Search (31 results, page 1 of 2)

0.07810174 = product of:
  0.13016956 = sum of:
    0.07017829 = weight(_text_:wide in 632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07017829 = score(doc=632,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20479609 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.342674 = fieldWeight in 632, 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=632)
    0.038072966 = weight(_text_:web in 632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038072966 = score(doc=632,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1508442 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 632, 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=632)
    0.021918291 = product of:
      0.043836582 = sum of:
        0.043836582 = weight(_text_:22 in 632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043836582 = score(doc=632,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = 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)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)

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

0.018041609 = product of:
  0.045104023 = sum of:
    0.032633968 = weight(_text_:web in 851) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032633968 = score(doc=851,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1508442 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 851, 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=851)
    0.012470056 = product of:
      0.024940113 = sum of:
        0.024940113 = weight(_text_:research in 851) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024940113 = score(doc=851,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.18912788 = fieldWeight in 851, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=851)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

This paper will examine the documentary universalism defended by Paul Otlet, as an aspect of his universalist philosophy. We will particularly be focusing on two elements of his knowledge organization theory: text and image documents. Then we will compare Otlet's universalist approach with the challenges of the "universal search" at the internet age. In order to discuss Paul Otlet's legacy, related to universal search and UDC role, we are currently analyzing the UIR archives, and more broadly, the Mundaneum's archives. The most important part of our research carried in the Mundaneum's archives will concern the Universal Iconographic Repertory (UIR) and what it reveals about the nature of the UDC and its's role in the universal search. This term covers both search engines and online libraries' catalogs tailored for searching on the Web.

0.01675643 = product of:
  0.041891076 = sum of:
    0.027194975 = weight(_text_:web in 5800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027194975 = score(doc=5800,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1508442 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 5800, 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=5800)
    0.014696103 = product of:
      0.029392205 = sum of:
        0.029392205 = weight(_text_:research in 5800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029392205 = score(doc=5800,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.22288933 = fieldWeight in 5800, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5800)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Shiyali Ramamrita Ranganathan's theory of classification spans a number of works over a number of decades. And while he was devoted to solving many problems in the practice of librarianship, and is known as the father of library science in India (Garfield, 1984), his work in classification revolves around one central concern. His classification research addressed the problems that arose from introducing new ideas into a scheme for classification, while maintaining a meaningful hierarchical and systematically arranged order of classes. This is because hierarchical and systematically arranged classes are the defining characteristic of useful classification. To lose this order is to through the addition of new classes is to introduce confusion, if not chaos, and to move toward a useless classification - or at least one that requires complete revision. In the following chapter, I outline the stages, and the elements of those stages, in Ranganathan's thought on classification from 1926-1972, as well as posthumous work that continues his agenda. And while facets figure prominently in all of these stages; but for Ranganathan to achieve his goal, he must continually add to this central feature of his theory of classification. I will close this chapter with an outline of persistent problems that represent research fronts for the field. Chief among these are what to do about scheme change and the open question about the rigor of information modeling in light of semantic web developments.

0.012030563 = product of:
  0.060152818 = sum of:
    0.060152818 = weight(_text_:wide in 80) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060152818 = score(doc=80,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20479609 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.29372054 = fieldWeight in 80, 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=80)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The history of structural development of classification systems (CS) is typologically divided into three main stages. Enumerative CS developed from ordinal towards hierarchical. In combinational CS, combinatory techniques evolved from division by analogy towards a fully-fledged system of typical subdivisions of general and special use. Syntactic designations were employed to combine notational symbols within wide limits. The invention of categorial analysis facilitated the development of faceted or analytical-synthetic CS. The system types under consideration are functioning simultaneously in the indexing practice. Clearly defined continuity can be observed. Each higher-ranking type comprises structural elements of its predecessor. Otherwise stated, each combinational classification contains elements of an enumerative one, while each faceted or analytical-synthetic CS includes elements of a combinational system

