-
Koltay, T.: ¬A hypertext tutorial on abstracting for library science students (1995)
0.06
0.055262476 = product of:
0.11052495 = sum of:
0.07657112 = weight(_text_:library in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07657112 = score(doc=3061,freq=8.0), product of:
0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.58101606 = fieldWeight in 3061, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3061)
0.033953834 = product of:
0.06790767 = sum of:
0.06790767 = weight(_text_:22 in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06790767 = score(doc=3061,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3061, 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=3061)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Discusses briefly the application of hypertext in library user training with particular reference to a specific hypertext based tutorial designed to teach library school students the basics knowledge of abstracts and abstracting process
- Date
- 27. 1.1996 18:22:06
- Source
- Journal of education for library and information science. 36(1995) no.2, S.170-173
-
Jizba, L.: Reflections on summarizing and abstracting : implications for Internet Web documents, and standardized library cataloging databases (1997)
0.05
0.049107663 = product of:
0.09821533 = sum of:
0.060314562 = weight(_text_:digital in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060314562 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.30507088 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
0.03790077 = weight(_text_:library in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03790077 = score(doc=701,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Comments on the value of abstracts or summary notes to information available online via the Internet and WWW and concludes that automated abstracting techniques would be highly useful if routinely applied to cataloguing or metadata for Internet documents and documents in other databases. Information seekers need external summary information to assess content and value of retrieved documents. Examines traditional models for writers, in library audiovisual cataloguing, periodical databases and archival work, along with innovative new model databases featuring robust cataloguing summaries. Notes recent developments in automated techniques, computational research, and machine summarization of digital images. Recommendations are made for future designers of cataloguing and metadata standards
-
Wan, X.; Yang, J.; Xiao, J.: Incorporating cross-document relationships between sentences for single document summarizations (2006)
0.04
0.036035247 = product of:
0.072070494 = sum of:
0.051698197 = weight(_text_:digital in 2421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.051698197 = score(doc=2421,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.26148933 = fieldWeight in 2421, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2421)
0.0203723 = product of:
0.0407446 = sum of:
0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 2421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0407446 = score(doc=2421,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2421, 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=2421)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Source
- Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006
-
Pinto, M.: Abstracting/abstract adaptation to digital environments : research trends (2003)
0.02
0.018278074 = product of:
0.073112294 = sum of:
0.073112294 = weight(_text_:digital in 4446) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.073112294 = score(doc=4446,freq=4.0), product of:
0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.36980176 = fieldWeight in 4446, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4446)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- The technological revolution is affecting the structure, form and content of documents, reducing the effectiveness of traditional abstracts that, to some extent, are inadequate to the new documentary conditions. Aims to show the directions in which abstracting/abstracts can evolve to achieve the necessary adequacy in the new digital environments. Three researching trends are proposed: theoretical, methodological and pragmatic. Theoretically, there are some needs for expanding the document concept, reengineering abstracting and designing interdisciplinary models. Methodologically, the trend is toward the structuring, automating and qualifying of the abstracts. Pragmatically, abstracts networking, combined with alternative and complementary models, open a new and promising horizon. Automating, structuring and qualifying abstracting/abstract offer some short-term prospects for progress. Concludes that reengineering, networking and visualising would be middle-term fruitful areas of research toward the full adequacy of abstracting in the new electronic age.
-
Pinto, M.; Lancaster, F.W.: Abstracts and abstracting in knowledge discovery (1999)
0.01
0.013399946 = product of:
0.053599782 = sum of:
0.053599782 = weight(_text_:library in 6233) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.053599782 = score(doc=6233,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 6233, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6233)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Library trends. 48(1999) no.1, S.234-248
-
Booth, A.; O'Rouke, A.J.: ¬The value of structured abstracts in information retrieval from MEDLINE (1997)
0.01
0.009866329 = product of:
0.039465316 = sum of:
0.039465316 = product of:
0.07893063 = sum of:
0.07893063 = weight(_text_:project in 764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07893063 = score(doc=764,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.37308553 = fieldWeight in 764, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=764)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Presents a structured abstract of the actual article. Outlines the debate on the value of structured abstracts and describes a research project into their use, which investigated records of cardiovascular disease downloaded from MEDLINE and tested against clinical questions derived from a survey of CD-ROM use in 3 health science libraries. It was found that structured abstracts improve precision at the expense of recall and place heavier demands on the skills of selecting fields to search within the abstract. Indicates directions for further research
-
Sen, B.K.: Research articles in LISA Plus : problems of identification (1997)
0.01
0.009475192 = product of:
0.03790077 = sum of:
0.03790077 = weight(_text_:library in 430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03790077 = score(doc=430,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 430, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=430)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Reports results of a study to determine how easy and quickly research articles in library and information science could be retrieved from the LISA Plus CD-ROM database. Results show that the search with the descriptor 'research' retrieves all types of articles and it is necessary to read through every abstract to locate the research articles. The introductory sentence of a substantial number of abstracts hinder the process of identification since the sentence provides such information as the conference where the paper was presented, the special issue or the section of a periodical where the article is located; or obvious background information. Suggests measures whereby research articles can be identified easily and rapidly
- Source
- Malaysian journal of library and information science. 2(1997) no.1, S.97-106
-
Spiteri, L.F.: Library and information science vs business : a comparison of approaches to abstracting (1997)
0.01
0.009475192 = product of:
0.03790077 = sum of:
0.03790077 = weight(_text_:library in 3699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03790077 = score(doc=3699,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 3699, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3699)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- The library and information science (LIS) literature on abstracting makes little mention about abstracting conducted in the corporate / business environment, whereas the business literature suggests that abstarcting is a very important component of business writing. Examines a variety of publications from LIS and business in order to compare and contrast their approaches to the following aspects of abstracting: definitions of abstracts; types of abstracts; purpose of abstracts; and writing of abstracts. Summarises the results of the examination which revealed a number of similarities, differences, and inadequacies in the ways in which both fields approach abstracting. Concludes that both fields need to develop more detailed guidelines concerning the cognitive process of abstracting and suggests improvements to the training af absractors based on these findings
-
Tibbo, H.R.: Abstracting across the disciplines : a content analysis of abstracts for the natural sciences, the social sciences, and the humanities with implications for abstracting standards and online information retrieval (1992)
0.01
0.0076571116 = product of:
0.030628446 = sum of:
0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 2536) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030628446 = score(doc=2536,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 2536, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2536)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Library and information science research. 14(1992) no.1, S.31-56
-
Bakewell, K.G.B.; Rowland, G.: Indexing and abstracting (1993)
0.01
0.0076571116 = product of:
0.030628446 = sum of:
0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 5540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030628446 = score(doc=5540,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 5540, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5540)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Imprint
- London : Library Association Publ.
