-
Winske, E.: ¬The development and structure of an urban, regional, and local documents classification scheme (1996)
0.05
0.049079686 = product of:
0.09815937 = sum of:
0.09815937 = sum of:
0.048496403 = weight(_text_:library in 7241) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048496403 = score(doc=7241,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.3522223 = fieldWeight in 7241, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7241)
0.049662966 = weight(_text_:22 in 7241) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049662966 = score(doc=7241,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7241, 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=7241)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Discusses the reasons for the decision, taken at Florida International University Library to develop an in house classification system for their local documents collections. Reviews the structures of existing classification systems, noting their strengths and weaknesses in relation to the development of an in house system and describes the 5 components of the new system; geography, subject categories, extensions for population group and/or function, extensions for type of publication, and title/series designator
- Footnote
- Paper presented at conference on 'Local documents, a new classification scheme' at the Research Caucus of the Florida Library Association Annual Conference, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 22 Apr 95
- Source
- Journal of educational media and library sciences. 34(1996) no.1, S.19-34
-
Lin, W.-Y.C.: ¬The concept and applications of faceted classifications (2006)
0.04
0.0443785 = product of:
0.088757 = sum of:
0.088757 = sum of:
0.031999324 = weight(_text_:library in 5083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031999324 = score(doc=5083,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 5083, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5083)
0.056757677 = weight(_text_:22 in 5083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056757677 = score(doc=5083,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5083, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5083)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 27. 5.2007 22:19:35
- Source
- Journal of educational media and library sciences. 47(2006) no.2, S.153-171
-
Olson, H.A.: Sameness and difference : a cultural foundation of classification (2001)
0.04
0.03883119 = product of:
0.07766238 = sum of:
0.07766238 = sum of:
0.02799941 = weight(_text_:library in 166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02799941 = score(doc=166,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 166, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=166)
0.049662966 = weight(_text_:22 in 166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049662966 = score(doc=166,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 166, 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=166)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
- Source
- Library resources and technical services. 45(2001) no.3, S.115-122
-
Kwasnik, B.H.: ¬The role of classification in knowledge representation (1999)
0.03
0.033283874 = product of:
0.06656775 = sum of:
0.06656775 = sum of:
0.023999494 = weight(_text_:library in 2464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023999494 = score(doc=2464,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 2464, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2464)
0.042568255 = weight(_text_:22 in 2464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042568255 = score(doc=2464,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2464, 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=2464)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Library trends. 48(1999) no.1, S.22-47
-
Qin, J.: Evolving paradigms of knowledge representation and organization : a comparative study of classification, XML/DTD and ontology (2003)
0.02
0.02218925 = product of:
0.0443785 = sum of:
0.0443785 = sum of:
0.015999662 = weight(_text_:library in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015999662 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.11620321 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
0.028378839 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028378839 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2763, 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=2763)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The different points of views an knowledge representation and organization from various research communities reflect underlying philosophies and paradigms in these communities. This paper reviews differences and relations in knowledge representation and organization and generalizes four paradigms-integrative and disintegrative pragmatism and integrative and disintegrative epistemologism. Examples such as classification, XML schemas, and ontologies are compared based an how they specify concepts, build data models, and encode knowledge organization structures. 1. Introduction Knowledge representation (KR) is a term that several research communities use to refer to somewhat different aspects of the same research area. The artificial intelligence (AI) community considers KR as simply "something to do with writing down, in some language or communications medium, descriptions or pictures that correspond in some salient way to the world or a state of the world" (Duce & Ringland, 1988, p. 3). It emphasizes the ways in which knowledge can be encoded in a computer program (Bench-Capon, 1990). For the library and information science (LIS) community, KR is literally the synonym of knowledge organization, i.e., KR is referred to as the process of organizing knowledge into classifications, thesauri, or subject heading lists. KR has another meaning in LIS: it "encompasses every type and method of indexing, abstracting, cataloguing, classification, records management, bibliography and the creation of textual or bibliographic databases for information retrieval" (Anderson, 1996, p. 336). Adding the social dimension to knowledge organization, Hjoerland (1997) states that knowledge is a part of human activities and tied to the division of labor in society, which should be the primary organization of knowledge. Knowledge organization in LIS is secondary or derived, because knowledge is organized in learned institutions and publications. These different points of views an KR suggest that an essential difference in the understanding of KR between both AI and LIS lies in the source of representationwhether KR targets human activities or derivatives (knowledge produced) from human activities. This difference also decides their difference in purpose-in AI KR is mainly computer-application oriented or pragmatic and the result of representation is used to support decisions an human activities, while in LIS KR is conceptually oriented or abstract and the result of representation is used for access to derivatives from human activities.
- Date
- 12. 9.2004 17:22:35
-
Wang, Z.; Chaudhry, A.S.; Khoo, C.S.G.: Using classification schemes and thesauri to build an organizational taxonomy for organizing content and aiding navigation (2008)
0.02
0.02218925 = product of:
0.0443785 = sum of:
0.0443785 = sum of:
0.015999662 = weight(_text_:library in 2346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015999662 = score(doc=2346,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.11620321 = fieldWeight in 2346, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2346)
0.028378839 = weight(_text_:22 in 2346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028378839 = score(doc=2346,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2346, 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=2346)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Purpose - Potential and benefits of classification schemes and thesauri in building organizational taxonomies cannot be fully utilized by organizations. Empirical data of building an organizational taxonomy by the top-down approach of using classification schemes and thesauri appear to be lacking. The paper seeks to make a contribution in this regard. Design/methodology/approach - A case study of building an organizational taxonomy was conducted in the information studies domain for the Division of Information Studies at Nanyang Technology University, Singapore. The taxonomy was built by using the Dewey Decimal Classification, the Information Science Taxonomy, two information systems taxonomies, and three thesauri (ASIS&T, LISA, and ERIC). Findings - Classification schemes and thesauri were found to be helpful in creating the structure and categories related to the subject facet of the taxonomy, but organizational community sources had to be consulted and several methods had to be employed. The organizational activities and stakeholders' needs had to be identified to determine the objectives, facets, and the subject coverage of the taxonomy. Main categories were determined by identifying the stakeholders' interests and consulting organizational community sources and domain taxonomies. Category terms were selected from terminologies of classification schemes, domain taxonomies, and thesauri against the stakeholders' interests. Hierarchical structures of the main categories were constructed in line with the stakeholders' perspectives and the navigational role taking advantage of structures/term relationships from classification schemes and thesauri. Categories were determined in line with the concepts and the hierarchical levels. Format of categories were uniformed according to a commonly used standard. The consistency principle was employed to make the taxonomy structure and categories neater. Validation of the draft taxonomy through consultations with the stakeholders further refined the taxonomy. Originality/value - No similar study could be traced in the literature. The steps and methods used in the taxonomy development, and the information studies taxonomy itself, will be helpful for library and information schools and other similar organizations in their effort to develop taxonomies for organizing content and aiding navigation on organizational sites.
- Date
- 7.11.2008 15:22:04
-
Maniez, J.: ¬Des classifications aux thesaurus : du bon usage des facettes (1999)
0.02
0.021284128 = product of:
0.042568255 = sum of:
0.042568255 = product of:
0.08513651 = sum of:
0.08513651 = weight(_text_:22 in 6404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08513651 = score(doc=6404,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6404, 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=6404)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
-
Maniez, J.: ¬Du bon usage des facettes : des classifications aux thésaurus (1999)
0.02
0.021284128 = product of:
0.042568255 = sum of:
0.042568255 = product of:
0.08513651 = sum of:
0.08513651 = weight(_text_:22 in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08513651 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3773, 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=3773)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
-
Foskett, D.J.: Systems theory and its relevance to documentary classification (2017)
0.02
0.021284128 = product of:
0.042568255 = sum of:
0.042568255 = product of:
0.08513651 = sum of:
0.08513651 = weight(_text_:22 in 3176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08513651 = score(doc=3176,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 6. 5.2017 18:46:22
-
Ranganathan, S.R.; Gopinath, M.A.: Prolegomena to library classification (1967)
0.02
0.020784173 = product of:
0.041568346 = sum of:
0.041568346 = product of:
0.08313669 = sum of:
0.08313669 = weight(_text_:library in 672) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08313669 = score(doc=672,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.60380965 = fieldWeight in 672, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=672)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Imprint
- Bangalore : Sarada Ranganathan Endowment for Library Science
- Series
- Ranganathan series in library science; 20
-
Malla, N.: Classification of knowledge : a study in the foundations of library science (1991)
0.02
0.019798571 = product of:
0.039597142 = sum of:
0.039597142 = product of:
0.079194285 = sum of:
0.079194285 = weight(_text_:library in 3004) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.079194285 = score(doc=3004,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.57517654 = fieldWeight in 3004, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3004)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Indian journal of library studies. 2(1991) no.2, S.163-168
-
Koshman, S.: Categorization and classification revisited : a review of concept in library science and cognitive psychology (1993)
0.02
0.017320145 = product of:
0.03464029 = sum of:
0.03464029 = product of:
0.06928058 = sum of:
0.06928058 = weight(_text_:library in 8349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06928058 = score(doc=8349,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.5031747 = fieldWeight in 8349, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=8349)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Reviews the basic concepts associated with categorization and classification in order to examine the cognitive psychology and library science perspectives toward these processes, to discover if a theoretical affinity exists and to discuss potential applications of cognitive categorization theory to the field of library science
-
Neelameghan, A.: Classification, theory of (1971)
0.02
0.015999662 = product of:
0.031999324 = sum of:
0.031999324 = product of:
0.06399865 = sum of:
0.06399865 = weight(_text_:library in 1988) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06399865 = score(doc=1988,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.46481284 = fieldWeight in 1988, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1988)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Encyclopedia of library and information science. Vol.5
-
Kumar, K.: Distinctive contribution of Ranganathan to library classification (1992)
0.02
0.015652146 = product of:
0.031304292 = sum of:
0.031304292 = product of:
0.062608585 = sum of:
0.062608585 = weight(_text_:library in 6991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.062608585 = score(doc=6991,freq=10.0), product of:
0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.45471698 = fieldWeight in 6991, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6991)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Stresses that S.R. Ranganathan was truly a great scholar, who made rich contribution to different aspects of library and information science, but is better known for his work in the field of library classification. discusses his distinctive contributions to classification such as normative principles, 3 plane model of work, freely faceted classification (involving facet analysis and the synthetic principle), postulational approach, fundamental categories and certain notational devices like the sector device, group notation device, emptying digit device and seminal mnemonic device. Regards these as seminal ideas forming the basis of his theory of library classification. Considers 7th ed. of the Colon Classification as the best example of the application of theses ideas
- Source
- Journal of library and information science. 17(1992) no.2, S.115-127
-
Connaway, L.S.; Sievert, M.C.: Comparison of three classification systems for information on health insurance (1996)
0.01
0.014189419 = product of:
0.028378839 = sum of:
0.028378839 = product of:
0.056757677 = sum of:
0.056757677 = weight(_text_:22 in 7242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056757677 = score(doc=7242,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7242, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7242)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 4.1997 21:10:19
-
Belayche, C.: ¬A propos de la classification de Dewey (1997)
0.01
0.014189419 = product of:
0.028378839 = sum of:
0.028378839 = product of:
0.056757677 = sum of:
0.056757677 = weight(_text_:22 in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056757677 = score(doc=1171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1171, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1171)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Bulletin d'informations de l'Association des Bibliothecaires Francais. 1997, no.175, S.22-23
-
Lorenz, B.: Zur Theorie und Terminologie der bibliothekarischen Klassifikation (2018)
0.01
0.014189419 = product of:
0.028378839 = sum of:
0.028378839 = product of:
0.056757677 = sum of:
0.056757677 = weight(_text_:22 in 4339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056757677 = score(doc=4339,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4339, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4339)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Pages
- S.1-22
-
McLachlan, H.V.: Buchanan, Locke and Wittgenstein on classification (1981)
0.01
0.013999705 = product of:
0.02799941 = sum of:
0.02799941 = product of:
0.05599882 = sum of:
0.05599882 = weight(_text_:library in 1781) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05599882 = score(doc=1781,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 1781, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1781)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Footnote
- Rezensionsbeitrag zu Buchanan, B.: Theory of library classification
-
Ranganathan, S.R.: Library classification as a discipline (1957)
0.01
0.013999705 = product of:
0.02799941 = sum of:
0.02799941 = product of:
0.05599882 = sum of:
0.05599882 = weight(_text_:library in 564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05599882 = score(doc=564,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 564, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=564)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Gopinath, M.A.: Paradigms, paradigm shifts and classification (1999)
0.01
0.013999705 = product of:
0.02799941 = sum of:
0.02799941 = product of:
0.05599882 = sum of:
0.05599882 = weight(_text_:library in 6152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05599882 = score(doc=6152,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.052364815 = queryNorm
0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 6152, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6152)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Library science with a slant to documentation and information studies. 36(1999) no.2, S.73-77