0.0113425255 = product of:
  0.056712627 = sum of:
    0.056712627 = weight(_text_:wide in 3628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056712627 = score(doc=3628,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.20479609 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.2769224 = fieldWeight in 3628, 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=3628)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

To those outside the field of library science, the name Melvil Dewey (1851-1931) is virtually synonymous with library classification. To those in the field, Dewey has been recognized as the premier classification maker. His enormously successful system (i.e., successful in terms of the wide adoption of the system around the world for over one hundred years) has now undergone nineteen editions. The Dewey Decimal Classification has been translated into more than twenty languages and is the most widely adopted classification scheme in the world. Even in its earliest manifestations, the Dewey Decimal Classification contained features that anticipated modern classification theory. Among these are the use of mnemonics and the commonly applied standard subdivisions, later called "common isolates" by S. R. Ranganathan (q.v.), which are the mainstays of facet analysis and synthesis. The device of standard subdivisions is an indication of the recognition of common aspects that pervade all subjects. The use of mnemonics, whereby recurring concepts in the scheme are represented by the same notation, for example, geographic concepts and language concepts, eased the transition of the Dewey Decimal Classification from a largely enumerative system to an increasingly faceted one. Another significant feature of the Dewey Decimal Classification is the use of the hierarchical notation based an the arabic numeral system. To a large extent, this feature accounts for the wide use and success of the system in the world across language barriers. With the prospect of increasing online information retrieval, the hierarchical notation will have a significant impact an the effectiveness of the Dewey Decimal Classification as an online retrieval tool. Because the notation is hierarchical, for example, with increasing digits in a number representing narrower subjects and decreasing digits indicating broader subjects, the Dewey Decimal Classification is particularly useful in generic searches for broadening or narrowing search results. In the preface to the second edition of his Decimal Classification Dewey explained the features of his "new" system. The excerpt below presents his ideas and theory concerning the rational basis of his classification, the standard subdivisions, the hierarchical notation based an decimal numbers, the use of mnemonics, the relative index, and relative location. It also reflects Dewey's lifelong interest in simplified spelling.

0.01001979 = product of:
  0.050098952 = sum of:
    0.050098952 = product of:
      0.100197904 = sum of:
        0.100197904 = weight(_text_:22 in 1168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.100197904 = score(doc=1168,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 1168, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1168)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Nachrichten für Dokumentation. 22(1971), S.55-63

0.008020377 = product of:
  0.040101882 = sum of:
    0.040101882 = weight(_text_:wide in 3629) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040101882 = score(doc=3629,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20479609 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.1958137 = fieldWeight in 3629, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3629)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Toward the end of the nineteenth century, Paul Otlet and Henri LaFontaine of Belgium initiated the compilation of an index to all recorded knowledge. Instead of an alphabetical file, they decided to adopt a classified arrangement. For the basis of such an arrangement, they turned to the Dewey Decimal Classification, a system which was gaining wide acceptance in American libraries. With permission secured from Melvil Dewey to expand the system to include details required for an indexing tool, Otlet and LaFontaine began developing what was to become the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC). Following the establishment of the Institut International de Bibliographie (IIB), later the Fédération Internationale de Documentation (FID), in 1895, work an the universal index and the classification scheme proceeded under its aegis. In 1905, the classification scheme was published as the Manuel du Répertoire bibliographique universel. While the initial, ambitious project of the universal index was abandoned, the classification scheme itself was widely adopted, particularly in special libraries in Europe. A second edition was published in 1927-1933 under the title Classification décimale universelle. The development and maintanance of the scheme continued with the support of the FID. In the course of its development, the UDC moved further and further away from its prototype, the Dewey Decimal Classification. One of the major differences between the two systems is the use of relators in UDC. The notation adopted by Melvil Dewey for his scheme is a hierarchical one; in other words, the notation reflects the hierarchical relationships among subjects. However, it does not display the relationships among the facets, or aspects, of a particular subject. Furthermore, the use of auxiliaries in the Dewey Decimal Classification, beginning with the form subdivisions and gradually expanding to include geographic subdivisions and finally other auxiliaries in the most recent editions, has been relatively restricted. As an indexing tool, Otlet and LaFontaine felt that their system needed commonly applicable auxiliaries which they called "determinatives."` To this end, a series of special symbols were introduced into the system for the purpose of combining related subjects and indicating different facets or aspects of the main subject. The use of these symbols, called relators, with the auxiliaries has rendered the Universal Decimal Classification a synthetic scheme. In this respect, the UDC has moved much more rapidly than the Dewey Decimal Classification toward becoming a faceted classification. In the following paper, Henry V. Hopwood, a Senior Assistant at the British Patent Office Library during the 1900s, explains the use and rationale of relators, or "marks," as he calls them, in the Universal Decimal Classification.

