Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Referieren"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Lancaster, F.W.: Indexing and abstracting in theory and practice (2003) 0.04
    0.042092286 = product of:
      0.08418457 = sum of:
        0.051698197 = weight(_text_:digital in 4913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051698197 = score(doc=4913,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.26148933 = fieldWeight in 4913, 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=4913)
        0.032486375 = weight(_text_:library in 4913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032486375 = score(doc=4913,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.24650425 = fieldWeight in 4913, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4913)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Footnote
    Rez. in: JASIST 57(2006) no.1, S.144-145 (H. Saggion): "... This volume is a very valuable source of information for not only students and professionals in library and information science but also for individuals and institutions involved in knowledge management and organization activities. Because of its broad coverage of the information science topic, teachers will find the contents of this book useful for courses in the areas of information technology, digital as well as traditional libraries, and information science in general."
    Imprint
    Champaign, IL : Graduate School of Library and Information Science
  2. 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
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. Parekh, R.L.: Advanced indexing and abstracting practices (2000) 0.01
    0.0057428335 = product of:
      0.022971334 = sum of:
        0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 119) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022971334 = score(doc=119,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 119, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=119)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Indexing and abstracting are not activities that should be looked upon as ends in themselves. It is the results of these activities that should be evaluated and this can only be done within the context of a particular database, whether in printed or machine-readable form. In this context, the indexing can be judged successful if it allows searchers to locate items they want without having to look at many they do not want. This book intended primarily as a text to be used in teaching indexing and abstracting of Library and information science. It is an immense value to all individuals and institutions involved in information retrieval and related activities, including librarians, managers of information centres and database producers.
  6. 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.