Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

0.16729856 = product of:
  0.22306475 = sum of:
    0.120629124 = weight(_text_:digital in 3057) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.120629124 = score(doc=3057,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.61014175 = fieldWeight in 3057, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3057)
    0.053599782 = weight(_text_:library in 3057) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053599782 = score(doc=3057,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 3057, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3057)
    0.048835836 = product of:
      0.09767167 = sum of:
        0.09767167 = weight(_text_:project in 3057) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09767167 = score(doc=3057,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.4616698 = fieldWeight in 3057, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3057)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

This article describes the digital music library work at the University of Waikato, New Zealand. At the heart of the project is a music information retrieval workbench for evaluating algorithms and performing experiments used in conjunction with four datasets of symbolic notation ranging from contemporary to classical pieces. The outcome of this experimentation is woven together with strands from our larger digital library project to form the Web-based music digital library MELDEX (short for melody index). An overview of the workbench software architecture is given along with a description of how this fits the larger digital library design, followed by several examples of MELDEX in use.

0.100256756 = product of:
  0.20051351 = sum of:
    0.13486744 = weight(_text_:digital in 2578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13486744 = score(doc=2578,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.6821592 = fieldWeight in 2578, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2578)
    0.06564606 = weight(_text_:library in 2578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06564606 = score(doc=2578,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.4981175 = fieldWeight in 2578, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2578)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to introduce Greenstone and explain how librarians use it to create and customize digital library collections. Design/methodology/approach - Through an end-user interface, users may add documents and metadata to collections, create new collections whose structure mirrors existing ones, and build collections and put them in place for users to view. Findings - First-time users can easily and quickly create their own digital library collections. More advanced users can design and customize new collection structures Originality/value - The Greenstone digital library software is a comprehensive system for building and distributing digital library collections. It provides a way of organizing information based on metadata and publishing it on the Internet or on removable media such as CD-ROM/DVD.

Source

Library hi tech. 23(2005) no.4, S.541-560

0.07738093 = product of:
  0.15476187 = sum of:
    0.10339639 = weight(_text_:digital in 3349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10339639 = score(doc=3349,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.52297866 = fieldWeight in 3349, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3349)
    0.05136547 = weight(_text_:library in 3349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05136547 = score(doc=3349,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.38975742 = fieldWeight in 3349, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3349)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This chapter illustrates the impact on a well-known digital library system Greenstone when it is moved from fixed modules and simple metadatabased structures, to open semantic digital library modules. This change has profound effects on the tools available to end-users to retrieve relevant content from the library, and an equally significant impact on the digital library (DL) architecture. Most current DL systems contain protocols for internal communication that define information exchange solely in terms of searching, browsing, and document retrieval. These communications reect traditional user interactions in the library. However, this regimented approach results in inexible systems that are difficult to extend to support other retrieval techniques. Furthermore, simple field-based metadata limits the ability of the DL to connect or disambiguate key items of information, impeding the precision of retrieval.

Source

Semantic digital libraries. Eds.: S.R. Kruk, B. McDaniel

0.06774329 = product of:
  0.13548657 = sum of:
    0.0895439 = weight(_text_:digital in 1225) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0895439 = score(doc=1225,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.4529128 = fieldWeight in 1225, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1225)
    0.045942668 = weight(_text_:library in 1225) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045942668 = score(doc=1225,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 1225, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1225)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The Greenstone digital library software is an open-source system for the construction and presentation of information collections. It builds collections with effective full-text searching and metadata-based browsing facilities that are attractive and easy to use. Moreover, they are easily maintained and can be augmented and rebuilt entirely automatically. The system is extensible: software "plugins" accommodate different document and metadata types. Greenstone incorporates an interface that makes it easy for people to create their own library collections. Collections may be built and served locally from the user's own web server, or (given appropriate permissions) remotely on a shared digital library host. End users can easily build new collections styled after existing ones from material on the Web or from their local files (or both), and collections can be updated and new ones brought on-line at any time.

0.02611697 = product of:
  0.10446788 = sum of:
    0.10446788 = weight(_text_:digital in 5914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10446788 = score(doc=5914,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.5283983 = fieldWeight in 5914, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5914)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Digital libraries have a pivotal role to play in the preservation and maintenance of international cultures in general and minority languages in particular. This paper outlines a software tool for building digital libraries that is well adapted for creating and distributing local information collections in minority languages, and describes some contexts in which it is used. The system can make multilingual documents available in structured collections and allows them to be accessed via multilingual interfaces. It is issued under a free open-source licence, which encourages participatory design of the software, and an end-user interface allows community-based localization of the various language interfaces-of which there are many.

0.021324418 = product of:
  0.085297674 = sum of:
    0.085297674 = weight(_text_:digital in 997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.085297674 = score(doc=997,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.43143538 = fieldWeight in 997, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=997)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

There has been a recent explosion of interest in digital music libraries. In particular, interactive melody retrieval is a striking example of a search paradigm that differs radically from the standard full-text search. Many different techniques have been proposed for melody matching, but the area lacks standard databases that allow them to be compared on common grounds--and copyright issues have stymied attempts to develop such a corpus. This paper focuses on methods for evaluating different symbolic music matching strategies, and describes a series of experiments that compare and contrast results obtained using three dominant paradigms. Combining two of these paradigms yields a hybrid approach which is shown to have the best overall combination of efficiency and effectiveness.

0.004785695 = product of:
  0.01914278 = sum of:
    0.01914278 = weight(_text_:library in 2986) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01914278 = score(doc=2986,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 2986, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2986)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Current institutional repository software provides few tools to help metadata librarians understand and analyse their collections. In this paper, we compare and contrast metadata analysis tools that were developed simultaneously, but independently, at two New Zealand institutions during a period of national investment in research repositories: the Metadata Analysis Tool (MAT) at The University of Waikato, and the Kiwi Research Information Service (KRIS) at the National Library of New Zealand. The tools have many similarities: they are convenient, online, on-demand services that harvest metadata using OAI-PMH, they were developed in response to feedback from repository administrators, and they both help pinpoint specific metadata errors as well as generating summary statistics. They also have significant differences: one is a dedicated tool while the other is part of a wider access tool; one gives a holistic view of the metadata while the other looks for specific problems; one seeks patterns in the data values while the other checks that those values conform to metadata standards. Both tools work in a complementary manner to existing web-based administration tools. We have observed that discovery and correction of metadata errors can be quickly achieved by switching web browser views from the analysis tool to the repository interface, and back. We summarise the findings from both tools' deployment into a checklist of requirements for metadata analysis tools.