0.007514843 = product of:
  0.037574213 = sum of:
    0.037574213 = product of:
      0.075148426 = sum of:
        0.075148426 = weight(_text_:22 in 3554) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.075148426 = score(doc=3554,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3554, 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=3554)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

25.12.1995 22:28:43

0.005090879 = product of:
  0.025454395 = sum of:
    0.025454395 = product of:
      0.05090879 = sum of:
        0.05090879 = weight(_text_:research in 3945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05090879 = score(doc=3945,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.38605565 = fieldWeight in 3945, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3945)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present the initial relationship between the Classification Research Group (CRG) and the Center for Documentation and Communication Research (CDCR) and how this relationship changed between 1952 and 1970. The theory of normative behavior and its concepts of worldviews, social norms, social types, and information behavior are used to characterize the relationship between the small worlds of the two groups with the intent of understanding the gap between early classification research and information retrieval (IR) research. Design/methodology/approach This is a mixed method analysis of two groups as evidenced in published artifacts by and about their work. A thorough review of historical literature about the groups as well as their own published works was employed and an author co-citation analysis was used to characterize the conceptual similarities and differences of the two groups of researchers. Findings The CRG focused on fundamental principles to aid classification and retrieval of information. The CDCR were more inclined to develop practical methods of retrieval without benefit of good theoretical foundations. The CRG began it work under the contention that the general classification schemes at the time were inadequate for the developing IR mechanisms. The CDCR rejected the classification schemes of the times and focused on developing punch card mechanisms and processes that were generously funded by both government and corporate funding. Originality/value This paper provides a unique historical analysis of two groups of influential researchers in the field of library and information science.

0.005039714 = product of:
  0.025198568 = sum of:
    0.025198568 = product of:
      0.050397135 = sum of:
        0.050397135 = weight(_text_:research in 1594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050397135 = score(doc=1594,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.38217562 = fieldWeight in 1594, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1594)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The paper explores the cultural construction of classification by identifying fundamental characteristics of classification and examining how these fit with other cultures. Foucault's method of discourse analysis is applied to selected texts an classification in two areas. The first area is classification originated in the dominant Western culture. The second area is classifications from indigenous cultures. It is concluded that classification research needs to have an increasing awareness of the cultural construction of classification schemes and to work with alternatives to approaches of fundamental universal principles of classification.

Source

Advances in classification research, vol.10: proceedings of the 10th ASIS SIG/CR Classification Research Workshop. Ed.: Albrechtsen, H. u. J.E. Mai

0.005009895 = product of:
  0.025049476 = sum of:
    0.025049476 = product of:
      0.050098952 = sum of:
        0.050098952 = weight(_text_:22 in 6607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050098952 = score(doc=6607,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6607, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6607)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Probleme des Wiederaufbaus im wissenschaftlichen Bibliothekswesen: aus d. Verhandlungen des 1. Bibliothekartagung der britischen Zone in Hamburg vom 22.-24.10.1946

