Search (95 results, page 1 of 5)

  • × theme_ss:"Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus"
  1. Bagheri, M.: Development of thesauri in Iran (2006) 0.03 
    0.02858579 = product of:
  0.07146447 = sum of:
    0.028980678 = weight(_text_:it in 260) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028980678 = score(doc=260,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.19173169 = fieldWeight in 260, 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=260)
    0.042483795 = weight(_text_:22 in 260) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042483795 = score(doc=260,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 260, 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=260)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The need for Persian thesauri became apparent during the late 1960s with the advent of documentation centres in Iran. The first Persian controlled vocabulary was published by IRANDOC in 1977. Other centres worked on translations of existing thesauri, but it was soon realised that these efforts did not meet the needs of the centres. After the Islamic revolution in 1979, the foundation of new centres intensified the need for Persian thesauri, especially in the fields of history and government documents. Also, during the Iran-Iraq war, Iranian research centres produced reports in scientific and technical fields, both to support military requirements and to meet society's needs. In order to provide a comprehensive thesaurus, the Council of Scientific Research of Iran approved a project for the compilation of such a work. Nowadays, 12 Persian thesauri are available and others are being prepared, based on the literary corpus and conformity with characteristics of Iranian culture.
    Source
    Indexer. 25(2006) no.1, S.19-22
  2. Keyser, P. de: Indexing : from thesauri to the Semantic Web (2012) 0.03 
    0.02858579 = product of:
  0.07146447 = sum of:
    0.028980678 = weight(_text_:it in 3197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028980678 = score(doc=3197,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.19173169 = fieldWeight in 3197, 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=3197)
    0.042483795 = weight(_text_:22 in 3197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042483795 = score(doc=3197,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3197, 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=3197)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Indexing consists of both novel and more traditional techniques. Cutting-edge indexing techniques, such as automatic indexing, ontologies, and topic maps, were developed independently of older techniques such as thesauri, but it is now recognized that these older methods also hold expertise. Indexing describes various traditional and novel indexing techniques, giving information professionals and students of library and information sciences a broad and comprehensible introduction to indexing. This title consists of twelve chapters: an Introduction to subject readings and theasauri; Automatic indexing versus manual indexing; Techniques applied in automatic indexing of text material; Automatic indexing of images; The black art of indexing moving images; Automatic indexing of music; Taxonomies and ontologies; Metadata formats and indexing; Tagging; Topic maps; Indexing the web; and The Semantic Web.
    Date
    24. 8.2016 14:03:22
  3. Mooers, C.N.: ¬The indexing language of an information retrieval system (1985) 0.02 
    0.023437202 = product of:
  0.058593005 = sum of:
    0.03381079 = weight(_text_:it in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03381079 = score(doc=3644,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.22368698 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
    0.024782214 = weight(_text_:22 in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024782214 = score(doc=3644,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Calvin Mooers' work toward the resolution of the problem of ambiguity in indexing went unrecognized for years. At the time he introduced the "descriptor" - a term with a very distinct meaning-indexers were, for the most part, taking index terms directly from the document, without either rationalizing them with context or normalizing them with some kind of classification. It is ironic that Mooers' term came to be attached to the popular but unsophisticated indexing methods which he was trying to root out. Simply expressed, what Mooers did was to take the dictionary definitions of terms and redefine them so clearly that they could not be used in any context except that provided by the new definition. He did, at great pains, construct such meanings for over four hundred words; disambiguation and specificity were sought after and found for these words. He proposed that all indexers adopt this method so that when the index supplied a term, it also supplied the exact meaning for that term as used in the indexed document. The same term used differently in another document would be defined differently and possibly renamed to avoid ambiguity. The disambiguation was achieved by using unabridged dictionaries and other sources of defining terminology. In practice, this tends to produce circularity in definition, that is, word A refers to word B which refers to word C which refers to word A. It was necessary, therefore, to break this chain by creating a new, definitive meaning for each word. Eventually, means such as those used by Austin (q.v.) for PRECIS achieved the same purpose, but by much more complex means than just creating a unique definition of each term. Mooers, however, was probably the first to realize how confusing undefined terminology could be. Early automatic indexers dealt with distinct disciplines and, as long as they did not stray beyond disciplinary boundaries, a quick and dirty keyword approach was satisfactory. The trouble came when attempts were made to make a combined index for two or more distinct disciplines. A number of processes have since been developed, mostly involving tagging of some kind or use of strings. Mooers' solution has rarely been considered seriously and probably would be extremely difficult to apply now because of so much interdisciplinarity. But for a specific, weIl defined field, it is still weIl worth considering. Mooers received training in mathematics and physics from the University of Minnesota and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He was the founder of Zator Company, which developed and marketed a coded card information retrieval system, and of Rockford Research, Inc., which engages in research in information science. He is the inventor of the TRAC computer language.
