Search (143 results, page 1 of 8)

0.10049444 = product of:
  0.20098887 = sum of:
    0.20098887 = sum of:
      0.15266424 = weight(_text_:discovery in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.15266424 = score(doc=40,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.26668423 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050953664 = queryNorm
          0.5724532 = fieldWeight in 40, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=40)
      0.048324626 = weight(_text_:22 in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048324626 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17843105 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050953664 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 40, 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=40)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

17.11.2020 12:22:59

Source

http://musingsaboutlibrarianship.blogspot.com/2020/11/the-next-generation-discovery-citation.html

0.07178174 = product of:
  0.14356348 = sum of:
    0.14356348 = sum of:
      0.109045886 = weight(_text_:discovery in 374) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.109045886 = score(doc=374,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.26668423 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050953664 = queryNorm
          0.40889513 = fieldWeight in 374, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=374)
      0.03451759 = weight(_text_:22 in 374) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03451759 = score(doc=374,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17843105 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050953664 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 374, 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=374)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Beschäftigt man sich mit Inhaltserschließung, so sind zunächst zwei Dimensionen zu unterscheiden - die Wissensorganisationssysteme selbst (z. B. Normdateien, Thesauri, Schlagwortsprachen, Klassifikationen und Ontologien) und die Metadaten für Dokumente, die mit diesen Wissensorganisationssystemen erschlossen sind. Beides steht in einer Wechselwirkung zueinander: Die Wissensorganisationssysteme sind die Werkzeuge für die Erschließungsarbeit und bilden die Grundlage für die Erstellung konkreter Erschließungsmetadaten. Die praktische Anwendung der Wissensorganisationssysteme in der Erschließung wiederum ist die Basis für deren Pflege und Weiterentwicklung. Zugleich haben Wissensorganisationssysteme auch einen Eigenwert unabhängig von den Erschließungsmetadaten für einzelne Dokumente, indem sie bestimmte Bereiche von Welt- oder Fachwissen modellartig abbilden. Will man nun Aussagen über die Qualität von inhaltlicher Erschließung treffen, so genügt es nicht, den Input - also die Wissensorganisationssysteme und die damit generierten Metadaten - zu betrachten. Man muss auch den Output betrachten, also das, was die Recherchewerkzeuge daraus machen und was folglich bei den Nutzer:innen konkret ankommt. Im vorliegenden Beitrag werden Überlegungen zur Qualität von Recherchewerkzeugen in diesem Bereich angestellt - gewissermaßen als Fortsetzung und Vertiefung der dazu im Thesenpapier des Expertenteams RDA-Anwendungsprofil für die verbale Inhaltserschließung (ET RAVI) gegebenen Hinweise. Im Zentrum steht die verbale Erschließung nach den Regeln für die Schlagwortkatalogisierung (RSWK), wie sie sich in Bibliothekskatalogen manifestiert - gleich, ob es sich dabei um herkömmliche Kataloge oder um Resource-Discovery-Systeme (RDS) handelt.

Date

24. 9.2021 12:22:02

0.06610556 = product of:
  0.13221112 = sum of:
    0.13221112 = product of:
      0.26442224 = sum of:
        0.26442224 = weight(_text_:discovery in 118) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.26442224 = score(doc=118,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.26668423 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050953664 = queryNorm
            0.991518 = fieldWeight in 118, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=118)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The recent trend of move from OPAC to discovery system has not been observed in Nigeria. Hence, this study examined Nigerian librarians' perceived knowledge and readiness to move from OPAC to discovery system. The study adopts mixed method research approach. The study found that Nigerian librarians are not ready to move from OPAC to library discovery system in the nearest future. It was also shown that there is little or no knowledge of library discovery system among Nigerian librarians. The study concludes that Nigerian librarians are not ready nor have knowledge of moving from OPAC to library discovery system.

