Search (90 results, page 1 of 5)

0.028635468 = product of:
  0.0429532 = sum of:
    0.02444262 = weight(_text_:to in 5920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02444262 = score(doc=5920,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.29521468 = fieldWeight in 5920, 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=5920)
    0.018510582 = product of:
      0.037021164 = sum of:
        0.037021164 = weight(_text_:22 in 5920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037021164 = score(doc=5920,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5920, 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=5920)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), a system originally designed as a tool for subject access to the Library's own collection in the late nineteenth century, has become, in the course of the last century, the main subject retrieval tool in library catalogs throughout the United States and in many other countries. It is one of the largest non-specialized controlled vocabularies in the world. As LCSH enters a new century, it faces an information environment that has undergone vast changes from what had prevailed when LCSH began, or, indeed, from its state in the early days of the online age. In order to continue its mission and to be useful in spheres outside library catalogs as well, LCSH must adapt to the multifarious environment. One possible approach is to adopt a series of scalable and flexible syntax and application rules to meet the needs of different user communities

Date

27. 5.2001 16:22:21

0.027839875 = product of:
  0.04175981 = sum of:
    0.020164136 = weight(_text_:to in 3600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020164136 = score(doc=3600,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.24353972 = fieldWeight in 3600, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3600)
    0.021595677 = product of:
      0.043191355 = sum of:
        0.043191355 = weight(_text_:22 in 3600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043191355 = score(doc=3600,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3600, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3600)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Evaluative and comparative studies of catalog data have tended to focus on methods that are labor intensive, demand expertise, and can examine only a limited number of records. This study explores an alternative approach to gathering and analyzing catalog data, focusing on the currency and consistency of controlled headings. The resulting data provide insight into libraries' use of changed headings and their success in maintaining currency and consistency, and the systems needed to support the current pace of heading changes.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.027215695 = product of:
  0.04082354 = sum of:
    0.02231296 = weight(_text_:to in 2205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02231296 = score(doc=2205,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.26949292 = fieldWeight in 2205, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2205)
    0.018510582 = product of:
      0.037021164 = sum of:
        0.037021164 = weight(_text_:22 in 2205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037021164 = score(doc=2205,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2205, 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=2205)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Form subdivisions have always been an important part of the Library of Congress Subject Headings. However, when the MARC format was developed, no separate subfield code to identify form subdivisions was defined. Form and topical subdivisions were both included within a general subdivision category. In 1995, the USMARC Advisory Group approved a proposal defining subfield v for form subdivisions, and in 1999 the Library of Congress (LC) began identifying form subdivisions with the new code. However, there are millions of older bibliographic records lacking the explicit form subdivision coding. Identifying form subdivisions retrospectively is not a simple task. An algorithmic method was developed to identify form subdivisions coded as general subdivisions. The algorithm was used to identify 2,563 unique form subdivisions or combinations of form subdivisions in OCLC's WorldCat. The algorithm proved to be highly accurate with an error rate estimated to be less than 0.1%. The observed usage of the form subdivisions was highly skewed with the 100 most used form subdivisions or combinations of subdivisions accounting for 90% of the assignments.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.023862753 = product of:
  0.035794128 = sum of:
    0.017283546 = weight(_text_:to in 3837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017283546 = score(doc=3837,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.20874833 = fieldWeight in 3837, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3837)
    0.018510582 = product of:
      0.037021164 = sum of:
        0.037021164 = weight(_text_:22 in 3837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037021164 = score(doc=3837,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3837, 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=3837)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Library of Congress Subject Headings (LSCH), which celebrated its 100th birthday in 1998, is the largest cataloging and indexing language in the world for the indication of the topics and formats of books and similar publications. It consists of a controlled list of main headings, many with subdivisions, with a rich system of cross references. It is supported by the U.S. government, and undergoes systematic revision. In recent decades its managers have begun to confront challenges such as biased terminology, complicated syntax (how terms are put together to form headings), and effective displays in electronic media. Many suggestions have been made for its improvement, including moving to a fully faceted system.

Date

27. 8.2011 14:22:13

0.022679746 = product of:
  0.03401962 = sum of:
    0.018594133 = weight(_text_:to in 3611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018594133 = score(doc=3611,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.22457743 = fieldWeight in 3611, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3611)
    0.015425485 = product of:
      0.03085097 = sum of:
        0.03085097 = weight(_text_:22 in 3611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03085097 = score(doc=3611,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3611, 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=3611)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims to discuss some long-standing issues of the development of a subject heading language as pre- or postcoordinated. Design/methodology/approach - In a review of literature on pre- and postcoordination and user behaviour, 20 criteria originally discussed by Svenonius are considered. Findings - The advantages and disadvantages of pre- and postcoordinated systems are on a very similar level. Most subject heading languages developed recently are precoordinated. They all require investments in highly skilled intellectual work, and are therefore expensive and difficult to maintain. Postcoordinated systems seem to have more advantages for information providers, but less for users. However, most of these disadvantages could be overcome by known information retrieval models and techniques. Research limitations/implications - The criteria originally discussed by Svenonius are difficult to evaluate in an exact manner. Some of them are also irrelevant because of changes in information retrieval systems. Practical implications - It was found that the decision on whether to use a pre- or postcoordinated system cannot be taken independent of consideration of the subject authority file and the functions of an information retrieval system, which should support users on one hand and information providers and indexers on the other. Originality/value - This literature review brings together some findings that have not been considered together previously.

Date

20. 6.2010 14:22:43

0.022158299 = product of:
  0.033237446 = sum of:
    0.011641769 = weight(_text_:to in 363) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011641769 = score(doc=363,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.14060771 = fieldWeight in 363, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=363)
    0.021595677 = product of:
      0.043191355 = sum of:
        0.043191355 = weight(_text_:22 in 363) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043191355 = score(doc=363,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 363, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=363)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Although the rules for descriptive cataloging have been recodified twice in the past twenty years, there never has been any kind of comprehensive theoretical code for subject headings, despite some suggestions for a code over the years. This essay explains the need for a code, provides historical background, and presents some broad proposals as to the philosophy, structure, and form of the code and what the code should cover. Included is the relation between the proposed code and the Library of Congress' 1984 Subject Cataloging Manual.

Date

7. 1.2007 13:22:01

0.02174836 = product of:
  0.03262254 = sum of:
    0.014111955 = weight(_text_:to in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014111955 = score(doc=4411,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.17044228 = fieldWeight in 4411, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4411)
    0.018510582 = product of:
      0.037021164 = sum of:
        0.037021164 = weight(_text_:22 in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037021164 = score(doc=4411,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = 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)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Structured abstracts are abstracts which include subheadings such as: background, aims, participants methods and results. These are rapidly replacing traditional abstracts in medical periodicals, but the number and detail of the subheadings used varies, and there is a range of different typographic settings. Reviews a number of studies designed to investigate readers' preferences for different typographic settings and layout. Over 400 readers took part in the study: students; postgraduates; research workers and academics in the social sciences. The most preferred version emerged from the last of 3 studies and 2 additional studies were then carried out to determine preferences for the overall position and layout of this most preferred version on a A4 page. The most preferred version for the setting of the subheadings are printed in bold capital letters

Source

Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.1, S.27-37

0.02174836 = product of:
  0.03262254 = sum of:
    0.014111955 = weight(_text_:to in 5618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014111955 = score(doc=5618,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.17044228 = fieldWeight in 5618, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5618)
    0.018510582 = product of:
      0.037021164 = sum of:
        0.037021164 = weight(_text_:22 in 5618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037021164 = score(doc=5618,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5618, 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=5618)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

A study group representing four European national libraries (the Swiss National Library, Die Deutsche Bibliothek, the Bibliothèque nationale de France and The British Library) recently conducted a study on the possibility of establishing multilingual thesaural links between the headings in the LCSH authority file and the authority files of the German indexing system SWD/RSWK and the French indexing system RAMEAU. The study demonstrated a high level of correspondence in main headings, but also revealed a number of issues requiring further investigation. The study group's findings led to recommendations on the scope for the development of a prototype system for linking the three Subject Heading Languages (SHLs) in the databases of the four institutions

