Search (87 results, page 1 of 5)

0.12851511 = product of:
  0.3855453 = sum of:
    0.3855453 = weight(_text_:me in 6474) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.3855453 = score(doc=6474,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3430384 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.2660704 = idf(docFreq=83, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047210995 = queryNorm
        1.1239129 = fieldWeight in 6474, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.2660704 = idf(docFreq=83, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6474)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.07172006 = product of:
  0.107580096 = sum of:
    0.09638633 = weight(_text_:me in 1429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09638633 = score(doc=1429,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3430384 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.2660704 = idf(docFreq=83, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047210995 = queryNorm
        0.28097823 = fieldWeight in 1429, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.2660704 = idf(docFreq=83, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1429)
    0.011193767 = product of:
      0.022387534 = sum of:
        0.022387534 = weight(_text_:22 in 1429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022387534 = score(doc=1429,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16532487 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047210995 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 1429, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1429)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Pauline Atherton Cochrane has been contributing to library and information science for fifty years. Think of it-from mid-century to the millennium, from ENIAC (practically) to Internet 11 (almost here). What a time to be in our field! Her work an indexing, subject access, and the user-oriented approach had immediate and sustained impact, and she continues to be one of our most heavily cited authors (see, JASIS, 49[4], 327-55) and most beloved personages. This introduction includes a few words about my own experiences with Pauline as well as a short summary of the contributions that make up this tribute. A review of the curriculum vita provided at the end of this publication Shows that Pauline Cochrane has been involved in a wide variety of work. As Marcia Bates points out in her note (See below), Pauline was (and is) a role model, but I will always think of her as simply the best teacher 1 ever had. In 1997, I entered the University of Illinois Graduate School of Library and Information Science as a returning mid-life student; my previous doctorate had not led to a full-time job and I was re-tooling. I was not sure what 1 would find in library school, and the introductory course attended by more than 100 students from widely varied backgrounds had not yet convinced me I was in the right place. Then, one day, Pauline gave a guest lecture an the digital library in my introductory class. I still remember it. She put up some notes-a few words clustered an the blackboard with some circles and directional arrows-and then she gave a free, seemingly extemporaneous, but riveting narrative. She set out a vision for ideal information exchange in the digital environment but noted a host of practical concerns, issues, and potential problems that required (demanded!) continued human intervention. The lecture brought that class and the entire semester's work into focus; it created tremendous excitement for the future of librarianship. 1 saw that librarians and libraries would play an active role. I was in the right place.

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

0.04635507 = product of:
  0.1390652 = sum of:
    0.1390652 = product of:
      0.2781304 = sum of:
        0.2781304 = weight(_text_:plus in 806) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.2781304 = score(doc=806,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.29135957 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047210995 = queryNorm
            0.954595 = fieldWeight in 806, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=806)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.045879625 = product of:
  0.13763887 = sum of:
    0.13763887 = product of:
      0.27527773 = sum of:
        0.27527773 = weight(_text_:plus in 3725) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.27527773 = score(doc=3725,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.29135957 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047210995 = queryNorm
            0.94480413 = fieldWeight in 3725, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3725)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Reports the responses of 32 Chinese, Taiwanese, Japanese, and Korean participants to the possible extensions to an OPAC of OCLC CJK Plus. Korean and Taiwanese participants are less satisfied with the system than are Japanese and Chinese. Unfamiliarity with the CJK word division, diacritics, Romanization, and lack of local standard keyboard support were the major reasons for this dissatisfaction. More comprehensive studies of each CJK language, and more user interface studies, are needed if a better system is to emerge

Object

OCLC CJK PLus

0.04014467 = product of:
  0.12043401 = sum of:
    0.12043401 = product of:
      0.24086802 = sum of:
        0.24086802 = weight(_text_:plus in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.24086802 = score(doc=3061,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.29135957 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047210995 = queryNorm
            0.8267036 = fieldWeight in 3061, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3061)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This article reports the findings of an experiment using a simulated title pages, author surnames, and title words, one-third of which were selected by each of the 3 authors, to determine the frequency of one-screen displays when used to search for known items in an implied Boolean retrieval system. Searches comprising surname plus one significant title word produced one-screen displays 78% of time; surname plus 2 words 97% of the time; and surname plus 3 words 98,5%. Three quarters of the significant words were nouns

0.037460554 = product of:
  0.11238166 = sum of:
    0.11238166 = product of:
      0.22476332 = sum of:
        0.22476332 = weight(_text_:plus in 3726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.22476332 = score(doc=3726,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.29135957 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047210995 = queryNorm
            0.7714293 = fieldWeight in 3726, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3726)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Outlines the problems of automated cataloguing systems for Chinese, Japanese and Korean (CJK) language materials. Describes the systems developed by the Research Library Information Network and OCLC in the 1980s, and the second generation system, CJK Plus, released by OCLC in 1993. Outlines how the latter system is being used by the East Asiatic Library at University of Colorado at Boulder

Object

OCLC CJK Plus

0.037460554 = product of:
  0.11238166 = sum of:
    0.11238166 = product of:
      0.22476332 = sum of:
        0.22476332 = weight(_text_:plus in 4296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.22476332 = score(doc=4296,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.29135957 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047210995 = queryNorm
            0.7714293 = fieldWeight in 4296, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4296)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This experiment searches an online library catalog employing author surnames, plus title words of books in citations of 8 scholarly works whose authors selected the title words used as being recallable. Searches comprising surname together with two recallable title words, or one if only one was available, yielded a single-screen miniature catalog (minicat) 99.0% of the time

0.033110764 = product of:
  0.09933229 = sum of:
    0.09933229 = product of:
      0.19866458 = sum of:
        0.19866458 = weight(_text_:plus in 3841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19866458 = score(doc=3841,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.29135957 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047210995 = queryNorm
            0.6818536 = fieldWeight in 3841, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3841)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Describes ILLINET Online Plus: the extended OPAC developed by Illinois Univ. at Urbana-Champaign Library. Describes in detail the component of the information workstation designed to provide improved access to local periodical index databases (the BRS/SEARCH interface)

0.032777987 = product of:
  0.098333955 = sum of:
    0.098333955 = product of:
      0.19666791 = sum of:
        0.19666791 = weight(_text_:plus in 6932) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19666791 = score(doc=6932,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.29135957 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047210995 = queryNorm
            0.67500067 = fieldWeight in 6932, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6932)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This experiment explores the effectiveness of retrieving the listing of a known-item book from the 3.6 million entry onine catalog at the library of the University of Michigan using various combinations of author's name plus first and last title words. The principal finding was that 98.9% of the time a 1 to 20 line miniature catalog (minicat) was displayed that contained either the entry sought or a not-in-database (NID) reply when the search comprised all three words.

0.032128777 = product of:
  0.09638633 = sum of:
    0.09638633 = weight(_text_:me in 1172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09638633 = score(doc=1172,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3430384 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.2660704 = idf(docFreq=83, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047210995 = queryNorm
        0.28097823 = fieldWeight in 1172, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.2660704 = idf(docFreq=83, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1172)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The impetus for this essay is the library community's uncertainty regarding the present and future direction of the library catalog in the era of Google and mass digitization projects. The uncertainty is evident at the highest levels. Deanna Marcum, Associate Librarian for Library Services at the Library of Congress (LC), is struck by undergraduate students who favor digital resources over the online library catalog because such resources are available at anytime and from anywhere (Marcum, 2006). She suggests that "the detailed attention that we have been paying to descriptive cataloging may no longer be justified ... retooled catalogers could give more time to authority control, subject analysis, [and] resource identification and evaluation" (Marcum, 2006, 8). In an abrupt about-face, LC terminated series added entries in cataloging records, one of the few subject-rich fields in such records (Cataloging Policy and Support Office, 2006). Mann (2006b) and Schniderman (2006) cite evidence of LC's prevailing viewpoint in favor of simplifying cataloging at the expense of subject cataloging. LC commissioned Karen Calhoun (2006) to prepare a report on "revitalizing" the online library catalog. Calhoun's directive is clear: divert resources from cataloging mass-produced formats (e.g., books) to cataloging the unique primary sources (e.g., archives, special collections, teaching objects, research by-products). She sums up her rationale for such a directive, "The existing local catalog's market position has eroded to the point where there is real concern for its ability to weather the competition for information seekers' attention" (p. 10). At the University of California Libraries (2005), a task force's recommendations parallel those in Calhoun report especially regarding the elimination of subject headings in favor of automatically generated metadata. Contemplating these events prompted me to revisit the glorious past of the online library catalog. For a decade and a half beginning in the early 1980s, the online library catalog was the jewel in the crown when people eagerly queued at its terminals to find information written by the world's experts. I despair how eagerly people now embrace Google because of the suspect provenance of the information Google retrieves. Long ago, we could have added more value to the online library catalog but the only thing we changed was the catalog's medium. Our failure to act back then cost the online catalog the crown. Now that the era of mass digitization has begun, we have a second chance at redesigning the online library catalog, getting it right, coaxing back old users, and attracting new ones. Let's revisit the past, reconsidering missed opportunities, reassessing their merits, combining them with new directions, making bold decisions and acting decisively on them.

0.027538948 = product of:
  0.08261684 = sum of:
    0.08261684 = weight(_text_:me in 1558) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08261684 = score(doc=1558,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3430384 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.2660704 = idf(docFreq=83, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047210995 = queryNorm
        0.24083847 = fieldWeight in 1558, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.2660704 = idf(docFreq=83, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1558)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

"MOST INTEGRATED library systems, as they are currently configured and used, should be removed from public view. Before I say why, let me be clean that I think the integrated library system serves a very important, albeit limited, role. An integrated library system should serve as a key piece of the infrastructure of a library, handling such tasks as ma terials acquisition, cataloging (including holdings, of course), and circulation. The integrated library system should be a complete and accurate recording of a local library's holdings. It should not be presented to users as the primary system for locating information. It fails badly at that important job. - Lack of content- The central problem of almost any library catalog system is that it typically includes only information about the books and journals held by a parficular library. Most do not provide access to joumal article indexes, web search engines, or even selective web directories like the Librarians' Index to the Internet. If they do offen such access, it is only via links to these services. The library catalog is far from onestop shopping for information. Although we acknowledge that fact to each other, we still treat it as if it were the best place in the universe to begin a search. Most of us give the catalog a place of great prominente an our web pages. But Information for each book is limited to the author, title, and a few subject headings. Seldom can book reviews, jacket summaries, recommendations, or tables of contents be found-or anything at all to help users determine if they want the material. - Lack of coverage - Most catalogs do not allow patrons to discover even all the books that are available to them. If you're lucky, your catalog may cover the collections of those libraries with which you have close ties-such as a regional network. But that leaves out all those items that could be requested via interlibrary loan. As Steve Coffman pointed out in his "Building Earth's Largest Library" article, we must show our users the universe that is open to them, highlight the items most accessible, and provide an estimate of how long it would take to obtain other items. - Inability to increase coverage - Despite some well-meaning attempts to smash everything of interest into the library catalog, the fact remains that most integrated library systems expect MARC records and MARC records only. This means that whatever we want to put into the catalog must be described using MARC and AACR2 (see "Marc Must Die," LJ 10/15/02, p. 26ff.). This is a barrier to dramatically increasing the scope of a catalog system, even if we decided to do it. How would you, for example, use the Open Archives Initiative Harvesting Protocol to crawl the bibliographic records of remote repositories and make them searchable within your library catalog? It can't be dope, and it shouldn't. The library catalog should be a record of a given library's holdings. Period.

0.02648861 = product of:
  0.07946583 = sum of:
    0.07946583 = product of:
      0.15893166 = sum of:
        0.15893166 = weight(_text_:plus in 2160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15893166 = score(doc=2160,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.29135957 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047210995 = queryNorm
            0.5454829 = fieldWeight in 2160, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2160)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Arizona State University installed the Tandem-based CARL integrated library system in 1987. This software supports all the traditional functions of an integrated system plus the ability to act as a platform for creating or loading multiple databases. The functionality of CARL software for this purpose is described, a brief rundown of databases loaded at ASU is provided, and the criteria for selecting databases is given. Public response and library instruction issues for locally loaded databases are briefly examined as is the future of the electronic library

0.02648861 = product of:
  0.07946583 = sum of:
    0.07946583 = product of:
      0.15893166 = sum of:
        0.15893166 = weight(_text_:plus in 3826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15893166 = score(doc=3826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.29135957 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047210995 = queryNorm
            0.5454829 = fieldWeight in 3826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3826)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Reports the findings of an experiment simulating use of a university OPAC by academic library users. Examines how effective are online searches by university library users employing surname plus first title word, or last title word, or first and last title words in producing miniature catalogues of i screen. The searches were known item searches for books

0.02648861 = product of:
  0.07946583 = sum of:
    0.07946583 = product of:
      0.15893166 = sum of:
        0.15893166 = weight(_text_:plus in 409) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15893166 = score(doc=409,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.29135957 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047210995 = queryNorm
            0.5454829 = fieldWeight in 409, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=409)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The academic library user demands a variety of information, but moving between the online catalogue and other databases can be difficult, confusing and cumbersome. Information services at Sunderland University, UK, has employed Pac Plus for Windows, an Ameritech Library Services online public catalogue product, to provide an alternative to, but not replace, the existing front end of the public catalogue, and to facilitate the provision of access to full text examination papers, module guides and selected journal content papers. Looks at the scanning and set up implications, advantages, user reactions and future developments

0.023177534 = product of:
  0.0695326 = sum of:
    0.0695326 = product of:
      0.1390652 = sum of:
        0.1390652 = weight(_text_:plus in 637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1390652 = score(doc=637,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.29135957 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047210995 = queryNorm
            0.4772975 = fieldWeight in 637, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=637)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This article reprots the findings of an experiment employing a simulated scholarly use of an OPAC to determine the frequency of one-screen displays when a scholar searches for a known-item with so-called 'keywords' in an implied boolean system. The experiment revealed that a 'keyword' search formula comprising surname plus first and last title words produced a single screen 92.8% of the time, thereby reducing the failure of traditional title searching to produce single screens by nearly one half; such a formula also enables a scholar to search successfully with abbreviated, unsearchable bibliographic citations. Additional research should be carried out, for if it is further demonstrated that replacing traditional bibliographic catalog entries with transcribed title pages provides an improved known-item OPAC, users would benefit and libraries would enjoy huge savings

0.019866457 = product of:
  0.05959937 = sum of:
    0.05959937 = product of:
      0.11919874 = sum of:
        0.11919874 = weight(_text_:plus in 7327) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11919874 = score(doc=7327,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.29135957 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047210995 = queryNorm
            0.40911216 = fieldWeight in 7327, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7327)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Describes the design and continuing development of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library Information Workstation, which provides the primary, in-library user acces to ILLINET Online Plus, the library's extended OPAC system. Briefly describes the automated library information resources and information processing environment as they have influenced the design and development of the Library Information Workstation. Discusses its philosophy and approach in the context of relevant information access issues and user needs and requirements. Features of the current Library Information Workstation implementation are then described using illustrations focused particularly on integrated access to local (resident on individual workstations) information fields and an integrated end user interface for bibliographic database searching. Ongoing development plans also are discussed briefly

0.01705717 = product of:
  0.051171508 = sum of:
    0.051171508 = product of:
      0.102343015 = sum of:
        0.102343015 = weight(_text_:22 in 7403) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.102343015 = score(doc=7403,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16532487 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047210995 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 7403, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7403)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Program. 22(1988), S.21-31

0.01705717 = product of:
  0.051171508 = sum of:
    0.051171508 = product of:
      0.102343015 = sum of:
        0.102343015 = weight(_text_:22 in 7483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.102343015 = score(doc=7483,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16532487 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047210995 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 7483, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7483)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Program. 22(1988), S.133-142

0.01507655 = product of:
  0.045229647 = sum of:
    0.045229647 = product of:
      0.090459295 = sum of:
        0.090459295 = weight(_text_:22 in 4368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.090459295 = score(doc=4368,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16532487 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047210995 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 4368, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4368)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 1.2000 19:36:10
22. 1.2000 19:41:58

0.014925024 = product of:
  0.04477507 = sum of:
    0.04477507 = product of:
      0.08955014 = sum of:
        0.08955014 = weight(_text_:22 in 3628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08955014 = score(doc=3628,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16532487 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047210995 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3628, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3628)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Bulletin des bibliothèques de France. 34(1989) no.1, S.22-47