Search (4182 results, page 1 of 210)

0.0914556 = product of:
  0.1371834 = sum of:
    0.1205523 = product of:
      0.3616569 = sum of:
        0.3616569 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.3616569 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.38609818 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.016631098 = weight(_text_:to in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016631098 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.20086816 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Content

Präsentation anlässlich: European Conference on Data Analysis (ECDA 2014) in Bremen, Germany, July 2nd to 4th 2014, LIS-Workshop.

Source

http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja

0.06309623 = product of:
  0.094644345 = sum of:
    0.072331384 = product of:
      0.21699414 = sum of:
        0.21699414 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.21699414 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.38609818 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.02231296 = weight(_text_:to in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02231296 = score(doc=400,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.26949292 = fieldWeight in 400, 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=400)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

On a scientific concept hierarchy, a parent concept may have a few attributes, each of which has multiple values being a group of child concepts. We call these attributes facets: classification has a few facets such as application (e.g., face recognition), model (e.g., svm, knn), and metric (e.g., precision). In this work, we aim at building faceted concept hierarchies from scientific literature. Hierarchy construction methods heavily rely on hypernym detection, however, the faceted relations are parent-to-child links but the hypernym relation is a multi-hop, i.e., ancestor-to-descendent link with a specific facet "type-of". We use information extraction techniques to find synonyms, sibling concepts, and ancestor-descendent relations from a data science corpus. And we propose a hierarchy growth algorithm to infer the parent-child links from the three types of relationships. It resolves conflicts by maintaining the acyclic structure of a hierarchy.

Content

Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.

0.05485135 = product of:
  0.08227702 = sum of:
    0.06027615 = product of:
      0.18082845 = sum of:
        0.18082845 = weight(_text_:3a in 855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18082845 = score(doc=855,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.38609818 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 855, 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=855)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.022000873 = weight(_text_:to in 855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022000873 = score(doc=855,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.2657236 = fieldWeight in 855, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=855)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Converting UDC numbers manually to a complex format such as the one mentioned above is an unrealistic expectation; supporting building these representations, as far as possible automatically, is a well-founded requirement. An additional advantage of this approach is that the existing records could also be processed and converted. In my dissertation I would like to prove also that it is possible to design and implement an algorithm that is able to convert pre-coordinated UDC numbers into the introduced format by identifying all their elements and revealing their whole syntactic structure as well. In my dissertation I will discuss a feasible way of building a UDC-specific XML schema for describing the most detailed and complicated UDC numbers (containing not only the common auxiliary signs and numbers, but also the different types of special auxiliaries). The schema definition is available online at: http://piros.udc-interpreter.hu#xsd. The primary goal of my research is to prove that it is possible to support building, retrieving, and analyzing UDC numbers without compromises, by taking the whole syntactic richness of the scheme by storing the UDC numbers reserving the meaning of pre-coordination. The research has also included the implementation of a software that parses UDC classmarks attended to prove that such solution can be applied automatically without any additional effort or even retrospectively on existing collections.

Content

Vgl. auch: New automatic interpreter for complex UDC numbers. Unter: <https%3A%2F%2Fudcc.org%2Ffiles%2FAttilaPiros_EC_36-37_2014-2015.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3kc9CwDDCWP7aArpfjrs5b>

0.0512715 = product of:
  0.07690725 = sum of:
    0.06027615 = product of:
      0.18082845 = sum of:
        0.18082845 = weight(_text_:3a in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18082845 = score(doc=4997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.38609818 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4997, 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=4997)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.016631098 = weight(_text_:to in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016631098 = score(doc=4997,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.20086816 = fieldWeight in 4997, 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=4997)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

While classifications are heavily used to categorize web content, the evolution of the web foresees a more formal structure - ontology - which can serve this purpose. Ontologies are core artifacts of the Semantic Web which enable machines to use inference rules to conduct automated reasoning on data. Lightweight ontologies bridge the gap between classifications and ontologies. A lightweight ontology (LO) is an ontology representing a backbone taxonomy where the concept of the child node is more specific than the concept of the parent node. Formal lightweight ontologies can be generated from their informal ones. The key applications of formal lightweight ontologies are document classification, semantic search, and data integration. However, these applications suffer from the following problems: the disambiguation accuracy of the state of the art NLP tools used in generating formal lightweight ontologies from their informal ones; the lack of background knowledge needed for the formal lightweight ontologies; and the limitation of ontology reuse. In this dissertation, we propose a novel solution to these problems in formal lightweight ontologies; namely, faceted lightweight ontology (FLO). FLO is a lightweight ontology in which terms, present in each node label, and their concepts, are available in the background knowledge (BK), which is organized as a set of facets. A facet can be defined as a distinctive property of the groups of concepts that can help in differentiating one group from another. Background knowledge can be defined as a subset of a knowledge base, such as WordNet, and often represents a specific domain.

