Search (19 results, page 1 of 1)

0.034802582 = product of:
  0.069605164 = sum of:
    0.014271717 = product of:
      0.057086866 = sum of:
        0.057086866 = weight(_text_:based in 5828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057086866 = score(doc=5828,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.40361002 = fieldWeight in 5828, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5828)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    0.055333447 = product of:
      0.11066689 = sum of:
        0.11066689 = weight(_text_:assessment in 5828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11066689 = score(doc=5828,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25917634 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.52102 = idf(docFreq=480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.4269946 = fieldWeight in 5828, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.52102 = idf(docFreq=480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5828)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Issues concerning the formulation and application of a model of how humans value information are examined. Formulation of a value function is based on research from modelling, value assessment, human information seeking behavior, and human decision making. The proposed function is incorporated into a computer-based fiction retrieval system and evaluated using data from nine searches. Evaluation is based on the ability of an individual's value function to discriminate among novels selected, rejected, and not considered. The results are discussed in terms of both formulation and utilization of a value function as well as the implications for extending the proposed formulation to other information seeking environments

0.021786068 = product of:
  0.043572135 = sum of:
    0.011771114 = product of:
      0.047084454 = sum of:
        0.047084454 = weight(_text_:based in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047084454 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.33289194 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    0.031801023 = product of:
      0.063602045 = sum of:
        0.063602045 = weight(_text_:22 in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.063602045 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16438834 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Date

5. 8.2006 13:22:44

0.0049940604 = product of:
  0.019976242 = sum of:
    0.019976242 = product of:
      0.079904966 = sum of:
        0.079904966 = weight(_text_:based in 5120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.079904966 = score(doc=5120,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.56493634 = fieldWeight in 5120, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5120)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.004161717 = product of:
  0.016646868 = sum of:
    0.016646868 = product of:
      0.06658747 = sum of:
        0.06658747 = weight(_text_:based in 8755) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06658747 = score(doc=8755,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.47078028 = fieldWeight in 8755, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=8755)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Cognitive systems engineering is the discipline underlying the design of computer-based information systems to support human work and endeavor. The book describes a cross-disciplinary framework for the integration of model concenpts from many different disciplines, such as engineering, psychology, cognitive science, management science, information and computer science. It is based on actual work performance in several domains

0.00411989 = product of:
  0.01647956 = sum of:
    0.01647956 = product of:
      0.06591824 = sum of:
        0.06591824 = weight(_text_:based in 3024) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06591824 = score(doc=3024,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.46604872 = fieldWeight in 3024, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3024)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.0035313342 = product of:
  0.014125337 = sum of:
    0.014125337 = product of:
      0.056501348 = sum of:
        0.056501348 = weight(_text_:based in 142) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056501348 = score(doc=142,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.39947033 = fieldWeight in 142, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=142)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.0035313342 = product of:
  0.014125337 = sum of:
    0.014125337 = product of:
      0.056501348 = sum of:
        0.056501348 = weight(_text_:based in 1044) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056501348 = score(doc=1044,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.39947033 = fieldWeight in 1044, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1044)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.0035313342 = product of:
  0.014125337 = sum of:
    0.014125337 = product of:
      0.056501348 = sum of:
        0.056501348 = weight(_text_:based in 1445) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056501348 = score(doc=1445,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.39947033 = fieldWeight in 1445, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1445)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.0035313342 = product of:
  0.014125337 = sum of:
    0.014125337 = product of:
      0.056501348 = sum of:
        0.056501348 = weight(_text_:based in 2088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056501348 = score(doc=2088,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.39947033 = fieldWeight in 2088, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2088)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.0035313342 = product of:
  0.014125337 = sum of:
    0.014125337 = product of:
      0.056501348 = sum of:
        0.056501348 = weight(_text_:based in 3088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056501348 = score(doc=3088,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.39947033 = fieldWeight in 3088, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3088)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.0035313342 = product of:
  0.014125337 = sum of:
    0.014125337 = product of:
      0.056501348 = sum of:
        0.056501348 = weight(_text_:based in 3251) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056501348 = score(doc=3251,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.39947033 = fieldWeight in 3251, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3251)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.0035313342 = product of:
  0.014125337 = sum of:
    0.014125337 = product of:
      0.056501348 = sum of:
        0.056501348 = weight(_text_:based in 5814) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056501348 = score(doc=5814,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.39947033 = fieldWeight in 5814, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5814)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.0024970302 = product of:
  0.009988121 = sum of:
    0.009988121 = product of:
      0.039952483 = sum of:
        0.039952483 = weight(_text_:based in 5838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039952483 = score(doc=5838,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.28246817 = fieldWeight in 5838, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5838)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Information retrieval and exploration of work domains through databases and integrated information systems has become increasingly important in many modern work settings (as well as in libraries). The problem space of the users is defined on occasion by the dynamically changing requirements from their tasks and goals. it is argued that IR system design should be based on an analysis of the properties of the work domain, the task situation and the user characteristics. The paper describes a general framework for IR system design that has been used in the design of a library system. A special problem identified from use of the framework in domain analysis of fiction retrieval is treated in more detail: mapping the authors' domain structures to the domain structures expressed in users' needs in indexing and representation of fiction

0.0023542228 = product of:
  0.009416891 = sum of:
    0.009416891 = product of:
      0.037667565 = sum of:
        0.037667565 = weight(_text_:based in 3842) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037667565 = score(doc=3842,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.26631355 = fieldWeight in 3842, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3842)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.0020808585 = product of:
  0.008323434 = sum of:
    0.008323434 = product of:
      0.033293735 = sum of:
        0.033293735 = weight(_text_:based in 153) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033293735 = score(doc=153,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.23539014 = fieldWeight in 153, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=153)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This paper introduces a new approach to the design of classification schemes for complex work domains to help structure the knowledge domains in databases for single users and multiple users in co-operative work. Ecological work based classification schemes are designed on the basis of an empirical analysis of the invariant structures of the work domain and of the information needs of its actors. Invariant structures of a work domain can be explicit or implicit (hidden structures). The invariant structures are identified through empirical analysis of field studies in work domains, guided by the use of a means ends abstraction hierarchy. This hierarchy provides a model for analyzing, or-ganizing and relating different levels of properties within a work domain. The resulting structure is an ecological classification scheme, comprising the different dimensions or categories of domain information that needs to be available for an actor to make a decision. Contrary to traditional classification systems which usually are designed from one particular point of view (a single discipline, paradigm or purpose), ecological classification schemes provide a transparent and structured information environment in which actors can navigate freely according to their current perspectives of work and subjective preferences

0.0020388167 = product of:
  0.008155267 = sum of:
    0.008155267 = product of:
      0.032621067 = sum of:
        0.032621067 = weight(_text_:based in 2755) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032621067 = score(doc=2755,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.2306343 = fieldWeight in 2755, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2755)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Collaborative integration of knowledge in distributed and cross-disciplinary work domains poses a number of challenges to classification, comprising: 1) how to analyze the actors' current practice of integration of knowledge and 2) how to model consistent semantic support of diverse interpretive perspectives among the actors. This paper introduces a cognitive systems engineering approach to modelling collaborative integration of knowledge in work domains. A generic means-ends model provides a theoretical foundation for mapping the territory of collaborative work. A decision task model captures the actors' distributed decision-making in integration of knowledge. The problem of collaborative integration of knowledge in a distributed web-based film collaboratory is explored through an empirical case of collaborative film indexing. The empirical study identified a lack of tools for consistent support of integration of knowledge. The means-ends model and the decision task model guided the design of a conceptual structure of the common workspace of film indexing. The paper concludes with a proposal for further work an models for integration of knowledge through ecological classification schemes. 1. Introduction Current work practice and knowledge production to an increasing degree involves actors from different disciplines, cultures and organisations. Additionally, current work practice not only relies an authoritative orderings of knowledge, but also relies an the dynamism of the actors' ongoing collaborative integration of knowledge, i.e. their shared interpretations of knowledge, exchange of perspectives and joint knowledge production. Consequently, in order to support the actors' ongoing collaborative integration of knowledge, the design of support tools, like classification schemes, must address not only the order of knowledge, but also the situational contexts where collaborative integration of knowledge occurs. This paper introduces an ecological approach to integration of knowledge across boundaries in distributed collaboratory work environments, which is founded an (a) work domain analysis (b) the development of models for collaborative integration of knowledge. The work domain analysis is based an means-ends analysis of the territory of work and the actors' information needs during decision making. The result is conceptual structures of collaborative work that can be used to create collaborative classification schemes. Previous work an design of ecological classification schemes proposed that such schemes should be based an a finegrained empirical analysis of actors' collaborative decision tasks in order to identify the knowledge produced and needed by the actors (Pejtersen & Albrechtsen, 2000).

0.0017656671 = product of:
  0.0070626684 = sum of:
    0.0070626684 = product of:
      0.028250674 = sum of:
        0.028250674 = weight(_text_:based in 3005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028250674 = score(doc=3005,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.19973516 = fieldWeight in 3005, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3005)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Work centered design of classification schemes is an emerging area of research which poses particular challenges to domain analysis and scheme construction. A key challenge in work centered design of classification schemes is the evolving semantics of work. This article introduces a work centered approach to the design of classification schemes, based an the framework of cognitive work analysis. We launch collaborative task situations as a new unit of analysis for capturing evolving semantic structures in work domains. An example case from a cognitive work analysis of three national film research archives illustrates the application of the framework for identifying actors' needs for a classification scheme to support collaborative knowledge integration. It is concluded that a main contribution of the new approach is support for empirical analysis and overall design of classification schemes that can serve as material interfaces for actors' negotiations and integration of knowledge perspectives during collaborative work.

0.0014713892 = product of:
  0.005885557 = sum of:
    0.005885557 = product of:
      0.023542227 = sum of:
        0.023542227 = weight(_text_:based in 6232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023542227 = score(doc=6232,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.16644597 = fieldWeight in 6232, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6232)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This paper describes the Book House system which is designed to support children's information retrieval in libraries as part of their education. It is a shareware program available on CD-ROM and discs, and comprises functionality for database searching as well as for the classification and storage of book information in the database. The system concept is based on an understanding of children's domain structures and their capabilities for categorization of information needs in connection with their activities in public libraries, in school libraries or in schools. These structures are visualized in the interface by using metaphors and multimedia technology. Through the use of text, images and animation, the Book House supports children - even at a very early age - to learn by doing in an enjoyable way which plays on their previous experiences with computer games. Both words and pictures can be used for searching; this makes the system suitable for all age groups. Even children who have not yet learned to read properly can by selecting pictures search for and find books they would like to have read aloud. Thus at the very beginning of their school period, they can learn to search for books on their own. For the library community itself, such a system will provide an extended service which will increase the number of children's own searches and also improve the relevance, quality and utilization of the collections in the libraries. A market research on the need for an annual indexing service for books in the Book House format is in preparation by the Danish Library Center

0.0014713892 = product of:
  0.005885557 = sum of:
    0.005885557 = product of:
      0.023542227 = sum of:
        0.023542227 = weight(_text_:based in 1300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023542227 = score(doc=1300,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04694356 = queryNorm
            0.16644597 = fieldWeight in 1300, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1300)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This paper describes a new OPAC system called The Book House and discusses its relevance as a solution to current OPAC developments. The Book House is an interactive, multimedia, online public access catalogue system designed to support casual and/or novice end-users in information retrieval. It runs on a Macintosh and is available on CD-ROM and disks in English and Danish (it can be purchased from Risø for $100). It comprises an interface and module for classifying and indexing fact and fiction books in the database called Book House Write. It uses icons, text and animation in the display interface in order to enhance the utility of the system for the general public. Both words and pictures can be used for searching, which makes the system suitable for all age groups. It plays on users' previous experiencees with computer games to support learning by doing something in an enjoyable way. A prerequisite for the design of The Book House was a new approach to cognitive analysis of retrieval in libraries. Based on the success of this approach, it is claimed that OPAC systems will only be really useful and widespread (1) when their domain and task characteristics allow supplementary information to be added to existing descriptions of book content in online card catalogues in order to match end-users' intentions and needs, and (2) when the user interface and routes to the databases are configured as an integrated and uniform set of displays which match the search strategies of users, as well as their mental capabilities and limitations