0.05742539 = product of:
  0.11485078 = sum of:
    0.11485078 = sum of:
      0.08723671 = weight(_text_:discovery in 566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08723671 = score(doc=566,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.26668423 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050953664 = queryNorm
          0.3271161 = fieldWeight in 566, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=566)
      0.027614072 = weight(_text_:22 in 566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.027614072 = score(doc=566,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17843105 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050953664 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 566, 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=566)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Knowledge Architectures reviews traditional approaches to managing information and explains why they need to adapt to support 21st-century information management and discovery. Exploring the rapidly changing environment in which information is being managed and accessed, the book considers how to use knowledge architectures, the basic structures and designs that underlie all of the parts of an effective information system, to best advantage. Drawing on 40 years of work with a variety of organizations, Bedford explains that failure to understand the structure behind any given system can be the difference between an effective solution and a significant and costly failure. Demonstrating that the information user environment has shifted significantly in the past 20 years, the book explains that end users now expect designs and behaviors that are much closer to the way they think, work, and act. Acknowledging how important it is that those responsible for developing an information or knowledge management system understand knowledge structures, the book goes beyond a traditional library science perspective and uses case studies to help translate the abstract and theoretical to the practical and concrete. Explaining the structures in a simple and intuitive way and providing examples that clearly illustrate the challenges faced by a range of different organizations, Knowledge Architectures is essential reading for those studying and working in library and information science, data science, systems development, database design, and search system architecture and engineering.

Content

Section 1 Context and purpose of knowledge architecture -- 1 Making the case for knowledge architecture -- 2 The landscape of knowledge assets -- 3 Knowledge architecture and design -- 4 Knowledge architecture reference model -- 5 Knowledge architecture segments -- Section 2 Designing for availability -- 6 Knowledge object modeling -- 7 Knowledge structures for encoding, formatting, and packaging -- 8 Functional architecture for identification and distinction -- 9 Functional architectures for knowledge asset disposition and destruction -- 10 Functional architecture designs for knowledge preservation and conservation -- Section 3 Designing for accessibility -- 11 Functional architectures for knowledge seeking and discovery -- 12 Functional architecture for knowledge search -- 13 Functional architecture for knowledge categorization -- 14 Functional architectures for indexing and keywording -- 15 Functional architecture for knowledge semantics -- 16 Functional architecture for knowledge abstraction and surrogation -- Section 4 Functional architectures to support knowledge consumption -- 17 Functional architecture for knowledge augmentation, derivation, and synthesis -- 18 Functional architecture to manage risk and harm -- 19 Functional architectures for knowledge authentication and provenance -- 20 Functional architectures for securing knowledge assets -- 21 Functional architectures for authorization and asset management -- Section 5 Pulling it all together - the big picture knowledge architecture -- 22 Functional architecture for knowledge metadata and metainformation -- 23 The whole knowledge architecture - pulling it all together

0.053421356 = product of:
  0.10684271 = sum of:
    0.10684271 = product of:
      0.21368542 = sum of:
        0.21368542 = weight(_text_:discovery in 552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.21368542 = score(doc=552,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.26668423 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050953664 = queryNorm
            0.80126756 = fieldWeight in 552, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=552)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Der Beitrag analysiert die Entstehungsgeschichte von bibliothekarischen Discovery-Systemen in Wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken, mit einem Fokus auf Bibliotheken in Deutschland. Hierfür dient der Hype-Zyklus als Rahmen, um vor allem auch auf die Erwartungen und Rezeption der Systeme in bibliothekarischen Kreisen einzugehen und diese zu diskutieren. Der Beitrag liefert außerdem einen Ausblick auf künftige Potenziale von Discovery-Systemen, auch im Kontext von forschungsnahen Dienstleistungen.

0.046743687 = product of:
  0.093487374 = sum of:
    0.093487374 = product of:
      0.18697475 = sum of:
        0.18697475 = weight(_text_:discovery in 1166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18697475 = score(doc=1166,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.26668423 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050953664 = queryNorm
            0.7011091 = fieldWeight in 1166, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1166)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Faceted search is a powerful tool that enables searchers to easily and intuitively take advantage of controlled vocabularies and structured metadata. Faceted search has been widely implemented in library discovery interfaces and has provided many benefits to library users. The effectiveness of facets in library catalogs depends on a complex interaction between facet vocabularies, metadata quality and structure, and the library discovery interface's capabilities. This article provides a holistic overview of challenges for optimally implementing facets in library catalogs. This supports a systematic approach to refining and enhancing the capacity of faceted search to improve searching and exploring bibliographic metadata.

0.04626425 = product of:
  0.0925285 = sum of:
    0.0925285 = product of:
      0.185057 = sum of:
        0.185057 = weight(_text_:discovery in 588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.185057 = score(doc=588,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.26668423 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050953664 = queryNorm
            0.69391805 = fieldWeight in 588, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=588)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article provides an overview of computer based catalogue systems designed for use by library clients, seeing present day 'discovery systems' on the same trajectory as the older 'online public access catalogues' (OPACs) which they are gradually replacing, both in technical development and their approach to client use scenarios. It traces the history of the OPAC/discovery system from its origins in the library automation of the 1960s through to the present and discusses the main technical standards which have formed its development. The article goes on to consider questions relating to the usability of electronic library catalogues and highlights semiotic and ethical issues inherent to their design. It concludes with reflections on the future of the OPAC/discovery system in an information universe apparently dominated by the internet search engine.

0.04046396 = product of:
  0.08092792 = sum of:
    0.08092792 = product of:
      0.24278377 = sum of:
        0.24278377 = weight(_text_:3a in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.24278377 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.43198574 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050953664 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, 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=862)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

https%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fabs%2F2212.06721&usg=AOvVaw3i_9pZm9y_dQWoHi6uv0EN

0.040066015 = product of:
  0.08013203 = sum of:
    0.08013203 = product of:
      0.16026406 = sum of:
        0.16026406 = weight(_text_:discovery in 375) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16026406 = score(doc=375,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.26668423 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050953664 = queryNorm
            0.60095066 = fieldWeight in 375, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=375)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Bibliotheken und Informationseinrichtungen erfahren in den letzten Jahren einen Wandel in ihren Aufgaben. Die zunehmende digitale Vernetzung ermöglicht es den Agierenden des Publikations- und Informationswesens, verstärkt die eigene Rolle zu verlassen und in Bereichen tätig zu werden, die bisher nicht dem eigenen Kerngebiet entsprochen haben. So können z. B. Verlage und Autor: innen in Umgehung des Einzelhandels und der Bibliotheken ihre Werke direkt an die Kund:innen verkaufen und ausliefern und Bibliotheken können über Open-Access-Repositorien selbst Werke publizieren. Ich möchte in diesem Beitrag dafür argumentieren, Tätigkeiten in Bibliotheken und Informationseinrichtungen - speziell Erschließung und das Entwickeln von Discovery-Systemen - konsequent in Bezug auf Anwendungsfälle zu denken und zu gestalten. Nur so lässt sich effektiv und effizient sowohl bei der Erschließung als auch bei der Gestaltung der die Erschließung nutzenden Systeme und Prozesse arbeiten. Zunächst möchte ich dafür in den folgenden Abschnitten Berührungspunkte aufzeigen, um auf die vielfältigen Probleme aber auch Möglichkeiten im Zusammenspiel von (Inhalts-)Erschließung und Discovery-Systemen hinzuweisen.