    Footnote
    Original in: Information retrieval today: papers presented at an Institute conducted by the Library School and the Center for Continuation Study, University of Minnesota, Sept. 19-22, 1962. Ed. by Wesley Simonton. Minneapolis, Minn.: The Center, 1963. S.21-36.
  4. Röttsches, H.: Thesauruspflege im Verbund der Bibliotheken der obersten Bundesbehörden (1989) 0.02 
    0.019825771 = product of:
  0.09912886 = sum of:
    0.09912886 = weight(_text_:22 in 4199) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09912886 = score(doc=4199,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4199, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4199)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Mitteilungen der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Parlaments- und Behördenbibliotheken. 1989, H.67, S.1-22
  5. Byrne, C.C.; McCracken, S.A.: ¬An adaptive thesaurus employing semantic distance, relational inheritance and nominal compound interpretation for linguistic support of information retrieval (1999) 0.02 
    0.016993519 = product of:
  0.08496759 = sum of:
    0.08496759 = weight(_text_:22 in 4483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08496759 = score(doc=4483,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4483, 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=4483)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    15. 3.2000 10:22:37
  6. Maniez, J.: ¬Des classifications aux thesaurus : du bon usage des facettes (1999) 0.02 
    0.016993519 = product of:
  0.08496759 = sum of:
    0.08496759 = weight(_text_:22 in 6404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08496759 = score(doc=6404,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6404, 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=6404)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
  7. Maniez, J.: ¬Du bon usage des facettes : des classifications aux thésaurus (1999) 0.02 
    0.016993519 = product of:
  0.08496759 = sum of:
    0.08496759 = weight(_text_:22 in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08496759 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3773, 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=3773)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
  8. Qin, J.; Paling, S.: Converting a controlled vocabulary into an ontology : the case of GEM (2001) 0.02 
    0.016993519 = product of:
  0.08496759 = sum of:
    0.08496759 = weight(_text_:22 in 3895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08496759 = score(doc=3895,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3895, 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=3895)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    24. 8.2005 19:20:22
  9. Riege, U.: Thesaurus und Klassifikation Sozialwissenschaften : Entwicklung der elektronischen Versionen (1998) 0.01 
    0.014161265 = product of:
  0.070806324 = sum of:
    0.070806324 = weight(_text_:22 in 4158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.070806324 = score(doc=4158,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4158, 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=4158)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Information und Märkte: 50. Deutscher Dokumentartag 1998, Kongreß der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Dokumentation e.V. (DGD), Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn, 22.-24. September 1998. Hrsg. von Marlies Ockenfeld u. Gerhard J. Mantwill
  10. Alkämper, H.: ¬Die Neugestaltung des Parlamentsthesaurus PARTHES (1998) 0.01 
    0.014161265 = product of:
  0.070806324 = sum of:
    0.070806324 = weight(_text_:22 in 4162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.070806324 = score(doc=4162,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4162, 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=4162)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Information und Märkte: 50. Deutscher Dokumentartag 1998, Kongreß der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Dokumentation e.V. (DGD), Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn, 22.-24. September 1998. Hrsg. von Marlies Ockenfeld u. Gerhard J. Mantwill
  11. Schenkel, M.: Vom Leitkartenthesaurus zum Online-Bibliotheksthesaurus : Die Revision des Dokumentationssystems der Bibliothek des Deutschen Bundestages (1949-1998) (1998) 0.01 
    0.014161265 = product of:
  0.070806324 = sum of:
    0.070806324 = weight(_text_:22 in 4163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.070806324 = score(doc=4163,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4163, 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=4163)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Information und Märkte: 50. Deutscher Dokumentartag 1998, Kongreß der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Dokumentation e.V. (DGD), Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn, 22.-24. September 1998. Hrsg. von Marlies Ockenfeld u. Gerhard J. Mantwill