Date

27. 5.2001 16:22:10

0.021371057 = product of:
  0.032056585 = sum of:
    0.016631098 = weight(_text_:to in 4143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016631098 = score(doc=4143,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.20086816 = fieldWeight in 4143, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4143)
    0.015425485 = product of:
      0.03085097 = sum of:
        0.03085097 = weight(_text_:22 in 4143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03085097 = score(doc=4143,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4143, 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=4143)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The Nuovo Soggettario is a subject indexing system edited by the Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di Firenze. It was presented to librarians from across Italy on 8 February 2007 in Florence as a new edition of the Soggettario (1956), and it has become the official Italian subject indexing tool. This system is made up of two individual and interactive components: the general thesaurus, accessible on the web since 2007 and the rules of a conventional syntax for the construction of subject strings. The Nuovo soggettario thesaurus has grown significantly in terms of terminology and connections with other knowledge organization tools (e.g., encyclopedias, dictionaries, resources of archives and museums, and other information data sets), offering the users the possibility to browse through documents, books, objects, photographs, etc. The conversion of the Nuovo soggettario thesaurus into formats suitable for the semantic web and linked data world improves its function as an interlinking hub for direct searching and for organizing content by different professional communities. Thanks to structured data and the SKOS format, the Nuovo soggettario thesaurus is published on the Data Hub platform, thus giving broad visibility to the BNCF and its precious patrimony.

Content

Beitrag eines Special Issue: ISKO-Italy: 8' Incontro ISKO Italia, Università di Bologna, 22 maggio 2017, Bologna, Italia.

0.018992826 = product of:
  0.02848924 = sum of:
    0.0099786585 = weight(_text_:to in 4652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0099786585 = score(doc=4652,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.12052089 = fieldWeight in 4652, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4652)
    0.018510582 = product of:
      0.037021164 = sum of:
        0.037021164 = weight(_text_:22 in 4652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037021164 = score(doc=4652,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4652, 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=4652)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The system is available both in print and online versions. Names a few new subject headings in areas like science, technology, engineering and medicine (STEM). In this edition, there are a total of 1,600 new headings making it a total of 12,000+ preferred headings meant for subject access in small and medium sized libraries. This unprecedented increase of about 1,600 headings is mostly due the complete incorporation of the Canadian Sears last published independently in 2006. Also critically examines inconsistencies in a few headings. Concludes to say the new edition in resplendent, hard binding maintains its stellar reputation of a handy list of general subject headings both for applications and a teaching resource.

Date

21.12.2018 18:22:12

0.012340388 = product of:
  0.037021164 = sum of:
    0.037021164 = product of:
      0.07404233 = sum of:
        0.07404233 = weight(_text_:22 in 3985) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07404233 = score(doc=3985,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3985, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3985)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

25.11.2005 18:37:22

0.010267075 = product of:
  0.030801224 = sum of:
    0.030801224 = weight(_text_:to in 2475) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030801224 = score(doc=2475,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.37201303 = fieldWeight in 2475, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2475)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In the preparation of a book on how to do a literature search, many inconsistencies were found in the assignment of subject terms. The Library of Congress Subject Headings is cited for not bringing computer languages into a consistent pattern. BASIC and FORTRAN are treated differently in their see also references and are without references to the words "computers" or "computer." Also index terms for the literature search on the "search for extraterrestrial life" showed inconsistent patterns in indexing. Catalogers and indexers need to review the work they are currently publishing and try to decide how to bring some standardization to the construction of subject terms. There is a need to provide a single thesaurus for all English index terms.

0.009505464 = product of:
  0.028516391 = sum of:
    0.028516391 = weight(_text_:to in 1636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028516391 = score(doc=1636,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.34441712 = fieldWeight in 1636, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1636)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The Deep Structure Indexing System is based on: (1) a set of postulated elementary categories of the elements fit to form componentes of names of subjects; (2) a set of syntax rules with reference to the categories; (3) a vocabulary control tool such as Classaurus; (4) a set of indicator digits to denote the categories and their subdivisions; and (5) a set of codes to denote a few of the decisions of the indexer. Names of subjects formulated on the basis mentioned above are input to a set of computer programs to generate several different types of subject index entires. This paper describes briefly the Deep Structure Index System

0.009505464 = product of:
  0.028516391 = sum of:
    0.028516391 = weight(_text_:to in 7927) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028516391 = score(doc=7927,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.34441712 = fieldWeight in 7927, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7927)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The criticisms made against chain indexing are reviewed, and PRECIS briefly considered as a possible (but improbable) general substitute for indexing. The failures of chain indexing arise mainly from an inherited overemphasis on generic relationships, encouraged by careless use of the term 'chain'. The use of symbols to represent relations between terms is suggested for the chain index, to emphasize syntagmatic relations and prevent ambiguity. These relationships can be used to manipulate the index terms into likely additional index approaches, employing the logical concepts of symmetry and transitivity which derive from a structure inherent between relations, a sort of 'metarelations'. The transitivityy of the relations of action or property to object over the relation of material to object are particularly considered, and clues to this relational structure obtained from Aristotle's theory of causation

0.009505464 = product of:
  0.028516391 = sum of:
    0.028516391 = weight(_text_:to in 5168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028516391 = score(doc=5168,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.34441712 = fieldWeight in 5168, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5168)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The Association for Manitoba Archives has created a database where members can deposit archival descriptions to provide a central search for users. Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) were chosen as the controlled subject vocabulary to use in the descriptions, but changes were made to LCSH to better describe material about or by Indigenous peoples. Examples include: the word "Indian"; geographic place embedded in terms such as "Indians of North America"; changes related to Manitoba peoples specifically; and miscellaneous changes not part of a larger pattern. New terms were also added.

0.00940797 = product of:
  0.02822391 = sum of:
    0.02822391 = weight(_text_:to in 5274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02822391 = score(doc=5274,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.34088457 = fieldWeight in 5274, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5274)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.00940797 = product of:
  0.02822391 = sum of:
    0.02822391 = weight(_text_:to in 8039) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02822391 = score(doc=8039,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.34088457 = fieldWeight in 8039, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=8039)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

A concise overview/introduction to the principles used to establish and apply LCSH

0.008869919 = product of:
  0.026609756 = sum of:
    0.026609756 = weight(_text_:to in 1336) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026609756 = score(doc=1336,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.32138905 = fieldWeight in 1336, 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=1336)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.008869919 = product of:
  0.026609756 = sum of:
    0.026609756 = weight(_text_:to in 749) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026609756 = score(doc=749,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.32138905 = fieldWeight in 749, 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=749)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Claims that there is no clear plan, comprehensive philosophy, or macro approach to the revision of Library of Congress Subject Headings. Having missed a great opportunity in the mid-1980s to develop a subject analog of AACR2, LC is now in a period of decline. Discusses alternatives to LC subject access such as PRECIS and keyword searching. Urges LC to halt and reverse the decline by bold, decisive action in the 1990s

0.00880035 = product of:
  0.026401049 = sum of:
    0.026401049 = weight(_text_:to in 5427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026401049 = score(doc=5427,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.3188683 = fieldWeight in 5427, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5427)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The syntactic and semantic consistency of the subject headings of Library of Congress is a matter of concern to cataloguers who must use appropriate terminologies to describe library materials undergoing processing. This paper looks at the structure of these headings by analyzing comparatively the syntactic types that make up the structures as listed in Literature and Librarianship on pages 3075 to 3085 and 3114 to 3117 respectively. Their semantic implications are also highlighted. Consistency and specificity are terms often used in criticizing LCSH. This paper examines the application of these two concepts on the structures believing that a thorough understanding of the syntactic types would help the cataloguer to determine the most appropriate and specific heading to use.