0.038553543 = product of:
  0.07710709 = sum of:
    0.07710709 = product of:
      0.15421417 = sum of:
        0.15421417 = weight(_text_:discovery in 105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15421417 = score(doc=105,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.26668423 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050953664 = queryNorm
            0.5782651 = fieldWeight in 105, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=105)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to provide a critical analysis from an ethical perspective of how the concept of indigenous wayfinding and voyaging is mapped in knowledge representation, organization and discovery systems. Design/methodology/approach In this study, the Dewey Decimal Classification, the Library of Congress Subject Headings, the Library of Congress Classifications systems and the Web of Science citation database were methodically examined to determine how these systems represent and facilitate the discovery of indigenous knowledge of wayfinding and voyaging. Findings The analysis revealed that there was no dedicated representation of the indigenous practices of wayfinding and voyaging in the major knowledge representation, organization and discovery systems. By scattering indigenous practice across various, often very broad and unrelated classes, coherence in the record is disrupted, resulting in misrepresentation of these indigenous concepts. Originality/value This study contributes to a relatively limited research literature on representation and organization of indigenous knowledge of wayfinding and voyaging. This study calls to foster a better understanding and appreciation for the rich knowledge that indigenous cultures provide for an enlightened society.

0.03816606 = product of:
  0.07633212 = sum of:
    0.07633212 = product of:
      0.15266424 = sum of:
        0.15266424 = weight(_text_:discovery in 833) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15266424 = score(doc=833,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.26668423 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050953664 = queryNorm
            0.5724532 = fieldWeight in 833, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=833)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In den letzten Jahren ist das Angebot an Academic Search Engines für die Recherche nach Fachliteratur zu allen Wissenschaftsgebieten stark angewachsen und ergänzt die beliebten kommerziellen Angebote wie Web of Science oder Scopus. Der Artikel zeigt die wesentlichen Unterschiede zwischen bibliothekarischen Discovery-Systemen und Academic Search Engines wie Base, Dimensions oder Open Alex auf und diskutiert Möglichkeiten, wie beide von einander profitieren können. Diese Entwicklungsperspektiven betreffen Aspekte wie die Kontextualisierung von Wissen, die Datenmodellierung, die automatischen Datenanreicherung sowie den Zuschnitt von Suchräumen.

0.03371997 = product of:
  0.06743994 = sum of:
    0.06743994 = product of:
      0.20231982 = sum of:
        0.20231982 = weight(_text_:3a in 5669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.20231982 = score(doc=5669,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.43198574 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050953664 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 5669, 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=5669)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

"Die Englischsprachige Wikipedia verfügt jetzt über mehr als 6 Millionen Artikel. An zweiter Stelle kommt die deutschsprachige Wikipedia mit 2.3 Millionen Artikeln, an dritter Stelle steht die französischsprachige Wikipedia mit 2.1 Millionen Artikeln (via Researchbuzz: Firehose <https://rbfirehose.com/2020/01/24/techcrunch-wikipedia-now-has-more-than-6-million-articles-in-english/> und Techcrunch <https://techcrunch.com/2020/01/23/wikipedia-english-six-million-articles/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Techcrunch+%28TechCrunch%29&guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9yYmZpcmVob3NlLmNvbS8yMDIwLzAxLzI0L3RlY2hjcnVuY2gtd2lraXBlZGlhLW5vdy1oYXMtbW9yZS10aGFuLTYtbWlsbGlvbi1hcnRpY2xlcy1pbi1lbmdsaXNoLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAK0zHfjdDZ_spFZBF_z-zDjtL5iWvuKDumFTzm4HvQzkUfE2pLXQzGS6FGB_y-VISdMEsUSvkNsg2U_NWQ4lwWSvOo3jvXo1I3GtgHpP8exukVxYAnn5mJspqX50VHIWFADHhs5AerkRn3hMRtf_R3F1qmEbo8EROZXp328HMC-o>). 250120 via digithek ch = #fineBlog s.a.: Angesichts der Veröffentlichung des 6-millionsten Artikels vergangene Woche in der englischsprachigen Wikipedia hat die Community-Zeitungsseite "Wikipedia Signpost" ein Moratorium bei der Veröffentlichung von Unternehmensartikeln gefordert. Das sei kein Vorwurf gegen die Wikimedia Foundation, aber die derzeitigen Maßnahmen, um die Enzyklopädie gegen missbräuchliches undeklariertes Paid Editing zu schützen, funktionierten ganz klar nicht. *"Da die ehrenamtlichen Autoren derzeit von Werbung in Gestalt von Wikipedia-Artikeln überwältigt werden, und da die WMF nicht in der Lage zu sein scheint, dem irgendetwas entgegenzusetzen, wäre der einzige gangbare Weg für die Autoren, fürs erste die Neuanlage von Artikeln über Unternehmen zu untersagen"*, schreibt der Benutzer Smallbones in seinem Editorial <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-01-27/From_the_editor> zur heutigen Ausgabe."