  12. Velasco, M.: Algoritmo de filtrado multitermino para la obtencion de relaciones jerarquicas en la construction automatica de un tesauro de descriptores (1999) 0.01 
    0.014161265 = product of:
  0.070806324 = sum of:
    0.070806324 = weight(_text_:22 in 348) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.070806324 = score(doc=348,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 348, 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=348)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Revista Española de Documentaçion Cientifica. 22(1999) no.1, S.34-49
  13. Tudhope, D.; Hodge, G.: Terminology registries (2007) 0.01 
    0.014161265 = product of:
  0.070806324 = sum of:
    0.070806324 = weight(_text_:22 in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.070806324 = score(doc=539,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 539, 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=539)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    26.12.2011 13:22:07
  14. Schulz, T.: Konzeption und prototypische Entwicklung eines Thesaurus für IT-Konzepte an Hochschulen (2021) 0.01 
    0.012779278 = product of:
  0.06389639 = sum of:
    0.06389639 = weight(_text_:it in 429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06389639 = score(doc=429,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.42272866 = fieldWeight in 429, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=429)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    In Hochschulen besteht derzeit ein großes Anliegen, die Digitalisierung effektiv und effizient für Prozesse in Steuerungsbereichen zu nutzen. Dabei steht die IT-Governance im Mittelpunkt der hochschulpolitischen Überlegungen und beinhaltet "die interne Steuerung und Koordination von Entscheidungsprozessen in Bezug auf IT-Steuerung beziehungsweise Digitalisierungsmaßnahmen."(Christmann-Budian et al. 2018) Strategisch kann die Bündelung von Kompetenzen in der deutschen Hochschullandschaft dabei helfen, die steigenden Anforderungen an die IT-Governance zu erfüllen. Passend zu diesem Ansatz realisieren aktuell im ZDT zusammengeschlossene Hochschulen das Projekt "IT-Konzepte - Portfolio gemeinsamer Vorlagen und Muster". Das Projekt schließt an die Problemstellung an, indem Kompetenzen gebündelt und alle Hochschulen befähigt werden, IT-Konzepte erarbeiten und verabschieden zu können. Dazu wird ein Portfolio an Muster und Vorlagen als Ressourcenpool zusammengetragen und referenziert, um eine Nachvollziehbarkeit der Vielfalt an Herausgebern gewährleisten zu können (Meister 2020). Um den Ressourcenpool, welcher einen Body of Knowledge (BoK) darstellt, effizient durchsuchen zu können, ist eine sinnvolle Struktur unabdinglich. Daher setzt sich das Ziel der Bachelorarbeit aus der Analyse von hochschulinternen Dokumenten mithilfe von Natural Language Processing (NLP) und die daraus resultierende Entwicklung eines Thesaurus-Prototyps für IT-Konzepte zusammen. Dieser soll im Anschluss serialisiert und automatisiert werden, um diesen fortlaufend auf einem aktuellen Stand zu halten. Es wird sich mit der Frage beschäftigt, wie ein Thesaurus nachhaltig technologisch, systematisch und konsistent erstellt werden kann, um diesen Prozess im späteren Verlauf als Grundlage für weitere Themenbereiche einzuführen.
  15. Lee, M.; Baillie, S.; Dell'Oro, J.: TML: a Thesaural Markpup Language (200?) 0.01 
    0.011592272 = product of:
  0.057961356 = sum of:
    0.057961356 = weight(_text_:it in 1622) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057961356 = score(doc=1622,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.38346338 = fieldWeight in 1622, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1622)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Thesauri are used to provide controlled vocabularies for resource classification. Their use can greatly assist document discovery because thesauri man date a consistent shared terminology for describing documents. A particular thesauras classifies documents according to an information community's needs. As a result, there are many different thesaural schemas. This has led to a proliferation of schema-specific thesaural systems. In our research, we exploit schematic regularities to design a generic thesaural ontology and specfiy it as a markup language. The language provides a common representational framework in which to encode the idiosyncrasies of specific thesauri. This approach has several advantages: it offers consistent syntax and semantics in which to express thesauri; it allows general purpose thesaural applications to leverage many thesauri; and it supports a single thesaural user interface by which information communities can consistently organise, score and retrieve electronic documents.