Content

PhD Dissertation at International Doctorate School in Information and Communication Technology. Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Fcore.ac.uk%2Fdownload%2Fpdf%2F150083013.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2n-qisNagpyT0lli_6QbAQ.

0.048220925 = product of:
  0.14466277 = sum of:
    0.14466277 = product of:
      0.43398827 = sum of:
        0.43398827 = weight(_text_:3a in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.43398827 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.38609818 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            1.1240361 = fieldWeight in 973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=973)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fcreativechoice.org%2Fdoc%2FHansJonas.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1TM3teaYKgABL5H9yoIifA&opi=89978449.

0.047725506 = product of:
  0.071588255 = sum of:
    0.03456709 = weight(_text_:to in 591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03456709 = score(doc=591,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.41749665 = fieldWeight in 591, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=591)
    0.037021164 = product of:
      0.07404233 = sum of:
        0.07404233 = weight(_text_:22 in 591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07404233 = score(doc=591,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 591, 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=591)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Date

22. 2.2013 12:35:05

Series

Letters to the editor

0.046171855 = product of:
  0.06925778 = sum of:
    0.048220925 = product of:
      0.14466277 = sum of:
        0.14466277 = weight(_text_:3a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14466277 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.38609818 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.02103686 = weight(_text_:to in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02103686 = score(doc=5820,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.25408036 = fieldWeight in 5820, 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=5820)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The successes of information retrieval (IR) in recent decades were built upon bag-of-words representations. Effective as it is, bag-of-words is only a shallow text understanding; there is a limited amount of information for document ranking in the word space. This dissertation goes beyond words and builds knowledge based text representations, which embed the external and carefully curated information from knowledge bases, and provide richer and structured evidence for more advanced information retrieval systems. This thesis research first builds query representations with entities associated with the query. Entities' descriptions are used by query expansion techniques that enrich the query with explanation terms. Then we present a general framework that represents a query with entities that appear in the query, are retrieved by the query, or frequently show up in the top retrieved documents. A latent space model is developed to jointly learn the connections from query to entities and the ranking of documents, modeling the external evidence from knowledge bases and internal ranking features cooperatively. To further improve the quality of relevant entities, a defining factor of our query representations, we introduce learning to rank to entity search and retrieve better entities from knowledge bases. In the document representation part, this thesis research also moves one step forward with a bag-of-entities model, in which documents are represented by their automatic entity annotations, and the ranking is performed in the entity space.
This proposal includes plans to improve the quality of relevant entities with a co-learning framework that learns from both entity labels and document labels. We also plan to develop a hybrid ranking system that combines word based and entity based representations together with their uncertainties considered. At last, we plan to enrich the text representations with connections between entities. We propose several ways to infer entity graph representations for texts, and to rank documents using their structure representations. This dissertation overcomes the limitation of word based representations with external and carefully curated information from knowledge bases. We believe this thesis research is a solid start towards the new generation of intelligent, semantic, and structured information retrieval.

Content

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Language and Information Technologies. Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cs.cmu.edu%2F~cx%2Fpapers%2Fknowledge_based_text_representation.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0SaTSvhWLTh__Uz_HtOtl3.

0.03937153 = product of:
  0.059057295 = sum of:
    0.028516391 = weight(_text_:to in 1400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028516391 = score(doc=1400,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.34441712 = fieldWeight in 1400, 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=1400)
    0.030540902 = product of:
      0.061081804 = sum of:
        0.061081804 = weight(_text_:22 in 1400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.061081804 = score(doc=1400,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 1400, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1400)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This paper discusses and illustrates through examples how meaningful or deep learning can be supported through well-structured presentation of material, through giving learners schemas they can use to organize knowledge in their minds, and through helping learners to understand knowledge organization principles they can use to construct their own schemas. It is a call to all authors, educators and information designers to pay attention to meaningful presentation that expresses the internal structure of the domain and facilitates the learner's assimilation of concepts and their relationships.