0.03371997 = product of:
  0.06743994 = sum of:
    0.06743994 = product of:
      0.20231982 = sum of:
        0.20231982 = weight(_text_:3a in 1000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.20231982 = score(doc=1000,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.43198574 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050953664 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 1000, 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=1000)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Master thesis Master of Science (Library and Information Studies) (MSc), Universität Wien. Advisor: Christoph Steiner. Vgl.: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371680244_Vergabe_von_DDC-Sachgruppen_mittels_eines_Schlagwort-Thesaurus. DOI: 10.25365/thesis.70030. Vgl. dazu die Präsentation unter: https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=0CAIQw7AJahcKEwjwoZzzytz_AhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQAg&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.dnb.de%2Fdownload%2Fattachments%2F252121510%2FDA3%2520Workshop-Gabler.pdf%3Fversion%3D1%26modificationDate%3D1671093170000%26api%3Dv2&psig=AOvVaw0szwENK1or3HevgvIDOfjx&ust=1687719410889597&opi=89978449.

0.032713763 = product of:
  0.06542753 = sum of:
    0.06542753 = product of:
      0.13085505 = sum of:
        0.13085505 = weight(_text_:discovery in 453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13085505 = score(doc=453,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.26668423 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050953664 = queryNorm
            0.49067414 = fieldWeight in 453, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=453)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In this paper, we present a case study of how well subject metadata (comprising headings from an international classification scheme) has been deployed in a national data catalogue, and how often data seekers use subject metadata when searching for data. Through an analysis of user search behaviour as recorded in search logs, we find evidence that users utilise the subject metadata for data discovery. Since approximately half of the records ingested by the catalogue did not include subject metadata at the time of harvest, we experimented with automatic subject classification approaches in order to enrich these records and to provide additional support for user search and data discovery. Our results show that automatic methods work well for well represented categories of subject metadata, and these categories tend to have features that can distinguish themselves from the other categories. Our findings raise implications for data catalogue providers; they should invest more effort to enhance the quality of data records by providing an adequate description of these records for under-represented subject categories.

0.026987478 = product of:
  0.053974956 = sum of:
    0.053974956 = product of:
      0.10794991 = sum of:
        0.10794991 = weight(_text_:discovery in 5919) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10794991 = score(doc=5919,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26668423 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050953664 = queryNorm
            0.4047855 = fieldWeight in 5919, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5919)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article provides an analysis of theories and methodologies that have been applied in citizen science research. This study suggests a significant contribution of citizen science to various disciplines as well as overall science education, literacy, and development. A solid theoretical grounding of citizen science research, coupled with application of pertinent emergent theories to various processes associated with scientific inquiry and discovery, suggests the disciplinary traits and unique contributions. This study proposes that the current pace of citizen science research, empowered by ordinary citizens as well as technological affordances, provides solid evidence to warrant further development of citizen science as a unique discipline that can strengthen and democratize scientific inquiry.