  16. Rolland-Thomas, P.: Thesaural codes : an appraisal of their use in the Library of Congress Subject Headings (1993) 0.01 
    0.011592272 = product of:
  0.057961356 = sum of:
    0.057961356 = weight(_text_:it in 549) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057961356 = score(doc=549,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.38346338 = fieldWeight in 549, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=549)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    LCSH is known as such since 1975. It always has created headings to serve the LC collections instead of a theoretical basis. It started to replace cross reference codes by thesaural codes in 1986, in a mechanical fashion. It was in no way transformed into a thesaurus. Its encyclopedic coverage, its pre-coordinate concepts make it substantially distinct, considering that thesauri usually map a restricted field of knowledge and use uniterms. The questions raised are whether the new symbols comply with thesaurus standards and if they are true to one or to several models. Explanations and definitions from other lists of subject headings and thesauri, literature in the field of classification and subject indexing will provide some answers. For instance, see refers from a subject heading not used to another or others used. Exceptionally it will lead from a specific term to a more general one. Some equate a see reference with the equivalence relationship. Such relationships are pointed by USE in LCSH. See also references are made from the broader subject to narrower parts of it and also between associated subjects. They suggest lateral or vertical connexions as well as reciprocal relationships. They serve a coordination purpose for some, lay down a methodical search itinerary for others. Since their inception in the 1950's thesauri have been devised for indexing and retrieving information in the fields of science and technology. Eventually they attended to a number of social sciences and humanities. Research derived from thesauri was voluminous. Numerous guidelines are designed. They did not discriminate between the "hard" sciences and the social sciences. RT relationships are widely but diversely used in numerous controlled vocabularies. LCSH's aim is to achieve a list almost free of RT and SA references. It thus restricts relationships to BT/NT, USE and UF. This raises the question as to whether all fields of knowledge can "fit" in the Procrustean bed of RT/NT, i.e., genus/species relationships. Standard codes were devised. It was soon realized that BT/NT, well suited to the genus/species couple could not signal a whole-part relationship. In LCSH, BT and NT function as reciprocals, the whole-part relationship is taken into account by ISO. It is amply elaborated upon by authors. The part-whole connexion is sometimes studied apart. The decision to replace cross reference codes was an improvement. Relations can now be distinguished through the distinct needs of numerous fields of knowledge are not attended to. Topic inclusion, and topic-subtopic, could provide the missing link where genus/species or whole/part are inadequate. Distinct codes, BT/NT and whole/part, should be provided. Sorting relationships with mechanical means can only lead to confusion.
  17. Dupuis, P.; Lapointe, J.: Developpement d'un outil documentaire à Hydro-Quebec : le Thesaurus HQ (1997) 0.01 
    0.011329013 = product of:
  0.05664506 = sum of:
    0.05664506 = weight(_text_:22 in 3173) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05664506 = score(doc=3173,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3173, 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=3173)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Argus. 26(1997) no.3, S.16-22
  18. Lambert, N.: Of thesauri and computers : reflections on the need for thesauri (1995) 0.01 
    0.011329013 = product of:
  0.05664506 = sum of:
    0.05664506 = weight(_text_:22 in 3734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05664506 = score(doc=3734,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3734, 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=3734)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Searcher. 3(1995) no.8, S.18-22
  19. Heinzelin, D. de; ¬d'¬Hautcourt, F.; Pols, R.: ¬Un nouveaux thesaurus multilingue informatise relatif aux instruments de musique (1998) 0.01 
    0.011329013 = product of:
  0.05664506 = sum of:
    0.05664506 = weight(_text_:22 in 932) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05664506 = score(doc=932,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 932, 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=932)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
  20. Z39.19-1993: Guidelines for the construction, format, and management of monolingual thesauri (1993) 0.01 
    0.011329013 = product of:
  0.05664506 = sum of:
    0.05664506 = weight(_text_:22 in 4092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05664506 = score(doc=4092,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4092, 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=4092)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Knowledge organization 22(1995) no.3/4, S.180-181 (M. Hudon)

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 80
  • d 9
  • f 4
  • pt 1
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 76
  • el 12
  • m 4
  • s 4
  • n 3
  • x 2
  • r 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications