Search (122 results, page 1 of 7)

0.17647162 = sum of:
  0.06638509 = product of:
    0.19915526 = sum of:
      0.19915526 = weight(_text_:3a in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.19915526 = score(doc=76,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.42522886 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050156675 = 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)
    0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11008652 = product of:
    0.22017305 = sum of:
      0.22017305 = weight(_text_:memory in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.22017305 = score(doc=76,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050156675 = queryNorm
          0.69641834 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

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_

0.12454869 = product of:
  0.24909738 = sum of:
    0.24909738 = product of:
      0.49819475 = sum of:
        0.49819475 = weight(_text_:memory in 2550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.49819475 = score(doc=2550,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            1.575815 = fieldWeight in 2550, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2550)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Memory and cognition. 9(1981), S.524-532

0.09341151 = product of:
  0.18682303 = sum of:
    0.18682303 = product of:
      0.37364605 = sum of:
        0.37364605 = weight(_text_:memory in 3215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.37364605 = score(doc=3215,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            1.1818612 = fieldWeight in 3215, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3215)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

PRECIS

Computer systems / Read only memory: Compact discs

Subject

Computer systems / Read only memory: Compact discs

0.088069215 = product of:
  0.17613843 = sum of:
    0.17613843 = product of:
      0.35227686 = sum of:
        0.35227686 = weight(_text_:memory in 7749) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.35227686 = score(doc=7749,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            1.1142694 = fieldWeight in 7749, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7749)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Journal of memory and language. 26(1987), S.322-340

0.088069215 = product of:
  0.17613843 = sum of:
    0.17613843 = product of:
      0.35227686 = sum of:
        0.35227686 = weight(_text_:memory in 7751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.35227686 = score(doc=7751,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            1.1142694 = fieldWeight in 7751, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7751)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Journal of memory and language. 24(1985), S.336-349

0.077060565 = product of:
  0.15412113 = sum of:
    0.15412113 = product of:
      0.30824226 = sum of:
        0.30824226 = weight(_text_:memory in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.30824226 = score(doc=5272,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.9749857 = fieldWeight in 5272, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5272)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.038921468 = product of:
  0.077842936 = sum of:
    0.077842936 = product of:
      0.15568587 = sum of:
        0.15568587 = weight(_text_:memory in 5222) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15568587 = score(doc=5222,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.4924422 = fieldWeight in 5222, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5222)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Knowledge to be processed for problem solving purposes can best be adapted to the human brain where it is stored in the form of 'concept configurations', by a representation in the manner of a structural diagram. The method discussed here for the graphic representation of knowledge in thesaurus-like fashion (TGW method) promotes the formation of the 'internal problem representation' by transforming the textually available knowledge into a structural diagram-like form. In such a sructural diagram, the concepts of the statements relevant to the problem are preordered with the aid of 'ordering lines' corresponding to the categories (facets) of the knowledge field concerned. In this way an open, discipline-independent ordering system for the knowledge available for the solution of the problem is established, into which even knowledge from quite different disciplines can be integrated. A sort of 'dialogue' between the graphically represented structural diagram of the knowledge available for problem solution and the knowledge stored in the problem's solver memory leads, as more and more knowledge is acquired, to optimization of the structural diagram and thus also to favorable preconditions for the problem-related activation of knowledge in the problem solver's working memory. These structural diagrams of knowledge can also be used as aids toward more effective interaction between man and computer. A typical multidisciplinary problem is used as an example to illustrate the application possibilities of the TGW method

0.038530283 = product of:
  0.077060565 = sum of:
    0.077060565 = product of:
      0.15412113 = sum of:
        0.15412113 = weight(_text_:memory in 2632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15412113 = score(doc=2632,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.48749286 = fieldWeight in 2632, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2632)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

How is knowledge acquired and represented in memory? By what process do individuals come to change their ideas, conceptions, or knowledge? Although the first question has been central to cognitive psychologists' research agendas for many years, relatively less is known about the change process. We examine 3 research literatures to broaden our understanding of the process of knowledge change. In particular, we draw on models of conceptual change from cognitive psychology, social psychology, and science education. Each model adds a new perspective on the change process. Based on the literature from these models of change, we developed a new model that represents our reconceptualization of the change process. We describe the model and use it to point out new areas of research to be addressed. Psychology has, at its foundation, an abiding interest in understanding the construction of knowledge. How do individuals come to perceive, know, remember, and learn? How do individuals acquire new knowledge? How is knowledge represented and organized in memory? How do individuals come to change their knowledge? These questions have served as conceptual frameworks for psychological, as well as philosophical, thought for centuries (Hunt, 1993).
A major contribution of cognitive psychology has been the conceptualization of knowledge as memory representations in the form of scripts, frames, or schemata (Anderson & Pearson, 1984; Rumelhart & Ortony, 1977; Shank & Abelson, 1977; Spiro, 1980). Schemata are defined as "packets of integrated information on various topics" (Hunt, 1993 , p.530). Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, cognitive psychologists were interested in describing the nature of these packets of information. Spiro (1980 ) demonstrated the constructive and complex nature of schemata and highlighted contextual factors--including tasks, texts, and situational contexts--that influenced how knowledge is organized in memory. Recently, cognitive researchers have come to view knowledge and schemata as multidimensional (Jetton, Rupley, & Willson, 1995). For example, researchers have differentiated novice and experts' knowledge structures in subject-matter domains (Chase & Simon, 1973; Chi, Glaser, & Rees, 1982; Larkin, McDermott, Simon, & Simon, 1981; Voss, Greene, Post, & Penner, 1983). Researchers have examined discourse knowledge--knowledge about language and how it works (McCutchen, 1986). Another aspect of knowledge that has been extensively studied is strategic knowledge--knowledge about procedures for accomplishing a goal or task (Alexander & Judy, 1988; J. R. Anderson, 1983a; Prawat, 1989).

0.033977687 = product of:
  0.067955375 = sum of:
    0.067955375 = product of:
      0.13591075 = sum of:
        0.13591075 = weight(_text_:22 in 1630) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13591075 = score(doc=1630,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17564014 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.77380234 = fieldWeight in 1630, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=1630)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

International classification. 8(1981), S.16-22

0.033977687 = product of:
  0.067955375 = sum of:
    0.067955375 = product of:
      0.13591075 = sum of:
        0.13591075 = weight(_text_:22 in 2798) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13591075 = score(doc=2798,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17564014 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.77380234 = fieldWeight in 2798, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=2798)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Cataloguing Australia. 13(1988), S.19-22

0.033977687 = product of:
  0.067955375 = sum of:
    0.067955375 = product of:
      0.13591075 = sum of:
        0.13591075 = weight(_text_:22 in 6143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13591075 = score(doc=6143,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17564014 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.77380234 = fieldWeight in 6143, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=6143)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Computer. 16(1983) no.10, S.22-27

0.033025958 = product of:
  0.066051915 = sum of:
    0.066051915 = product of:
      0.13210383 = sum of:
        0.13210383 = weight(_text_:memory in 3642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13210383 = score(doc=3642,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.41785103 = fieldWeight in 3642, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3642)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This chapter from The Sayers Memorial Volume summarizes Farradane's earlier work in which he developed his major themes by drawing in part upon research in psychology, and particularly those discoveries called "cognitive" which now form part of cognitive science. Farradane, a chemist by training who later became an information scientist and Director of the Center for Information Science, City University, London, from 1958 to 1973, defines the various types of methods used to achieve classification systems-philosophic, scientific, and synthetic. Early an he distinguishes the view that classification is "some part of external 'reality' waiting to be discovered" from that view which considers it "an intellectual operation upon mental entities and concepts." Classification, therefore, is to be treated as a mental construct and not as something "out there" to be discovered as, say, in astronomy or botany. His approach could be termed, somewhat facetiously, as an "in there" one, meaning found by utilizing the human brain as the key tool. This is not to say that discoveries in astronomy or botany do not require the use of the brain as a key tool. It is merely that the "material" worked upon by this tool is presented to it for observation by "that inward eye," by memory and by inference rather than by planned physical observation, memory, and inference. This distinction could be refined or clarified by considering the initial "observation" as a specific kind of mental set required in each case. Farradane then proceeds to demolish the notion of main classes as "fictitious," partly because the various category-defining methodologies used in library classification are "randomly mixed." The implication, probably correct, is that this results in mixed metaphorical concepts. It is an interesting contrast to the approach of Julia Pettee (q.v.), who began with indexing terms and, in studying relationships between terms, discovered hidden hierarchies both between the terms themselves and between the cross-references leading from one term or set of terms to another. One is tempted to ask two questions: "Is hierarchy innate but misinterpreted?" and "ls it possible to have meaningful terms which have only categorical relationships (that have no see also or equivalent relationships to other, out-of-category terms)?" Partly as a result of the rejection of existing general library classification systems, the Classification Research Group-of which Farradane was a charter member decided to adopt the principles of Ranganathan's faceted classification system, while rejecting his limit an the number of fundamental categories. The advantage of the faceted method is that it is created by inductive, rather than deductive, methods. It can be altered more readily to keep up with changes in and additions to the knowledge base in a subject without having to re-do the major schedules. In 1961, when Farradane's paper appeared, the computer was beginning to be viewed as a tool for solving all information retrieval problems. He tartly remarks:
The basic fallacy of mechanised information retrieval systems seems to be the often unconscious but apparently implied assumption that the machine can inject meaning into a group of juxtaposed terms although no methods of conceptual analysis and re-synthesis have been programmed (p. 203). As an example, he suggests considering the slight but vital differences in the meaning of the word "of" in selected examples: swarm of bees house of the mayor House of Lords spectrum of the sun basket of fish meeting of councillors cooking of meat book of the film Farradane's distinctive contribution is his matrix of basic relationships. The rows concern time and memory, in degree of happenstance: coincidentally, occasionally, or always. The columns represent degree of the "powers of discrimination": occurring together, linked by common elements only, or standing alone. To make these relationships easily managed, he used symbols for each of the nine kinds - "symbols found an every typewriter": /O (Theta) /* /; /= /+ /( /) /_ /: Farradane has maintained his basic insights to the present day. Though he has gone an to do other kinds of research in classification, his work indicates that he still believes that "the primary task ... is that of establishing satisfactory and enduring principles of subject analysis, or classification" (p. 208).

Footnote

Original in: The Sayers memorial volume: essays in librarianship im memory of William Charles Berwick Sayers. London: The Library Association 1961. S.120-135.

0.028831026 = product of:
  0.05766205 = sum of:
    0.05766205 = product of:
      0.1153241 = sum of:
        0.1153241 = weight(_text_:22 in 670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1153241 = score(doc=670,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17564014 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 670, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=670)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 7.2000 18:22:27

0.027182149 = product of:
  0.054364298 = sum of:
    0.054364298 = product of:
      0.108728595 = sum of:
        0.108728595 = weight(_text_:22 in 195) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108728595 = score(doc=195,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17564014 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 195, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=195)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Bibliotheksdienst. 22(1988), S.552-563

0.027182149 = product of:
  0.054364298 = sum of:
    0.054364298 = product of:
      0.108728595 = sum of:
        0.108728595 = weight(_text_:22 in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108728595 = score(doc=402,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17564014 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Information processing and management. 22(1986) no.6, S.465-476

0.027182149 = product of:
  0.054364298 = sum of:
    0.054364298 = product of:
      0.108728595 = sum of:
        0.108728595 = weight(_text_:22 in 435) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108728595 = score(doc=435,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17564014 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 435, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=435)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

International forum on information and documentation. 14(1989), S.22-27

0.027182149 = product of:
  0.054364298 = sum of:
    0.054364298 = product of:
      0.108728595 = sum of:
        0.108728595 = weight(_text_:22 in 1175) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108728595 = score(doc=1175,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17564014 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 1175, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1175)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

DK-Mitteilungen. 25(1981) Nr.4, S.15-22

0.027182149 = product of:
  0.054364298 = sum of:
    0.054364298 = product of:
      0.108728595 = sum of:
        0.108728595 = weight(_text_:22 in 1176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108728595 = score(doc=1176,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17564014 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 1176, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1176)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

DK-Mitteilungen. 27(1983) Nr.6, S.19-22

0.027182149 = product of:
  0.054364298 = sum of:
    0.054364298 = product of:
      0.108728595 = sum of:
        0.108728595 = weight(_text_:22 in 1955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108728595 = score(doc=1955,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17564014 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 1955, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1955)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Library herald. 22(1983), S.1-29

0.027182149 = product of:
  0.054364298 = sum of:
    0.054364298 = product of:
      0.108728595 = sum of:
        0.108728595 = weight(_text_:22 in 2507) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108728595 = score(doc=2507,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17564014 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2507, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2507)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 7.2000 18:21:08