0.026987478 = product of:
  0.053974956 = sum of:
    0.053974956 = product of:
      0.10794991 = sum of:
        0.10794991 = weight(_text_:discovery in 127) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10794991 = score(doc=127,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26668423 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050953664 = queryNorm
            0.4047855 = fieldWeight in 127, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=127)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article discusses how libraries can include person identifiers in the MARC format. It suggests using URIs in fields and subfields to help transition the data to an RDF model, and to help prepare the catalog for a Linked Data. It analyzes the selection of URIs and Real-World Objects, and the use of tag 024 to describe person identifiers in authority records. When a creator or collaborator is identified in a work, the identifiers are transferred from authority to the bibliographic record. The article concludes that URI-based descriptions can provide a better experience for users, offering other methods of discovery.

0.026987478 = product of:
  0.053974956 = sum of:
    0.053974956 = product of:
      0.10794991 = sum of:
        0.10794991 = weight(_text_:discovery in 704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10794991 = score(doc=704,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26668423 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050953664 = queryNorm
            0.4047855 = fieldWeight in 704, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=704)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Controlled vocabularies are a foundational concept in library science and provide a framework for consistency in cataloging practices. Subject headings provide valuable access points to library resources during search and discovery for patrons. Many librarians will be familiar with the more widely used controlled vocabularies, like those maintained by national libraries or major professional organizations. More recently, there has been an increasing shift toward specialized vocabularies maintained by independent entities intended for much narrower use. While there is valid criticism of the nature or content of controlled vocabularies, they will likely continue to be an important feature in information organization.

0.026987478 = product of:
  0.053974956 = sum of:
    0.053974956 = product of:
      0.10794991 = sum of:
        0.10794991 = weight(_text_:discovery in 707) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10794991 = score(doc=707,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26668423 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050953664 = queryNorm
            0.4047855 = fieldWeight in 707, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=707)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper discusses the basics of creating name authority records for Arabic personal names in accordance with Resource Description and Access instructions and Program for Cooperative Cataloging guidelines. A background into the use of romanization for non-Latin scripts in bibliographic and authority records is provided to establish the context. Issues with romanization that are particular to Arabic are addressed. Separate sections on modern and classical names provide an overview of the major challenges, and strategies to enhance discovery are outlined. The paper concludes with an examination of the possible benefits of identity management and other changes in the authority control landscape for names in non-Latin script.

0.026987478 = product of:
  0.053974956 = sum of:
    0.053974956 = product of:
      0.10794991 = sum of:
        0.10794991 = weight(_text_:discovery in 1173) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10794991 = score(doc=1173,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26668423 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050953664 = queryNorm
            0.4047855 = fieldWeight in 1173, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1173)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Genre/Form headings are an important means by which librarians provide users with contextual or descriptive information. To facilitate the discovery of resources with important provenance characteristics, the Marion E. Wade Center added terms from a controlled vocabulary to bibliographic records representing items in the C. S. Lewis personal library collection. The selected terms focus on features that have historically been of interest to visitors. The addition of these headings in the bibliographic records allows users to use these keywords to conduct a search or narrow their results, resulting in more flexibility to locate and select the resources that best meet their needs.

0.026987478 = product of:
  0.053974956 = sum of:
    0.053974956 = product of:
      0.10794991 = sum of:
        0.10794991 = weight(_text_:discovery in 1177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10794991 = score(doc=1177,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26668423 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050953664 = queryNorm
            0.4047855 = fieldWeight in 1177, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.2338576 = idf(docFreq=640, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1177)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The Michigan State University Libraries (MSUL) digital repository contains numerous collections of openly available material. Since 2016, the digital repository has been using Faceted Application of Subject Terminology (FAST) subject headings as its primary subject vocabulary in order to streamline faceting, display, and search. The MSUL FAST use case presents some challenges that are not addressed by existing MARC-focused FAST tools. This paper will outline the MSUL digital repository team's justification for including FAST headings in the digital repository as well as workflows for adding FAST headings to Metadata Object Description Schema (MODS) metadata, their maintenance, and utilization for discovery.