-
Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.; Blurton, A.: Obtaining information accurately and quickly : are structured abstracts more efficient? (1996)
0.02
0.01760727 = product of:
0.03521454 = sum of:
0.03521454 = product of:
0.052821808 = sum of:
0.020292813 = weight(_text_:12 in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020292813 = score(doc=7673,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.15279384 = fieldWeight in 7673, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=7673)
0.032528996 = weight(_text_:22 in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032528996 = score(doc=7673,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16815145 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 7673, 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=7673)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 6. 4.1996 12:46:16
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.5, S.349-356
-
Koltay, T.: ¬A hypertext tutorial on abstracting for library science students (1995)
0.01
0.010842999 = product of:
0.021685999 = sum of:
0.021685999 = product of:
0.06505799 = sum of:
0.06505799 = weight(_text_:22 in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06505799 = score(doc=3061,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16815145 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3061, 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=3061)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 27. 1.1996 18:22:06
-
Fraenkel, A.S.; Klein, S.T.: Information retrieval from annotated texts (1999)
0.01
0.009469979 = product of:
0.018939959 = sum of:
0.018939959 = product of:
0.056819875 = sum of:
0.056819875 = weight(_text_:12 in 4308) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056819875 = score(doc=4308,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.42782274 = fieldWeight in 4308, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4308)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 17. 1.2000 12:28:37
-
Hartley, J.: Do structured abstracts take more space? : And does it matter? (2002)
0.01
0.009469979 = product of:
0.018939959 = sum of:
0.018939959 = product of:
0.056819875 = sum of:
0.056819875 = weight(_text_:12 in 582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056819875 = score(doc=582,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.42782274 = fieldWeight in 582, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=582)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 14. 8.2005 12:33:03
-
Palais, E.S.: Abstracting for reference librarians (1988)
0.01
0.0086744 = product of:
0.0173488 = sum of:
0.0173488 = product of:
0.052046396 = sum of:
0.052046396 = weight(_text_:22 in 2832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052046396 = score(doc=2832,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16815145 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2832, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2832)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Reference librarian. 1988, no.22, S.297-308
-
Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.: Which layout do you prefer? : an analysis of readers' preferences for different typographic layouts of structured abstracts (1996)
0.01
0.0065057995 = product of:
0.013011599 = sum of:
0.013011599 = product of:
0.039034795 = sum of:
0.039034795 = weight(_text_:22 in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039034795 = score(doc=4411,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16815145 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4411, 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=4411)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.1, S.27-37
-
Ward, M.L.: ¬The future of the human indexer (1996)
0.01
0.0065057995 = product of:
0.013011599 = sum of:
0.013011599 = product of:
0.039034795 = sum of:
0.039034795 = weight(_text_:22 in 7244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039034795 = score(doc=7244,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16815145 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 7244, 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=7244)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 9. 2.1997 18:44:22
-
Wan, X.; Yang, J.; Xiao, J.: Incorporating cross-document relationships between sentences for single document summarizations (2006)
0.01
0.0065057995 = product of:
0.013011599 = sum of:
0.013011599 = product of:
0.039034795 = sum of:
0.039034795 = weight(_text_:22 in 2421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039034795 = score(doc=2421,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16815145 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2421, 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=2421)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006
-
Reischer, J.; Lottes, D.; Meier, F.; Stirner, M.: Evaluation von Summarizing-Systemen : Kommerzielle und freie Systeme im Vergleich (2010)
0.01
0.005411417 = product of:
0.010822834 = sum of:
0.010822834 = product of:
0.0324685 = sum of:
0.0324685 = weight(_text_:12 in 492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0324685 = score(doc=492,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.24447013 = fieldWeight in 492, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=492)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Information und Wissen: global, sozial und frei? Proceedings des 12. Internationalen Symposiums für Informationswissenschaft (ISI 2011) ; Hildesheim, 9. - 11. März 2011. Hrsg.: J. Griesbaum, T. Mandl u. C. Womser-Hacker
-
Spiteri, L.F.: Library and information science vs business : a comparison of approaches to abstracting (1997)
0.00
0.0047349897 = product of:
0.009469979 = sum of:
0.009469979 = product of:
0.028409937 = sum of:
0.028409937 = weight(_text_:12 in 3699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028409937 = score(doc=3699,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.21391137 = fieldWeight in 3699, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3699)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 23. 5.1999 12:54:47
-
Bowman, J.H.: Annotation: a lost art in cataloguing (2007)
0.00
0.0047349897 = product of:
0.009469979 = sum of:
0.009469979 = product of:
0.028409937 = sum of:
0.028409937 = weight(_text_:12 in 255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028409937 = score(doc=255,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.21391137 = fieldWeight in 255, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=255)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 5. 6.2001 12:25:05
-
Cross, C.; Oppenheim, C.: ¬A genre analysis of scientific abstracts (2006)
0.00
0.0046864245 = product of:
0.009372849 = sum of:
0.009372849 = product of:
0.028118547 = sum of:
0.028118547 = weight(_text_:12 in 5603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028118547 = score(doc=5603,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.21171735 = fieldWeight in 5603, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5603)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of the paper is to analyse the structure of a small number of abstracts that have appeared in the CABI database over a number of years, during which time the authorship of the abstracts changed from CABI editorial staff to journal article authors themselves. This paper reports a study of the semantic organisation and thematic structure of 12 abstracts from the field of protozoology in an effort to discover whether these abstracts followed generally agreed abstracting guidelines. Design/methodology/approach - The method adopted was a move analysis of the text of the abstracts. This move analysis revealed a five-move pattern: move 1 situates the research within the scientific community; move 2 introduces the research by either describing the main features of the research or presenting its purpose; move 3 describes the methodology; move 4 states the results; and move 5 draws conclusions or suggests practical applications. Findings - Thematic analysis shows that scientific abstract authors thematise their subject by referring to the discourse domain or the "real" world. Not all of the abstracts succeeded in following the guideline advice. However, there was general consistency regarding semantic organisation and thematic structure. Research limitations/implications - The research limitations were the small number of abstracts examined, from just one subject domain. Practical limitations - The practical implications are the need for abstracting services to be clearer and more prescriptive regarding how they want abstracts to be structured as the lack of formal training in abstract writing increases the risk of subjectivity and verbosity and reduces clarity in scientific abstracts. Another implication of the research are that abstracting and indexing services must ensure that they maintain abstract quality if they introduce policies of accepting author abstracts. This is important as there is probably little formal training in abstract writing for science students at present. Recommendations for further research are made. Originality/value - This paper reports a study of the semantic organisation and thematic structure of 12 abstracts from the field of protozoology.
- Date
- 1. 8.2006 12:00:26
-
Montesi, M.; Urdiciain, B.G.: Recent linguistic research into author abstracts : its value for information science (2005)
0.00
0.0040585627 = product of:
0.008117125 = sum of:
0.008117125 = product of:
0.024351375 = sum of:
0.024351375 = weight(_text_:12 in 4823) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024351375 = score(doc=4823,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.1833526 = fieldWeight in 4823, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4823)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 9. 1.2006 12:32:16
-
Spina, D.; Trippas, J.R.; Cavedon, L.; Sanderson, M.: Extracting audio summaries to support effective spoken document search (2017)
0.00
0.0040585627 = product of:
0.008117125 = sum of:
0.008117125 = product of:
0.024351375 = sum of:
0.024351375 = weight(_text_:12 in 3788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024351375 = score(doc=3788,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.1833526 = fieldWeight in 3788, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3788)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 16.11.2017 14:09:12
-
Montesi, M.; Mackenzie Owen, J.: Revision of author abstracts : how it is carried out by LISA editors (2007)
0.00
0.0033821356 = product of:
0.0067642713 = sum of:
0.0067642713 = product of:
0.020292813 = sum of:
