Search (761 results, page 1 of 39)

0.11849305 = product of:
  0.2369861 = sum of:
    0.2369861 = sum of:
      0.15362337 = weight(_text_:report in 6224) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.15362337 = score(doc=6224,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.6302661 = fieldWeight in 6224, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6224)
      0.083362736 = weight(_text_:22 in 6224) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.083362736 = score(doc=6224,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6224, 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=6224)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 1.2012 13:17:00

0.09986856 = sum of:
  0.06786369 = product of:
    0.20359105 = sum of:
      0.20359105 = weight(_text_:3a in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.20359105 = score(doc=4997,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.4347 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = 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)
  0.03200487 = product of:
    0.06400974 = sum of:
      0.06400974 = weight(_text_:report in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06400974 = score(doc=4997,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.26261088 = fieldWeight in 4997, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4997)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

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.

Series

Technical report; # DISI-10-050

0.08143642 = product of:
  0.16287284 = sum of:
    0.16287284 = product of:
      0.4886185 = sum of:
        0.4886185 = weight(_text_:3a in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.4886185 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4347 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05127382 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

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

0.06912094 = product of:
  0.13824189 = sum of:
    0.13824189 = sum of:
      0.08961363 = weight(_text_:report in 1465) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08961363 = score(doc=1465,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.36765522 = fieldWeight in 1465, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1465)
      0.048628263 = weight(_text_:22 in 1465) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048628263 = score(doc=1465,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1465, 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=1465)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

"Explore" is a user task introduced in the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) final report. Through various case scenarios, the authors discuss how structured data, presented based on Linked Data principles and using knowledge organisation systems (KOS) as the backbone, extend the explore task within and beyond subject authority data.

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

0.06912094 = product of:
  0.13824189 = sum of:
    0.13824189 = sum of:
      0.08961363 = weight(_text_:report in 2592) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08961363 = score(doc=2592,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.36765522 = fieldWeight in 2592, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2592)
      0.048628263 = weight(_text_:22 in 2592) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048628263 = score(doc=2592,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2592, 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=2592)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In June 2009, the Association for Library Collections and Technical Services Heads of Technical Services in Large Research Libraries Interest Group established the Task Force on Cost/Value Assessment of Bibliographic Control to address recommendation 5.1.1.1 of On the Record: Report of the Library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control, which focused on developing measures for costs, benefits, and value of bibliographic control. This paper outlines results of that task force's efforts to develop and articulate metrics for evaluating the cost and value of cataloging activities specifically, and offers some next steps that the community could take to further the profession's collective understanding of the costs and values associated with bibliographic control.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.06787902 = product of:
  0.13575804 = sum of:
    0.13575804 = sum of:
      0.076811686 = weight(_text_:report in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.076811686 = score(doc=1967,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.31513304 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
      0.05894636 = weight(_text_:22 in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05894636 = score(doc=1967,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper reports on the second part of an initiative of the authors on researching classification systems with the conceptual model defined by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) final report. In an earlier study, the authors explored whether the FRSAD conceptual model could be extended beyond subject authority data to model classification data. The focus of the current study is to determine if classification data modeled using FRSAD can be used to solve real-world discovery problems in multicultural and multilingual contexts. The paper discusses the relationships between entities (same type or different types) in the context of classification systems that involve multiple translations and /or multicultural implementations. Results of two case studies are presented in detail: (a) two instances of the DDC (DDC 22 in English, and the Swedish-English mixed translation of DDC 22), and (b) Chinese Library Classification. The use cases of conceptual models in practice are also discussed.

0.06786369 = product of:
  0.13572738 = sum of:
    0.13572738 = product of:
      0.4071821 = sum of:
        0.4071821 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.4071821 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4347 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05127382 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

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

0.059246525 = product of:
  0.11849305 = sum of:
    0.11849305 = sum of:
      0.076811686 = weight(_text_:report in 4649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.076811686 = score(doc=4649,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.31513304 = fieldWeight in 4649, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4649)
      0.041681368 = weight(_text_:22 in 4649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041681368 = score(doc=4649,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4649, 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=4649)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

More and more cultural heritage institutions publish their collections, vocabularies and metadata on the Web. The resulting Web of linked cultural data opens up exciting new possibilities for searching and browsing through these cultural heritage collections. We report on ongoing work in which we investigate the estimation of relevance in this Web of Culture. We study existing measures of semantic distance and how they apply to two use cases. The use cases relate to the structured, multilingual and multimodal nature of the Culture Web. We distinguish between measures using the Web, such as Google distance and PMI, and measures using the Linked Data Web, i.e. the semantic structure of metadata vocabularies. We perform a small study in which we compare these semantic distance measures to human judgements of relevance. Although it is too early to draw any definitive conclusions, the study provides new insights into the applicability of semantic distance measures to the Web of Culture, and clear starting points for further research.

Date

26.12.2011 13:40:22

0.05656585 = product of:
  0.1131317 = sum of:
    0.1131317 = sum of:
      0.06400974 = weight(_text_:report in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06400974 = score(doc=1962,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.26261088 = fieldWeight in 1962, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1962)
      0.049121965 = weight(_text_:22 in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049121965 = score(doc=1962,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1962, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1962)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article reports on the second part of an initiative of the authors on researching classification systems with the conceptual model defined by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) final report. In an earlier study, the authors explored whether the FRSAD conceptual model could be extended beyond subject authority data to model classification data. The focus of the current study is to determine if classification data modeled using FRSAD can be used to solve real-world discovery problems in multicultural and multilingual contexts. The article discusses the relationships between entities (same type or different types) in the context of classification systems that involve multiple translations and/or multicultural implementations. Results of two case studies are presented in detail: (a) two instances of the Dewey Decimal Classification [DDC] (DDC 22 in English, and the Swedish-English mixed translation of DDC 22), and (b) Chinese Library Classification. The use cases of conceptual models in practice are also discussed.

0.049372107 = product of:
  0.09874421 = sum of:
    0.09874421 = sum of:
      0.06400974 = weight(_text_:report in 3931) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06400974 = score(doc=3931,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.26261088 = fieldWeight in 3931, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3931)
      0.034734476 = weight(_text_:22 in 3931) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034734476 = score(doc=3931,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3931, 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=3931)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

47 Jahre ist es her, dass die Berater des US-amerikanischen Präsidenten Kennedy, in ihrem Bericht "Science, Government and Information" die Empfehlung aussprachen, in jedem Forscherteam gleichberechtigt "research scientists" und "information scientists" zusammen zu spannen, eine Forderung, die heute wieder neu gestellt werden muss. Sowohl die Deutsche Gesellschaft für Dokumentation (DGD) als auch das Zentralinstitut für Information und Dokumentation (ZIID) ließen diesen sogenannten Weinberg Report seinerzeit ins Deutsche übersetzen. Die Dokumentationsbewegung in ganz Deutschland erhielt politischen Rückenwind. Ein Jahr zuvor, am 16. und 17. November 1962, fand auf Initiative des Leiters des Instituts für Dokumentation und Patentwesen der Hochschule für Elektrotechnik, Ilmenau, Prof. Dr. Felix Weber, in Ilmenau ein Kolloquium "Dokumentation/ Information" statt. Diese Veranstaltung bildete den gemeinsame Ursprung von zwei Veranstaltungsreihen, die es bis in die Gegenwart gibt: Das Internationale Kolloquium zur Praxis der Informationsvermittlung, kurz "Oberhofer Kolloquium" sowie das "Kolloquium der TU Ilmenau über Patentinformation und gewerblichen Rechtsschutz", kurz "PATINFO". Das "Oberhofer Kolloquium" mit dem Thema "Recherche im Google-Zeitalter - vollständig und präzise?! Die Notwendigkeit von Informationskompetenz" fand vom 22. bis 24. April zum 25. Mal statt. Etwa hundert ehemalige, aktive und künftige praktisch und wissenschaftlich Tätige aus dem weit gespannten Bereich der Informationsaufbereitung und -vermittlung waren der Einladung nach Barleben bei Magdeburg gefolgt.

0.049372107 = product of:
  0.09874421 = sum of:
    0.09874421 = sum of:
      0.06400974 = weight(_text_:report in 4540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06400974 = score(doc=4540,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.26261088 = fieldWeight in 4540, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4540)
      0.034734476 = weight(_text_:22 in 4540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034734476 = score(doc=4540,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4540, 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=4540)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

12. 7.2011 18:29:22

0.049372107 = product of:
  0.09874421 = sum of:
    0.09874421 = sum of:
      0.06400974 = weight(_text_:report in 4544) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06400974 = score(doc=4544,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.26261088 = fieldWeight in 4544, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4544)
      0.034734476 = weight(_text_:22 in 4544) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034734476 = score(doc=4544,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4544, 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=4544)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - People often engage in different information-seeking strategies (ISSs) within a single information-seeking episode. A critical concern for the design of information retrieval (IR) systems is how to provide support for these different behaviors in a manner which searchers can easily understand, navigate and use, as they move from one ISS to another. The purpose of this paper is to describe a dialogue structure that was implemented in an experimental IR system, in order to address this concern. Design/methodology/approach - The authors conducted a user-centered experiment to evaluate the IR systems. Participants were asked to search for information on two different task types, with four different topics per task, in both the experimental system and a baseline system emulating state-of-the-art IR systems. The authors report here the results related explicitly to the use of the experimental system's dialogue structure. Findings - For one of the task types, most participants followed the search steps as predicted in the dialogue structures, and those who did so completed the task in fewer moves. For the other task type, predicted order of moves was often not followed, but participants again used fewer moves when following the predicted order. Results demonstrate that the dialogue structures the authors designed indeed support effective human information behavior patterns in a variety of ways, and that searchers can effectively use a system which changes to support different ISSs. Originality/value - This study shows that it is both possible and beneficial, to design an IR system which can support multiple ISSs, and that such a system can be understood and used successfully.

Date

6. 4.2015 19:22:59

0.049372107 = product of:
  0.09874421 = sum of:
    0.09874421 = sum of:
      0.06400974 = weight(_text_:report in 635) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06400974 = score(doc=635,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.26261088 = fieldWeight in 635, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=635)
      0.034734476 = weight(_text_:22 in 635) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034734476 = score(doc=635,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 635, 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=635)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Despite the dissemination of modeling languages and tools for representation and construction of ontologies, their underlying methodologies can still be improved. As a consequence, ontology tools can be enhanced accordingly, in order to support users through the ontology construction process. This paper proposes suggestions for ontology tools' improvement based on a case study within the domain of bioinformatics, applying a reuse method ology. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were carried out on a subset of 28 terms of Gene Ontology on a semi-automatic alignment with other biomedical ontologies. As a result, a report is presented containing suggestions for enhancing ontology reuse tools, which is a product derived from difficulties that we had in reusing a set of OBO ontologies. For the reuse process, a set of steps closely related to those of Pinto and Martin's methodology was used. In each step, it was observed that the experiment would have been significantly improved if ontology manipulation tools had provided certain features. Accordingly, problematic aspects in ontology tools are presented and suggestions are made aiming at getting better results in ontology reuse.

Date

22. 2.2013 12:03:53

0.049372107 = product of:
  0.09874421 = sum of:
    0.09874421 = sum of:
      0.06400974 = weight(_text_:report in 660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06400974 = score(doc=660,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.26261088 = fieldWeight in 660, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=660)
      0.034734476 = weight(_text_:22 in 660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034734476 = score(doc=660,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 660, 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=660)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Several independent authors reported a high share of uncited publications, which include those produced by top scientists. This share was repeatedly reported to exceed 10% of the total papers produced, without any explanation of this phenomenon and the lack of difference in uncitedness between average and successful researchers. In this report, we analyze the uncitedness among two independent groups of highly visible scientists (mathematicians represented by Fields medalists, and researchers in physiology or medicine represented by Nobel Prize laureates in the respective field). Analysis of both groups led to the identical conclusion: over 90% of the uncited database records of highly visible scientists can be explained by the inclusion of editorial materials progress reports presented at international meetings (meeting abstracts), discussion items (letters to the editor, discussion), personalia (biographic items), and by errors of omission and commission of the Web of Science (WoS) database and of the citing documents. Only a marginal amount of original articles and reviews were found to be uncited (0.9 and 0.3%, respectively), which is in strong contrast with the previously reported data, which never addressed the document types among the uncited records.

Date

22. 3.2013 19:21:46

0.049372107 = product of:
  0.09874421 = sum of:
    0.09874421 = sum of:
      0.06400974 = weight(_text_:report in 670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06400974 = score(doc=670,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.26261088 = fieldWeight in 670, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=670)
      0.034734476 = weight(_text_:22 in 670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034734476 = score(doc=670,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 670, 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=670)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Since the invention of sound reproduction in the late 19th century, studio practices in musical recording evolved in parallel with technological improvements. Recently, digital technology and Internet file sharing led to the delocalization of professional recording studios and the decline of traditional record companies. A direct consequence of this new paradigm is that studio professions found themselves in a transitional phase, needing to be reinvented. To understand the scope of these recent technological advances, we first offer an overview of musical recording culture and history and show how studio recordings became a sophisticated form of musical artwork that differed from concert representations. We then trace the economic evolution of the recording industry through technological advances and present positive and negative impacts of the decline of the traditional business model on studio practices and professions. Finally, we report findings from interviews with six world-renowned record producers reflecting on their recording approaches, the impact of recent technological advances on their careers, and the future of their profession. Interviewees appreciate working on a wider variety of projects than they have in the past, but they all discuss trade-offs between artistic expectations and budget constraints in the current paradigm. Our investigations converge to show that studio professionals have adjusted their working settings to the new economic situation, although they still rely on the same aesthetic approaches as in the traditional business model to produce musical recordings.

Date

22. 3.2013 19:47:38

0.049372107 = product of:
  0.09874421 = sum of:
    0.09874421 = sum of:
      0.06400974 = weight(_text_:report in 1374) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06400974 = score(doc=1374,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.26261088 = fieldWeight in 1374, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1374)
      0.034734476 = weight(_text_:22 in 1374) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034734476 = score(doc=1374,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1374, 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=1374)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper presents the final phase of a research project that aims to develop a bilingual taxonomy (English and French) for the indexing of ordinary digital images. The objective of this last stage was to ask a representative sample of image searchers to complete retrieval tasks of images indexed using the new taxonomy TIIARA to measure its degree of effectiveness and efficiency. During this experiment, a sample of 60 participants were asked to indicate where in the taxonomic structure they thought they would find each one of the 30 images shown. Respondents also completed a questionnaire intended to obtain their general opinion on TIIARA and to report any difficulties encountered during the retrieval process. The quantitative data was analyzed according to statistical methods, while the content of the open-ended questions was analyzed and coded to identify emergent themes. The findings of this ultimate phase of the research project indicated that, despite the fact that some categories still need further refining, TIIARA already constitutes a successful tool that provides access to ordinary images. Furthermore, the bilingual taxonomy constitutes a definite benefit for image searchers who are not very familiar with images indexed in English, which is still the dominant language of the Web.

Date

3. 9.2014 19:22:07

0.049372107 = product of:
  0.09874421 = sum of:
    0.09874421 = sum of:
      0.06400974 = weight(_text_:report in 1627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06400974 = score(doc=1627,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.26261088 = fieldWeight in 1627, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1627)
      0.034734476 = weight(_text_:22 in 1627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034734476 = score(doc=1627,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1627, 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=1627)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to design a watcher-based crawler (WBC) that has the ability of crawling static and dynamic web sites, and can download only the updated and newly added web pages. Design/methodology/approach In the proposed WBC crawler, a watcher file, which can be uploaded to the web sites servers, prepares a report that contains the addresses of the updated and the newly added web pages. In addition, the WBC is split into five units, where each unit is responsible for performing a specific crawling process. Findings Several experiments have been conducted and it has been observed that the proposed WBC increases the number of uniquely visited static and dynamic web sites as compared with the existing crawling techniques. In addition, the proposed watcher file not only allows the crawlers to visit the updated and newly web pages, but also solves the crawlers overlapping and communication problems. Originality/value The proposed WBC performs all crawling processes in the sense that it detects all updated and newly added pages automatically without any human explicit intervention or downloading the entire web sites.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.049372107 = product of:
  0.09874421 = sum of:
    0.09874421 = sum of:
      0.06400974 = weight(_text_:report in 2593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06400974 = score(doc=2593,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.26261088 = fieldWeight in 2593, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2593)
      0.034734476 = weight(_text_:22 in 2593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034734476 = score(doc=2593,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2593, 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=2593)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose The four major Subject Repositories (SRs), arXiv, Research Papers in Economics (RePEc), Social Science Research Network (SSRN) and PubMed Central (PMC), are all important within their disciplines but no previous study has systematically compared how often they are cited in academic publications. In response, the purpose of this paper is to report an analysis of citations to SRs from Scopus publications, 2000-2013. Design/methodology/approach Scopus searches were used to count the number of documents citing the four SRs in each year. A random sample of 384 documents citing the four SRs was then visited to investigate the nature of the citations. Findings Each SR was most cited within its own subject area but attracted substantial citations from other subject areas, suggesting that they are open to interdisciplinary uses. The proportion of documents citing each SR is continuing to increase rapidly, and the SRs all seem to attract substantial numbers of citations from more than one discipline. Research limitations/implications Scopus does not cover all publications, and most citations to documents found in the four SRs presumably cite the published version, when one exists, rather than the repository version. Practical implications SRs are continuing to grow and do not seem to be threatened by institutional repositories and so research managers should encourage their continued use within their core disciplines, including for research that aims at an audience in other disciplines. Originality/value This is the first simultaneous analysis of Scopus citations to the four most popular SRs.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.049372107 = product of:
  0.09874421 = sum of:
    0.09874421 = sum of:
      0.06400974 = weight(_text_:report in 3364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06400974 = score(doc=3364,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.26261088 = fieldWeight in 3364, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3364)
      0.034734476 = weight(_text_:22 in 3364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034734476 = score(doc=3364,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05127382 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3364, 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=3364)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine participation in online social platforms consisting of information exchange, social network interactions, and political deliberation. Despite the proven benefits of online participation, the majority of internet users read social media data but do not directly contribute, a phenomenon called lurking. Design/methodology/approach A survey was administered electronically to 507 participants and consisted of ten sections in a questionnaire to gather data on the relationship between online participation and the following variables: anonymity, social value orientation, motivations, and participation in offline activities, as well as the internet's political influence and personality traits. Findings Findings show that users with high levels of participation also identify themselves, report higher levels of extroversion, openness, and activity outside the internet, the motivations being an intermediary variable in the relationship between the variables value. Originality/value The study shows that participation in online social platforms is not only related to personality traits, but they are impacted by the nature of the motivations that drive them to participate in the particular social platform, as well as by the interest toward the specific topic, or the type or nature of the social group with whom they are communicating.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.04750458 = product of:
  0.09500916 = sum of:
    0.09500916 = product of:
      0.28502747 = sum of:
        0.28502747 = weight(_text_:3a in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.28502747 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4347 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05127382 = queryNorm
            0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 5955, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5955)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: Philosophisch-ethische Rezensionen vom 09.11.2019 (Jürgen Czogalla), Unter: https://philosophisch-ethische-rezensionen.de/rezension/Goedert1.html. In: B.I.T. online 23(2020) H.3, S.345-347 (W. Sühl-Strohmenger) [Unter: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.b-i-t-online.de%2Fheft%2F2020-03-rezensionen.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0iY3f_zNcvEjeZ6inHVnOK]. In: Open Password Nr. 805 vom 14.08.2020 (H.-C. Hobohm) [Unter: https://www.password-online.de/?mailpoet_router&endpoint=view_in_browser&action=view&data=WzE0MywiOGI3NjZkZmNkZjQ1IiwwLDAsMTMxLDFd].