Pages

S.22-32

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.037985653 = product of:
  0.05697848 = sum of:
    0.019957317 = weight(_text_:to in 138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019957317 = score(doc=138,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.24104178 = fieldWeight in 138, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=138)
    0.037021164 = product of:
      0.07404233 = sum of:
        0.07404233 = weight(_text_:22 in 138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07404233 = score(doc=138,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 138, 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=138)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Date

22. 2.2013 12:36:34

Series

Letters to the editor

0.037985653 = product of:
  0.05697848 = sum of:
    0.019957317 = weight(_text_:to in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019957317 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.24104178 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
    0.037021164 = product of:
      0.07404233 = sum of:
        0.07404233 = weight(_text_:22 in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07404233 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1239, 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=1239)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Date

18. 3.2014 19:13:22

Series

Letter to the editor

0.037985653 = product of:
  0.05697848 = sum of:
    0.019957317 = weight(_text_:to in 2485) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019957317 = score(doc=2485,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.24104178 = fieldWeight in 2485, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2485)
    0.037021164 = product of:
      0.07404233 = sum of:
        0.07404233 = weight(_text_:22 in 2485) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07404233 = score(doc=2485,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2485, 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=2485)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Date

22. 1.2016 14:45:01

Series

Letter to the editor

0.037985653 = product of:
  0.05697848 = sum of:
    0.019957317 = weight(_text_:to in 3176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019957317 = score(doc=3176,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.24104178 = fieldWeight in 3176, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3176)
    0.037021164 = product of:
      0.07404233 = sum of:
        0.07404233 = weight(_text_:22 in 3176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07404233 = score(doc=3176,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3176, 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=3176)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Date

6. 5.2017 18:46:22

0.03493127 = product of:
  0.0523969 = sum of:
    0.030801224 = weight(_text_:to in 4227) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030801224 = score(doc=4227,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.37201303 = fieldWeight in 4227, 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=4227)
    0.021595677 = product of:
      0.043191355 = sum of:
        0.043191355 = weight(_text_:22 in 4227) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043191355 = score(doc=4227,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4227, 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=4227)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

We present three fundamental, interrelated approaches to support multiple access paths to each terminal object in information hierarchies: faceted classification, faceted search, and web directories with embedded symbolic links. This survey aims to demonstrate how each approach supports users who seek information from multiple perspectives. We achieve this by exploring each approach, the relationships between these approaches, including tradeoffs, and how they can be used in concert, while focusing on a core set of hypermedia elements common to all. This approach provides a foundation from which to study, understand, and synthesize applications which employ these techniques. This survey does not aim to be comprehensive, but rather focuses on thematic issues.

Source

Information processing and management. 46(2010) no.1, S.22-43

0.03493127 = product of:
  0.0523969 = sum of:
    0.030801224 = weight(_text_:to in 2599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030801224 = score(doc=2599,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.37201303 = fieldWeight in 2599, 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=2599)
    0.021595677 = product of:
      0.043191355 = sum of:
        0.043191355 = weight(_text_:22 in 2599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043191355 = score(doc=2599,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2599, 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=2599)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The US cataloging community is an interorganizational network with the Library of Congress (LC) as the lead organization, which reserves to itself the power to shape cataloging rules. Peripheral members of the network who are interested in modifying changes to the rules or to the network can use various strategies for organizational change that incorporate building ties to the decision-makers located at the hub of the network. The story of William E. Studwell's campaign for a subject heading code illustrates how some traditional scholarly methods of urging change-papers and presentations-are insufficient to achieve reform in an interorganizational network, absent strategies to build alliances with the decision makers.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.033408046 = product of:
  0.05011207 = sum of:
    0.028516391 = weight(_text_:to in 1460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028516391 = score(doc=1460,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.34441712 = fieldWeight in 1460, 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=1460)
    0.021595677 = product of:
      0.043191355 = sum of:
        0.043191355 = weight(_text_:22 in 1460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043191355 = score(doc=1460,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1460, 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=1460)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The paper examines whether subject headings in a bibliographic description could be used to direct users to relevant archival sources: a publication about a subject is likely to cite archival sources that are related to the subject. In the light of the data collected for the paper this approach might work in case of some keywords. However, there are also problems, like finding the optimal level the user should be directed to in the archival hierarchy, and the lack of information in archival persistent identifiers (PIDs).

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.033408046 = product of:
  0.05011207 = sum of:
    0.028516391 = weight(_text_:to in 1899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028516391 = score(doc=1899,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.34441712 = fieldWeight in 1899, 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=1899)
    0.021595677 = product of:
      0.043191355 = sum of:
        0.043191355 = weight(_text_:22 in 1899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043191355 = score(doc=1899,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1899, 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=1899)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Dominican University's Graduate School of Library and Information Science (GSLIS) was one of a funnel group of graduate schools of library and information science selected to test RDA. A seminar specifically for this purpose was conducted from August to December 2010. Fifteen students participated in the test, creating records in AACR2 and in RDA, encoding them in the MARC format, and responding to the required questionnaires. In addition to record creation, the students were also asked to submit a final paper in which they described their experiences and recommended whether or not to accept RDA as a replacement for AACR2.