0.020292813 = weight(_text_:12 in 807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020292813 = score(doc=807,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.15279384 = fieldWeight in 807, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=807)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 12. 3.2001 11:34:20
-
Sauperl, A.; Klasinc, J.; Luzar, S.: Components of abstracts : logical structure of scholarly abstracts in pharmacology, sociology, and linguistics and literature (2008)
0.00
0.0033821356 = product of:
0.0067642713 = sum of:
0.0067642713 = product of:
0.020292813 = sum of:
0.020292813 = weight(_text_:12 in 1961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020292813 = score(doc=1961,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.15279384 = fieldWeight in 1961, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1961)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 12. 7.2008 18:23:36
-
Hartley, J.; Betts, L.: Revising and polishing a structured abstract : is it worth the time and effort? (2008)
0.00
0.0033821356 = product of:
0.0067642713 = sum of:
0.0067642713 = product of:
0.020292813 = sum of:
0.020292813 = weight(_text_:12 in 2362) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020292813 = score(doc=2362,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.15279384 = fieldWeight in 2362, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2362)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.12, S.1870-1877
-
Ou, S.; Khoo, C.; Goh, D.H.; Heng, H.-Y.: Automatic discourse parsing of sociology dissertation abstracts as sentence categorization (2004)
0.00
0.0027057086 = product of:
0.005411417 = sum of:
0.005411417 = product of:
0.01623425 = sum of:
0.01623425 = weight(_text_:12 in 2676) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01623425 = score(doc=2676,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.12223507 = fieldWeight in 2676, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2676)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 3. 8.2006 12:45:51
-
Kuhlen, R.: Informationsaufbereitung III : Referieren (Abstracts - Abstracting - Grundlagen) (2004)
0.00
0.0027057086 = product of:
0.005411417 = sum of:
0.005411417 = product of:
0.01623425 = sum of:
0.01623425 = weight(_text_:12 in 2917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01623425 = score(doc=2917,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.12223507 = fieldWeight in 2917, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2917)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Was ein Abstract (im Folgenden synonym mit Referat oder Kurzreferat gebraucht) ist, legt das American National Standards Institute in einer Weise fest, die sicherlich von den meisten Fachleuten akzeptiert werden kann: "An abstract is defined as an abbreviated, accurate representation of the contents of a document"; fast genauso die deutsche Norm DIN 1426: "Das Kurzreferat gibt kurz und klar den Inhalt des Dokuments wieder." Abstracts gehören zum wissenschaftlichen Alltag. Weitgehend allen Publikationen, zumindest in den naturwissenschaftlichen, technischen, informationsbezogenen oder medizinischen Bereichen, gehen Abstracts voran, "prefe-rably prepared by its author(s) for publication with it". Es gibt wohl keinen Wissenschaftler, der nicht irgendwann einmal ein Abstract geschrieben hätte. Gehört das Erstellen von Abstracts dann überhaupt zur dokumentarischen bzw informationswissenschaftlichen Methodenlehre, wenn es jeder kann? Was macht den informationellen Mehrwert aus, der durch Expertenreferate gegenüber Laienreferaten erzeugt wird? Dies ist nicht so leicht zu beantworten, zumal geeignete Bewertungsverfahren fehlen, die Qualität von Abstracts vergleichend "objektiv" zu messen. Abstracts werden in erheblichem Umfang von Informationsspezialisten erstellt, oft unter der Annahme, dass Autoren selber dafür weniger geeignet sind. Vergegenwärtigen wir uns, was wir über Abstracts und Abstracting wissen. Ein besonders gelungenes Abstract ist zuweilen klarer als der Ursprungstext selber, darf aber nicht mehr Information als dieser enthalten: "Good abstracts are highly structured, concise, and coherent, and are the result of a thorough analysis of the content of the abstracted materials. Abstracts may be more readable than the basis documents, but because of size constraints they rarely equal and never surpass the information content of the basic document". Dies ist verständlich, denn ein "Abstract" ist zunächst nichts anderes als ein Ergebnis des Vorgangs einer Abstraktion. Ohne uns zu sehr in die philosophischen Hintergründe der Abstraktion zu verlieren, besteht diese doch "in der Vernachlässigung von bestimmten Vorstellungsbzw. Begriffsinhalten, von welchen zugunsten anderer Teilinhalte abgesehen, abstrahiert' wird. Sie ist stets verbunden mit einer Fixierung von (interessierenden) Merkmalen durch die aktive Aufmerksamkeit, die unter einem bestimmten pragmatischen Gesichtspunkt als wesentlich' für einen vorgestellten bzw für einen unter einen Begriff fallenden Gegenstand (oder eine Mehrheit von Gegenständen) betrachtet werden". Abstracts reduzieren weniger Begriffsinhalte, sondern Texte bezüglich ihres proportionalen Gehaltes. Borko/ Bernier haben dies sogar quantifiziert; sie schätzen den Reduktionsfaktor auf 1:10 bis 1:12