-
Palais, E.S.: Abstracting for reference librarians (1988)
0.01
0.0067907665 = product of:
0.027163066 = sum of:
0.027163066 = product of:
0.054326132 = sum of:
0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 2832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054326132 = score(doc=2832,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2832, 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=2832)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Reference librarian. 1988, no.22, S.297-308
-
Armstrong, C.J.; Wheatley, A.: Writing abstracts for online databases : results of database producers' guidelines (1998)
0.01
0.006699973 = product of:
0.026799891 = sum of:
0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 3295) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026799891 = score(doc=3295,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 3295, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3295)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Reports on one area of research in an Electronic Libraries Programme (eLib) MODELS (MOving to Distributed Environments for Library Services) supporting study in 3 investigative areas: examination of current database producers' guidelines for their abstract writers; a brief survey of abstracts in some traditional online databases; and a detailed survey of abstracts from 3 types of electronic database (print sourced online databases, Internet subject trees or directories, and Internet gateways). Examination of database producers' guidelines, reported here, gave a clear view of the intentions behind professionally produced traditional (printed index based) database abstracts and provided a benchmark against which to judge the conclusions of the larger investigations into abstract style, readability and content
-
Bowman, J.H.: Annotation: a lost art in cataloguing (2007)
0.01
0.006699973 = product of:
0.026799891 = sum of:
0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026799891 = score(doc=255,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 255, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=255)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Public library catalogues in early twentieth-century Britain frequently included annotations, either to clarify obscure titles or to provide further information about the subject-matter of the books they described. Two manuals giving instruction on how to do this were published at that time. Following World War I, with the decline of the printed catalogue, this kind of annotation became rarer, and was almost confined to bulletins of new books. The early issues of the British National Bibliography included some annotations in exceptional cases. Parallels are drawn with the provision of table-of-contents information in present-day OPAC's.
-
Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.: Which layout do you prefer? : an analysis of readers' preferences for different typographic layouts of structured abstracts (1996)
0.01
0.005093075 = product of:
0.0203723 = sum of:
0.0203723 = product of:
0.0407446 = sum of:
0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0407446 = score(doc=4411,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4411, 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=4411)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.1, S.27-37
-
Ward, M.L.: ¬The future of the human indexer (1996)
0.01
0.005093075 = product of:
0.0203723 = sum of:
0.0203723 = product of:
0.0407446 = sum of:
0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 7244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0407446 = score(doc=7244,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 7244, 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=7244)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 9. 2.1997 18:44:22
-
Montesi, M.; Mackenzie Owen, J.: Revision of author abstracts : how it is carried out by LISA editors (2007)
0.00
0.004785695 = product of:
0.01914278 = sum of:
0.01914278 = weight(_text_:library in 807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01914278 = score(doc=807,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 807, 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=807)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The literature on abstracts recommends the revision of author supplied abstracts before their inclusion in database collections. However, little guidance is given on how to carry out such revision, and few studies exist on this topic. The purpose of this research paper is to first survey 187 bibliographic databases to ascertain how many did revise abstracts, and then study the practical amendments made by one of these, i.e. LISA (Library and Information Science Abstracts). Design/methodology/approach - Database policies were established by e-mail or through alternative sources, with 136 databases out of 187 exhaustively documented. Differences between 100 author-supplied abstracts and the corresponding 100 LISA amended abstracts were classified into sentence-level and beyond sentence-level categories, and then as additions, deletions and rephrasing of text. Findings - Revision of author abstracts was carried out by 66 databases, but in just 32 cases did it imply more than spelling, shortening of length and formula representation. In LISA, amendments were often non-systematic and inconsistent, but still pointed to significant aspects which were discussed. Originality/value - Amendments made by LISA editors are important in multi- and inter-disciplinary research, since they tend to clarify certain aspects such as terminology, and suggest that abstracts should not always be considered as substitutes for the original document. From this point-of-view, the revision of abstracts can be considered as an important factor in enhancing a database's quality.
-
Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.; Blurton, A.: Obtaining information accurately and quickly : are structured abstracts more efficient? (1996)
0.00
0.0042442293 = product of:
0.016976917 = sum of:
0.016976917 = product of:
0.033953834 = sum of:
0.033953834 = weight(_text_:22 in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033953834 = score(doc=7673,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 7673, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=7673)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.5, S.349-356