Date

25. 5.2015 18:36:22

0.033408046 = product of:
  0.05011207 = sum of:
    0.028516391 = weight(_text_:to in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028516391 = score(doc=1934,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.34441712 = fieldWeight in 1934, 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=1934)
    0.021595677 = product of:
      0.043191355 = sum of:
        0.043191355 = weight(_text_:22 in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043191355 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1934, 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=1934)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Creativity is now a core requirement for successful organizations. Libraries, like all organizations, need to produce and utilize new ideas to improve user service and experiences. With changes in cataloging such as Resource Description and Access (RDA), the opportunity to rethink cataloging practices is here now. Everyone has creative potential, although catalogers may have both a personality and work environment that make it more difficult. To be able to maximize creative capacity, catalogers need the proper work environment, support from their organization, and a plan for accomplishing creative goals. Given that environment, catalogers may create ideas that will shape the future. (RDA).

Date

29. 5.2015 11:08:22

0.033377253 = product of:
  0.050065875 = sum of:
    0.03155529 = weight(_text_:to in 2856) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03155529 = score(doc=2856,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.38112053 = fieldWeight in 2856, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2856)
    0.018510582 = product of:
      0.037021164 = sum of:
        0.037021164 = weight(_text_:22 in 2856) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037021164 = score(doc=2856,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2856, 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=2856)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This article introduces a new source of evidence of the value of medical-related research: citations from clinical guidelines. These give evidence that research findings have been used to inform the day-to-day practice of medical staff. To identify whether citations from guidelines can give different information from that of traditional citation counts, this article assesses the extent to which references in clinical guidelines tend to be highly cited in the academic literature and highly read in Mendeley. Using evidence from the United Kingdom, references associated with the UK's National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines tended to be substantially more cited than comparable articles, unless they had been published in the most recent 3 years. Citation counts also seemed to be stronger indicators than Mendeley readership altmetrics. Hence, although presence in guidelines may be particularly useful to highlight the contributions of recently published articles, for older articles citation counts may already be sufficient to recognize their contributions to health in society.

Date

19. 3.2016 12:22:00

0.033377253 = product of:
  0.050065875 = sum of:
    0.03155529 = weight(_text_:to in 2925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03155529 = score(doc=2925,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.38112053 = fieldWeight in 2925, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2925)
    0.018510582 = product of:
      0.037021164 = sum of:
        0.037021164 = weight(_text_:22 in 2925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037021164 = score(doc=2925,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2925, 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=2925)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

In this article we use a stated choice experiment to study researcher preferences in the information sciences and to investigate the relative importance of different journal characteristics in convincing potential authors to submit to a particular journal. The analysis distinguishes high quality from standard quality articles and focuses on the question whether communicating acceptance rates rather than rejection rates leads to other submission decisions. Our results show that a positive framing effect might be present when authors decide on submitting a high quality article. No evidence of a framing effect is found when authors consider a standard quality article. From a journal marketing perspective, this is important information for editors. Communicating acceptance rates rather than rejection rates might help to convince researchers to submit to their journal.

Date

7. 5.2016 20:02:22

0.032297708 = product of:
  0.04844656 = sum of:
    0.029935975 = weight(_text_:to in 666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029935975 = score(doc=666,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.36156267 = fieldWeight in 666, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=666)
    0.018510582 = product of:
      0.037021164 = sum of:
        0.037021164 = weight(_text_:22 in 666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037021164 = score(doc=666,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 666, 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=666)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The proliferation of digital knowledge repositories (DKRs) used for distributed and collocated work raises important questions about how to manage these technologies. This study investigates why individuals contribute information to DKRs by applying and extending transactive memory theory. Data from knowledge workers (N = 208) nested in work groups (J = 17) located in Europe and the United States revealed, consistent with transactive memory theory, that perceptions of experts' retrieval of information were positively related to the likelihood of information provision to DKRs. The relationship between experts' perceptions of retrieval and information provision varied from group to group, and cross-level interactions indicated that trust in how the information would be used and the interdependence of tasks within groups could explain that variation. Furthermore, information provision to DKRs was related to communication networks in ways consistent with theorizing regarding the formation of transactive memory systems. Implications for theory and practice are discussed, emphasizing the utility of multilevel approaches for conceptualizing and modeling why individuals provide information to DKRs.

Date

22. 3.2013 19:39:00