Search (42 results, page 1 of 3)

0.028635468 = product of:
  0.0429532 = sum of:
    0.02444262 = weight(_text_:to in 1187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02444262 = score(doc=1187,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.29521468 = fieldWeight in 1187, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1187)
    0.018510582 = product of:
      0.037021164 = sum of:
        0.037021164 = weight(_text_:22 in 1187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037021164 = score(doc=1187,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1187, 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=1187)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Subject access to monographs through online public access catalogs (OPACs) has always been a major concern for large research and/or academic libraries. Academic library practice of providing subject access to monographs has proven inadequate, especially in the case of composite works. Many techniques have been proposed to enhance subject treatment of monographs in OPACs. This article briefly reviews these efforts in the past and presents the case of adding Tables of Contents as one of the Most useful and probably also one of the Most costeffective ways of improving subject access to Monographs in an academic environment.

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

0.022251498 = product of:
  0.033377245 = sum of:
    0.02103686 = weight(_text_:to in 520) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02103686 = score(doc=520,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.25408036 = fieldWeight in 520, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=520)
    0.012340387 = product of:
      0.024680775 = sum of:
        0.024680775 = weight(_text_:22 in 520) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024680775 = score(doc=520,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 520, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=520)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Myriad new information resources are available to contemporary library users. While print remains the foundation of most collections, libraries are also beginning to provide access to an array of bibliographic, numeric, and full-text databases. As more and more information is produced in electronic form and presented at computer workstations, the library catalog is being given an expanded role. The expanded catalog will play a crucial part in organizing information in electronic libraries, and in providing navigational assistance to library users. Like the traditional card catalog, the expanded catalog will not only lead to specific items or groups of sources, but also will provide connections to related materials. These connections will uses standard data elements to link the results of a search in one database with related material in another. For example, links will show local library holdings of sources in citation databases. Cornell University's Mann Library serves the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, the College of Human Ecology, and the Division of Biological Sciences. As part of electronic library development, Mann staff have been analyzing issues involved in making it possible for Agricola and BIOSIS users to see, automatically, which of their retrieved citations are from sources available in the Cornell libraries. Samples of citations from Agricola and BIOSIS were drawn, and data elements present in these records were compared with bibliographic records of the library's holdings. In some cases, links would be provided by ISSNs. The study shows, however, that the presence of standard identifiers such as ISSN, USBN, or CODEN cannot be assumed, and other linking algorithms must be developed. This article presents study results, provides an overview of several linking systems, and identifies some of the difficulties caused by lack of standardization between different bibliographic databases. It is clear that the concept of an expanded catalog will require not only links between information resources but agreements among information professionals on standard data elements.

Date

8. 1.2007 17:22:25

Footnote

Simultaneously published as Enhancing Access to Information: Designing Catalogs for the 21st Century

0.014397118 = product of:
  0.043191355 = sum of:
    0.043191355 = product of:
      0.08638271 = sum of:
        0.08638271 = weight(_text_:22 in 1061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08638271 = score(doc=1061,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 1061, 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=1061)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Indexer. 11(1978), S.14-22

0.014397118 = product of:
  0.043191355 = sum of:
    0.043191355 = product of:
      0.08638271 = sum of:
        0.08638271 = weight(_text_:22 in 7322) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08638271 = score(doc=7322,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7322, 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=7322)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

International forum on information and documentation. 14(1989), S.17-22

0.0117338 = product of:
  0.0352014 = sum of:
    0.0352014 = weight(_text_:to in 514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0352014 = score(doc=514,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.42515776 = fieldWeight in 514, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=514)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Contents notes can improve online access to works containing essays, short stories, and significantly titles chapters. Few records in bibliographic utilities include contents notes. The OCLC PRISM service may provide an opportunity to cooperatively build a contents-enriched database. This paper discusses some issues related to the creation of enhanced records and their display in online cataloges. It also describes one library's efforts to add contents notes lically and to participate in an anticipated OCLC pilot project

Footnote

Simultaneously published as Enhancing Access to Information: Designing Catalogs for the 21st Century

0.011087399 = product of:
  0.033262197 = sum of:
    0.033262197 = weight(_text_:to in 1700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033262197 = score(doc=1700,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.40173632 = fieldWeight in 1700, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1700)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Reports a project to enhance the records of the reference book collection, held on the online catalogue of the Minnesota University, Bio-Medical Library, with tables of contents or summaries; and to keyword index the enhancement fields to improve searching

0.009916872 = product of:
  0.029750613 = sum of:
    0.029750613 = weight(_text_:to in 4647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029750613 = score(doc=4647,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.3593239 = fieldWeight in 4647, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4647)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

To enhance descriptions, cataloguers can add 'enriching' words or phrases to titles, or introduce content-enriched access features to aid subject-based research. Additional and natural language subject headings designed to support, though not replace, controlled language headings can result in enhanced indexing. Analytical cataloguing and double indexing are 2 other means by which readers can gian access to additional bibliographic data. Also examines how online research tool effectiveness can be enhanced by a system of automatic links between descriptors

0.00940797 = product of:
  0.02822391 = sum of:
    0.02822391 = weight(_text_:to in 5421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02822391 = score(doc=5421,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.34088457 = fieldWeight in 5421, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5421)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This article describes our efforts in supporting information retrieval from OCR degraded text. In particular, we report our approach to an automatic cataloging and searching contest for books in multiple languages. In this contest, 500 books in English, German, French, and Italian published during the 1770s to 1970s are scanned into images and OCRed to digital text. The goal is to use only automatic ways to extract information for sophisticated searching. We adopted the vector space retrieval model, an n-gram indexing method, and a special weighting scheme to tackle this problem. Although the performance by this approach is slightly inferior to the best approach, which is mainly based on regular expression match, one advantage of our approach is that it is less language dependent and less layout sensitive, thus is readily applicable to other languages and document collections. Problems of OCR text retrieval for some Asian languages are also discussed in this article, and solutions are suggested

0.008869919 = product of:
  0.026609756 = sum of:
    0.026609756 = weight(_text_:to in 389) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026609756 = score(doc=389,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.32138905 = fieldWeight in 389, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=389)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.008869919 = product of:
  0.026609756 = sum of:
    0.026609756 = weight(_text_:to in 391) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026609756 = score(doc=391,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.32138905 = fieldWeight in 391, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=391)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.008869919 = product of:
  0.026609756 = sum of:
    0.026609756 = weight(_text_:to in 845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026609756 = score(doc=845,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.32138905 = fieldWeight in 845, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=845)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.008869919 = product of:
  0.026609756 = sum of:
    0.026609756 = weight(_text_:to in 1399) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026609756 = score(doc=1399,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.32138905 = fieldWeight in 1399, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1399)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.008869919 = product of:
  0.026609756 = sum of:
    0.026609756 = weight(_text_:to in 2195) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026609756 = score(doc=2195,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.32138905 = fieldWeight in 2195, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2195)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.008869919 = product of:
  0.026609756 = sum of:
    0.026609756 = weight(_text_:to in 4430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026609756 = score(doc=4430,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.32138905 = fieldWeight in 4430, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4430)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.008869919 = product of:
  0.026609756 = sum of:
    0.026609756 = weight(_text_:to in 4654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026609756 = score(doc=4654,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.32138905 = fieldWeight in 4654, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4654)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

As librarians plan ahead to make subject enhancements available to online searchers in various possible file locations and formats, they may want to base their decisions on implications for online searching. This paper explores some of these implications with respect to unique and misleading terminology in tables of contents, Choice abstracts, and reviews from Computing reviews for thirty-six books on information and computer science chosen from the 1987 issues of Choice. It also discusses possible interacting functions in the search process served by these subject enhancements, assigned LCSH, and book title terminology

0.008677262 = product of:
  0.026031785 = sum of:
    0.026031785 = weight(_text_:to in 516) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026031785 = score(doc=516,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.3144084 = fieldWeight in 516, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=516)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

With the advent of online public access catalogs, catalog librarians and their staffs have been freed from the labor-intensive processes involved in the creation and maintenance of card catalogs. At the Medical University of South Carolina Library, this new found time has been devoted to enhancing access to the library's collections. Enhancements discussed include the creation of bibliographic records for vertical file materials, the National Library of Medicine bibliographies, and reserve items, as well as providing subject access to individual chapters in books and articles in monographic serials.

Footnote

Simultaneously published as Enhancing Access to Information: Designing Catalogs for the 21st Century

0.0081475405 = product of:
  0.02444262 = sum of:
    0.02444262 = weight(_text_:to in 2230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02444262 = score(doc=2230,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.29521468 = fieldWeight in 2230, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2230)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Experimental evidence suggests that enhancing the subject content of OPAC records can improve retrieval performance. This is based on the use of natural language index terms derived from the table of contents and back-of-the-book index of documents. The research reported here investigates the alternative approach of translating these natural language terms into controlled vocabulary. Subject queries were collected by interview at the catalogue, and indexing of the queries demonstrated the impressive ability of PRECIS, and to a lesser extent LCSH, to represent users' information needs. DDC performed poorly in this respect. The assumption was made that an index language adequately specific to represent users' queries should be adequate to represent document contents. Searches were carried out on three test databases, and both natural language and PRECIS enhancement of MARC records increased the number of relevant documents found, with PRECIS showing the better performance. However, with weak stemming the advantage of PRECIS was lost. Consideration must also be given to the potential advantages of controlled vocabulary, over and above basic retrieval performance measures

0.007839975 = product of:
  0.023519924 = sum of:
    0.023519924 = weight(_text_:to in 4259) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023519924 = score(doc=4259,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.28407046 = fieldWeight in 4259, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4259)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Considers the potential of providing enhanced content indexing of document records either by natural language or PRECIS controlled vocabulary in order to provide more effective subject access to OPACs. Considers multilingual access OPACs. Controlled vocabulary is the best option for the latter in the short terms

0.0077611795 = product of:
  0.023283537 = sum of:
    0.023283537 = weight(_text_:to in 844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023283537 = score(doc=844,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.28121543 = fieldWeight in 844, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=844)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.0077611795 = product of:
  0.023283537 = sum of:
    0.023283537 = weight(_text_:to in 3385) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023283537 = score(doc=3385,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.28121543 = fieldWeight in 3385, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3385)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Reports results of research into the feasibility of using OCR scanner technology to capture contents pages of collective monographs and to extract the bibliographic information of each individual work and process this using a standardized language, such as SGML, for tagging electronic documents. By this means, data can be used as electronic information or stored in OPACs, thus providing additional access points. Outlines a pilot system to test the initial hypotheses, show the feasibility of achieving the suggested goals and develop the tasks required for them to be carried out as automatically as possible