0.0049880226 = product of:
  0.024940113 = sum of:
    0.024940113 = product of:
      0.049880225 = sum of:
        0.049880225 = weight(_text_:research in 1835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049880225 = score(doc=1835,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.37825575 = fieldWeight in 1835, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1835)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The progress in the first century of the classification era is traced in the three majot perios: pre-facet, transition-to-facet, and facet period. The facet-period is divided into the restricted facet formula, generilised facet formula periods and the two relativity periods - viz. Dorking and Elsinore periods. For each of the six resulting periods, the chief achievements in library classification and the social factors leading to them are mentioned. The achievements of the Dorking period just ending are described in greater detail. The follows the programme of research work for the Elsinore period of 1965 to 1975. A programme for fundamental research in the idea, verbal, and notational planes is chalked out. Then follows the programme for routine research in the building of schedules of common isolates, whcih is a back log from the Dorking period, and in the new area of the design and building of schedules for the depth classification of diverse subjects, needed for documentation work and service. Lastly, the organization suitable to carry out the programme is outlined

Source

Classification research. Proc. of the 2nd Int. Study Conf. ... Elsinore, 14.-18.9.1964. Ed. by P. Atherton

0.0049880226 = product of:
  0.024940113 = sum of:
    0.024940113 = product of:
      0.049880225 = sum of:
        0.049880225 = weight(_text_:research in 49) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049880225 = score(doc=49,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.37825575 = fieldWeight in 49, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=49)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Universal classification II: subject analysis and ordering systems. Proc. of the 4th Int. Study Conf. on Classification research, Augsburg, 28.6.-2.7.1982. Ed.: I. Dahlberg

0.004702753 = product of:
  0.023513764 = sum of:
    0.023513764 = product of:
      0.04702753 = sum of:
        0.04702753 = weight(_text_:research in 2095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04702753 = score(doc=2095,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.35662293 = fieldWeight in 2095, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2095)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Classification research for knowledge representation and organization. Proc. 5th Int. Study Conf. on Classification Research, Toronto, Canada, 24.-28.6.1991. Ed. by N.J. Williamson u. M. Hudon

0.004702753 = product of:
  0.023513764 = sum of:
    0.023513764 = product of:
      0.04702753 = sum of:
        0.04702753 = weight(_text_:research in 571) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04702753 = score(doc=571,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.35662293 = fieldWeight in 571, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=571)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

From classification to 'knowledge organization': Dorking revisited or 'past is prelude'. A collection of reprints to commemorate the firty year span between the Dorking Conference (First International Study Conference on Classification Research 1957) and the Sixth International Study Conference on Classification Research (London 1997). Ed.: A. Gilchrist

0.0043836585 = product of:
  0.021918291 = sum of:
    0.021918291 = product of:
      0.043836582 = sum of:
        0.043836582 = weight(_text_:22 in 75) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043836582 = score(doc=75,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 75, 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=75)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

International forum on information and documentation. 22(1997) no.2, S.3-15

0.0043836585 = product of:
  0.021918291 = sum of:
    0.021918291 = product of:
      0.043836582 = sum of:
        0.043836582 = weight(_text_:22 in 2550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043836582 = score(doc=2550,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2550, 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=2550)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

9. 2.1997 18:44:22

0.004156686 = product of:
  0.020783428 = sum of:
    0.020783428 = product of:
      0.041566856 = sum of:
        0.041566856 = weight(_text_:research in 3537) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041566856 = score(doc=3537,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.31521314 = fieldWeight in 3537, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3537)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Tendencias de investigación en organización del conocimient: IV Cologuio International de Ciencas de la Documentación , VI Congreso del Capitulo Espanol de ISKO = Trends in knowledge organization research. Eds.: J.A. Frias u. C. Travieso

0.0037574214 = product of:
  0.018787106 = sum of:
    0.018787106 = product of:
      0.037574213 = sum of:
        0.037574213 = weight(_text_:22 in 538) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037574213 = score(doc=538,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 538, 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=538)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

9. 2.1997 18:44:22

0.0037574214 = product of:
  0.018787106 = sum of:
    0.018787106 = product of:
      0.037574213 = sum of:
        0.037574213 = weight(_text_:22 in 1429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037574213 = score(doc=1429,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1429, 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=1429)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik