Search (7890 results, page 1 of 395)

0.11659854 = product of:
  0.29149634 = sum of:
    0.24901254 = weight(_text_:3a in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.24901254 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4430686 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
    0.042483795 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042483795 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Content

Vgl.: http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CEAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.91.4940%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&ei=dOXrUMeIDYHDtQahsIGACg&usg=AFQjCNHFWVh6gNPvnOrOS9R3rkrXCNVD-A&sig2=5I2F5evRfMnsttSgFF9g7Q&bvm=bv.1357316858,d.Yms.

Date

8. 1.2013 10:22:32

0.11119729 = product of:
  0.27799323 = sum of:
    0.24901254 = weight(_text_:3a in 2918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.24901254 = score(doc=2918,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4430686 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 2918, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2918)
    0.028980678 = weight(_text_:it in 2918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028980678 = score(doc=2918,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.19173169 = fieldWeight in 2918, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2918)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

The employees of an organization often use a personal hierarchical classification scheme to organize digital documents that are stored on their own workstations. As this may make it hard for other employees to retrieve these documents, there is a risk that the organization will lose track of needed documentation. Furthermore, the inherent boundaries of such a hierarchical structure require making arbitrary decisions about which specific criteria the classification will b.e based on (for instance, the administrative activity or the document type, although a document can have several attributes and require classification in several classes).A faceted classification model to support corporate information organization is proposed. Partially based on Ranganathan's facets theory, this model aims not only to standardize the organization of digital documents, but also to simplify the management of a document throughout its life cycle for both individuals and organizations, while ensuring compliance to regulatory and policy requirements.

Footnote

Vgl.: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?reload=true&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fiel5%2F4755313%2F4755314%2F04755480.pdf%3Farnumber%3D4755480&authDecision=-203.

0.11119729 = product of:
  0.27799323 = sum of:
    0.24901254 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.24901254 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4430686 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
    0.028980678 = weight(_text_:it in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028980678 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.19173169 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

On a scientific concept hierarchy, a parent concept may have a few attributes, each of which has multiple values being a group of child concepts. We call these attributes facets: classification has a few facets such as application (e.g., face recognition), model (e.g., svm, knn), and metric (e.g., precision). In this work, we aim at building faceted concept hierarchies from scientific literature. Hierarchy construction methods heavily rely on hypernym detection, however, the faceted relations are parent-to-child links but the hypernym relation is a multi-hop, i.e., ancestor-to-descendent link with a specific facet "type-of". We use information extraction techniques to find synonyms, sibling concepts, and ancestor-descendent relations from a data science corpus. And we propose a hierarchy growth algorithm to infer the parent-child links from the three types of relationships. It resolves conflicts by maintaining the acyclic structure of a hierarchy.

Content

Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.

0.11119729 = product of:
  0.27799323 = sum of:
    0.24901254 = weight(_text_:3a in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.24901254 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4430686 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=862)
    0.028980678 = weight(_text_:it in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028980678 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.19173169 = fieldWeight in 862, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=862)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

This research revisits the classic Turing test and compares recent large language models such as ChatGPT for their abilities to reproduce human-level comprehension and compelling text generation. Two task challenges- summary and question answering- prompt ChatGPT to produce original content (98-99%) from a single text entry and sequential questions initially posed by Turing in 1950. We score the original and generated content against the OpenAI GPT-2 Output Detector from 2019, and establish multiple cases where the generated content proves original and undetectable (98%). The question of a machine fooling a human judge recedes in this work relative to the question of "how would one prove it?" The original contribution of the work presents a metric and simple grammatical set for understanding the writing mechanics of chatbots in evaluating their readability and statistical clarity, engagement, delivery, overall quality, and plagiarism risks. While Turing's original prose scores at least 14% below the machine-generated output, whether an algorithm displays hints of Turing's true initial thoughts (the "Lovelace 2.0" test) remains unanswerable.

Source

https%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fabs%2F2212.06721&usg=AOvVaw3i_9pZm9y_dQWoHi6uv0EN

0.09666581 = product of:
  0.24166451 = sum of:
    0.20751046 = weight(_text_:3a in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20751046 = score(doc=76,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4430686 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
    0.034154054 = weight(_text_:it in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034154054 = score(doc=76,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.22595796 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

A summary of brain theory is given so far as it is contained within the framework of Localization Theory. Difficulties of this "conventional theory" are traced back to a specific deficiency: there is no way to express relations between active cells (as for instance their representing parts of the same object). A new theory is proposed to cure this deficiency. It introduces a new kind of dynamical control, termed synaptic modulation, according to which synapses switch between a conducting and a non- conducting state. The dynamics of this variable is controlled on a fast time scale by correlations in the temporal fine structure of cellular signals. Furthermore, conventional synaptic plasticity is replaced by a refined version. Synaptic modulation and plasticity form the basis for short-term and long-term memory, respectively. Signal correlations, shaped by the variable network, express structure and relationships within objects. In particular, the figure-ground problem may be solved in this way. Synaptic modulation introduces exibility into cerebral networks which is necessary to solve the invariance problem. Since momentarily useless connections are deactivated, interference between di erent memory traces can be reduced, and memory capacity increased, in comparison with conventional associative memory

Source

http%3A%2F%2Fcogprints.org%2F1380%2F1%2FvdM_correlation.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0g7DvZbQPb2U7dYb49b9v_

0.09266441 = product of:
  0.23166102 = sum of:
    0.20751046 = weight(_text_:3a in 692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20751046 = score(doc=692,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4430686 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 692, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=692)
    0.024150565 = weight(_text_:it in 692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024150565 = score(doc=692,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.15977642 = fieldWeight in 692, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=692)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

What is the difference between Piaget's constructivism and Papert's "constructionism"? Beyond the mere play on the words, I think the distinction holds, and that integrating both views can enrich our understanding of how people learn and grow. Piaget's constructivism offers a window into what children are interested in, and able to achieve, at different stages of their development. The theory describes how children's ways of doing and thinking evolve over time, and under which circumstance children are more likely to let go of-or hold onto- their currently held views. Piaget suggests that children have very good reasons not to abandon their worldviews just because someone else, be it an expert, tells them they're wrong. Papert's constructionism, in contrast, focuses more on the art of learning, or 'learning to learn', and on the significance of making things in learning. Papert is interested in how learners engage in a conversation with [their own or other people's] artifacts, and how these conversations boost self-directed learning, and ultimately facilitate the construction of new knowledge. He stresses the importance of tools, media, and context in human development. Integrating both perspectives illuminates the processes by which individuals come to make sense of their experience, gradually optimizing their interactions with the world.

Content

Vgl.: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Piaget-%E2%80%99-s-Constructivism-%2C-Papert-%E2%80%99-s-%3A-What-%E2%80%99-s-Ackermann/89cbcc1e740a4591443ff4765a6ae8df0fdf5554. Darunter weitere Hinweise auf verwandte Beiträge. Auch unter: Learning Group Publication 5(2001) no.3, S.438.

0.083004184 = product of:
  0.4150209 = sum of:
    0.4150209 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.4150209 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4430686 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja

0.07413153 = product of:
  0.18532883 = sum of:
    0.16600837 = weight(_text_:3a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16600837 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4430686 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
    0.019320453 = weight(_text_:it in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019320453 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.12782113 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

The successes of information retrieval (IR) in recent decades were built upon bag-of-words representations. Effective as it is, bag-of-words is only a shallow text understanding; there is a limited amount of information for document ranking in the word space. This dissertation goes beyond words and builds knowledge based text representations, which embed the external and carefully curated information from knowledge bases, and provide richer and structured evidence for more advanced information retrieval systems. This thesis research first builds query representations with entities associated with the query. Entities' descriptions are used by query expansion techniques that enrich the query with explanation terms. Then we present a general framework that represents a query with entities that appear in the query, are retrieved by the query, or frequently show up in the top retrieved documents. A latent space model is developed to jointly learn the connections from query to entities and the ranking of documents, modeling the external evidence from knowledge bases and internal ranking features cooperatively. To further improve the quality of relevant entities, a defining factor of our query representations, we introduce learning to rank to entity search and retrieve better entities from knowledge bases. In the document representation part, this thesis research also moves one step forward with a bag-of-entities model, in which documents are represented by their automatic entity annotations, and the ranking is performed in the entity space.

Content

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Language and Information Technologies. Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cs.cmu.edu%2F~cx%2Fpapers%2Fknowledge_based_text_representation.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0SaTSvhWLTh__Uz_HtOtl3.

0.06640335 = product of:
  0.33201674 = sum of:
    0.33201674 = weight(_text_:3a in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.33201674 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4430686 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 230, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=230)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

https%3A%2F%2Ftannerlectures.utah.edu%2F_documents%2Fa-to-z%2Fp%2Fpopper80.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3f4QRTEH-OEBmoYr2J_c7H

0.05810293 = product of:
  0.29051465 = sum of:
    0.29051465 = weight(_text_:3a in 306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.29051465 = score(doc=306,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4430686 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 306, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=306)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

Vgl.: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5386707&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5386707.

0.05785609 = product of:
  0.14464022 = sum of:
    0.03381079 = weight(_text_:it in 1936) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03381079 = score(doc=1936,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.22368698 = fieldWeight in 1936, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1936)
    0.110829435 = weight(_text_:22 in 1936) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.110829435 = score(doc=1936,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.6055961 = fieldWeight in 1936, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1936)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Dewey Decimal Classification and Relative Index, Edition 22 (DDC 22) will be issued simultaneously in print and web versions in July 2003. The new edition is the first full print update to the Dewey Decimal Classification system in seven years-it includes several significant updates and many new numbers and topics. DDC 22 also features some fundamental structural changes that have been introduced with the goals of promoting classifier efficiency and improving the DDC for use in a variety of applications in the web environment. Most importantly, the content of the new edition has been shaped by the needs and recommendations of Dewey users around the world. The worldwide user community has an important role in shaping the future of the DDC.

Object

DDC-22

0.05717158 = product of:
  0.14292894 = sum of:
    0.057961356 = weight(_text_:it in 825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057961356 = score(doc=825,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.38346338 = fieldWeight in 825, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=825)
    0.08496759 = weight(_text_:22 in 825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08496759 = score(doc=825,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 825, 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=825)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

The article examines the viability of various methods used by DDC for accommodating the universe of subjects. It also provides some suggestions for efficacious use of these methods

Source

International classification. 14(1987), S.19-22

0.05717158 = product of:
  0.14292894 = sum of:
    0.057961356 = weight(_text_:it in 1575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057961356 = score(doc=1575,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.38346338 = fieldWeight in 1575, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1575)
    0.08496759 = weight(_text_:22 in 1575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08496759 = score(doc=1575,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1575, 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=1575)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Footnote

Rez. in: Journal of academic librarianship. 22(1996) no.6, S.472 (B.J. Scales)

0.05717158 = product of:
  0.14292894 = sum of:
    0.057961356 = weight(_text_:it in 2847) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057961356 = score(doc=2847,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.38346338 = fieldWeight in 2847, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2847)
    0.08496759 = weight(_text_:22 in 2847) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08496759 = score(doc=2847,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2847, 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=2847)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

The Open Source Software movement has much to offer the library community. But can it survive the onslaught of patent applications?

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.231-237

0.055645775 = product of:
  0.13911444 = sum of:
    0.06830811 = weight(_text_:it in 911) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06830811 = score(doc=911,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.45191592 = fieldWeight in 911, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=911)
    0.070806324 = weight(_text_:22 in 911) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.070806324 = score(doc=911,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 911, 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=911)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

The information arcade at the main library, University of Iowa encourage and facilitates the integration of electronic information resources into the academic curriculum and into research activities. It is the result of a collaboration between librarians, faculty and computing staff. Describes how the service was set up and the services it provides

Source

Journal of academic librarianship. 20(1994) no.1, S.22-23

0.055645775 = product of:
  0.13911444 = sum of:
    0.06830811 = weight(_text_:it in 1705) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06830811 = score(doc=1705,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.45191592 = fieldWeight in 1705, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1705)
    0.070806324 = weight(_text_:22 in 1705) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.070806324 = score(doc=1705,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1705, 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=1705)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

The Digital Object Identifier (DOI) system, launched in Oct 97, is a system for executing various processes on the Internet. Explains how it works and what it can do and discusses governance of the system warning of the need for wider investigation

Source

Bookseller. 1997, no.4798, S.20-22

0.053570747 = product of:
  0.13392687 = sum of:
    0.07728181 = weight(_text_:it in 3499) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07728181 = score(doc=3499,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.51128453 = fieldWeight in 3499, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3499)
    0.05664506 = weight(_text_:22 in 3499) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05664506 = score(doc=3499,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3499, 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=3499)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Presents a survey and discussion on signature-based text retrieval methods. It describes the main idea behind the signature approach and its advantages over other text retrieval methods, it provides a classification of the signature methods that have appeared in the literature, it describes the main representatives of each class, together with the relative advantages and drawbacks, and it gives a list of applications as well as commercial or university prototypes that use the signature approach

Date

7. 5.1999 15:22:48

0.04980251 = product of:
  0.24901254 = sum of:
    0.24901254 = weight(_text_:3a in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.24901254 = score(doc=2514,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4430686 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fdelab.csd.auth.gr%2F~dimitris%2Fcourses%2Fir_spring06%2Fpage_rank_computing%2Fp527-li.pdf. Vgl. auch: http://www2002.org/CDROM/refereed/643/.

0.049429227 = product of:
  0.123573065 = sum of:
    0.06692801 = weight(_text_:it in 6435) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06692801 = score(doc=6435,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.44278538 = fieldWeight in 6435, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6435)
    0.05664506 = weight(_text_:22 in 6435) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05664506 = score(doc=6435,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6435, 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=6435)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Defends the role of quality cataloguing. It is only with adequate records that users will be able to find the information they require. It is a prerequisite for efficient machine retrieval and integrated services. Quality MARC records and the intellectual structure of cataloguing are essential is standards of service are to be maintained

Source

Journal of academic librarianship. 22(1996) no.4, S.306-307

0.049429227 = product of:
  0.123573065 = sum of:
    0.06692801 = weight(_text_:it in 127) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06692801 = score(doc=127,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.44278538 = fieldWeight in 127, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=127)
    0.05664506 = weight(_text_:22 in 127) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05664506 = score(doc=127,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = 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)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=127)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Z39.50 is an information retrieval protocol. It has generated much interest but is so far little deployed in UK systems and services. Gives a functional overview of the protocol itself and the standards background, describes some European initiatives which make use of it, and outlines various issues to do with its future use and acceptance. Z39.50 is a crucial building block of future distributed information systems but it needs to be considered alongside other protocols and services to provide useful applications

Source

Program. 30(1996) no.1, S.1-22