folksonomies. We describe a proof of concept project to develop community contributions to managing information and resources, using Taxonomy-Directed Folksonomy. An established taxonomy from the Australian education sector suggests terms for tagging and users can suggest terms. Importantly, the folksonomy will feed back into the taxonomy showing gaps in coverage and helping us to monitor new terms and usage to improve and develop our formal taxonomies. This model would initially sit alongside the current edna repositories, tools and services but will give us valuable user contributed resources as well as information about how users manage resources. Observing terms suggested, chosen and used in folksonomies is a rich source of information for developing our formal systems so that we can indeed get the best of both worlds.
- Date
- 26.12.2011 13:29:46
- Object
- Web 2.0
-
Pera, M.S.; Lund, W.; Ng, Y.-K.: ¬A sophisticated library search strategy using folksonomies and similarity matching (2009)
0.01
0.011965774 = product of:
0.035897322 = sum of:
0.02494502 = weight(_text_:web in 2939) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02494502 = score(doc=2939,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13836423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 2939, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2939)
0.010952301 = product of:
0.032856904 = sum of:
0.032856904 = weight(_text_:system in 2939) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032856904 = score(doc=2939,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13353272 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.042397358 = queryNorm
0.24605882 = fieldWeight in 2939, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2939)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Libraries, private and public, offer valuable resources to library patrons. As of today, the only way to locate information archived exclusively in libraries is through their catalogs. Library patrons, however, often find it difficult to formulate a proper query, which requires using specific keywords assigned to different fields of desired library catalog records, to obtain relevant results. These improperly formulated queries often yield irrelevant results or no results at all. This negative experience in dealing with existing library systems turns library patrons away from directly querying library catalogs; instead, they rely on Web search engines to perform their searches first, and upon obtaining the initial information (e.g., titles, subject headings, or authors) on the desired library materials, they query library catalogs. This searching strategy is an evidence of failure of today's library systems. In solving this problem, we propose an enhanced library system, which allows partial, similarity matching of (a) tags defined by ordinary users at a folksonomy site that describe the content of books and (b) unrestricted keywords specified by an ordinary library patron in a query to search for relevant library catalog records. The proposed library system allows patrons posting a query Q using commonly used words and ranks the retrieved results according to their degrees of resemblance with Q while maintaining the query processing time comparable with that achieved by current library search engines.
