Search (26 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Indexierungsstudien"
  1. Veenema, F.: To index or not to index (1996) 0.03 
    0.033915933 = product of:
  0.084789835 = sum of:
    0.02796361 = weight(_text_:1 in 7247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02796361 = score(doc=7247,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12878966 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.2171262 = fieldWeight in 7247, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7247)
    0.056826223 = weight(_text_:22 in 7247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056826223 = score(doc=7247,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18359412 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7247, 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=7247)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Canadian journal of information and library science. 21(1996) no.2, S.1-22
  2. Booth, A.: How consistent is MEDLINE indexing? (1990) 0.03 
    0.029676441 = product of:
  0.0741911 = sum of:
    0.02446816 = weight(_text_:1 in 3510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02446816 = score(doc=3510,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12878966 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.18998542 = fieldWeight in 3510, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3510)
    0.049722943 = weight(_text_:22 in 3510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049722943 = score(doc=3510,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18359412 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3510, 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=3510)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Health libraries review. 7(1990) no.1, S.22-26
  3. Neshat, N.; Horri, A.: ¬A study of subject indexing consistency between the National Library of Iran and Humanities Libraries in the area of Iranian studies (2006) 0.03 
    0.029676441 = product of:
  0.0741911 = sum of:
    0.02446816 = weight(_text_:1 in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02446816 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12878966 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.18998542 = fieldWeight in 230, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=230)
    0.049722943 = weight(_text_:22 in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049722943 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18359412 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 230, 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=230)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    4. 1.2007 10:22:26
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 43(2006) no.1, S.67-76
  4. Leininger, K.: Interindexer consistency in PsychINFO (2000) 0.03 
    0.02543695 = product of:
  0.063592374 = sum of:
    0.020972708 = weight(_text_:1 in 2552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020972708 = score(doc=2552,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12878966 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 2552, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2552)
    0.042619668 = weight(_text_:22 in 2552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042619668 = score(doc=2552,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18359412 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2552, 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=2552)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    9. 2.1997 18:44:22
    Source
    Journal of librarianship and information science. 32(2000) no.1, S.4-8
  5. Cleverdon, C.W.: ASLIB Cranfield Research Project : Report on the first stage of an investigation into the comparative efficiency of indexing systems (1960) 0.02 
    0.017047867 = product of:
  0.085239336 = sum of:
    0.085239336 = weight(_text_:22 in 6158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.085239336 = score(doc=6158,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18359412 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6158, 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=6158)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: College and research libraries 22(1961) no.3, S.228 (G. Jahoda)
  6. Tinker, F.F.: Imprecision in meaning measured by inconsistency of indexing (1966-68) 0.01 
    0.0121086 = product of:
  0.060542997 = sum of:
    0.060542997 = weight(_text_:1 in 2275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060542997 = score(doc=2275,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12878966 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.47009206 = fieldWeight in 2275, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2275)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Content
    Ergebnisse: (1) Wenn SW frei gewählt, Recherche um so schwieriger, je mehr SW; (2) 'ältere' SW häufiger und weniger genau verwendet als 'jüngere'; (3) viele Wörter mit ungenauer Bedeutung
    Issue
    T.1-2.
    Source
    American documentation. 17(1966) no.2, S.96-102 (T.1); 19(1988) no.3, S
  7. Swanson, D.R.: ¬The evidence underlying the Cranfield results (1965) 0.01 
    0.011185444 = product of:
  0.05592722 = sum of:
    0.05592722 = weight(_text_:1 in 2266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05592722 = score(doc=2266,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12878966 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.4342524 = fieldWeight in 2266, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2266)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Library quarterly. 35(1965), S.1-20
  8. Cleverdon, C.W.; Mills, J.; Keen, M.: Factors determining the performance of indexing systems : ASLIB Cranfield research project (1966) 0.01 
    0.009787264 = product of:
  0.04893632 = sum of:
    0.04893632 = weight(_text_:1 in 5363) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04893632 = score(doc=5363,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12878966 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.37997085 = fieldWeight in 5363, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5363)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Issue
    Vol.1: Design; Vol.2: Test results
  9. Taniguchi, S.: Recording evidence in bibliographic records and descriptive metadata (2005) 0.01 
    0.008523934 = product of:
  0.042619668 = sum of:
    0.042619668 = weight(_text_:22 in 3565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042619668 = score(doc=3565,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18359412 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3565, 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=3565)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    18. 6.2005 13:16:22
  10. Zunde, P.; Dexter, M.E.: Factors affecting indexing performance (1969) 0.01 
    0.008389084 = product of:
  0.041945416 = sum of:
    0.041945416 = weight(_text_:1 in 7496) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041945416 = score(doc=7496,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12878966 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.32568932 = fieldWeight in 7496, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=7496)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Cooperating information societies: Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, San Francisco, CA, 1.-4.10.1969. Ed.: J.B. North
  11. Pimenov, E.N.: O faktorah, vliyayushchikh na indeksirivanie : indeksirovanie i predmetnaya oblast' (2000) 0.01 
    0.008389084 = product of:
  0.041945416 = sum of:
    0.041945416 = weight(_text_:1 in 898) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041945416 = score(doc=898,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12878966 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.32568932 = fieldWeight in 898, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=898)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Nauchno- Tekhnicheskaya Informatsiya; Series 1. 2000, no.2, S.15-23
  12. Iivonen, M.: ¬The impact of the indexing environment on interindexer consistency (1990) 0.01 
    0.007909304 = product of:
  0.03954652 = sum of:
    0.03954652 = weight(_text_:1 in 4779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03954652 = score(doc=4779,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12878966 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.30706283 = fieldWeight in 4779, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4779)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol.1
    Source
    Tools for knowledge organization and the human interface. Proceedings of the 1st International ISKO Conference, Darmstadt, 14.-17.8.1990. Pt.1
  13. Subrahmanyam, B.: Library of Congress Classification numbers : issues of consistency and their implications for union catalogs (2006) 0.01 
    0.007103278 = product of:
  0.03551639 = sum of:
    0.03551639 = weight(_text_:22 in 5784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03551639 = score(doc=5784,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18359412 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5784, 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=5784)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  14. White, H.; Willis, C.; Greenberg, J.: HIVEing : the effect of a semantic web technology on inter-indexer consistency (2014) 0.01 
    0.007103278 = product of:
  0.03551639 = sum of:
    0.03551639 = weight(_text_:22 in 1781) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03551639 = score(doc=1781,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18359412 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1781, 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=1781)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of the Helping Interdisciplinary Vocabulary Engineering (HIVE) system on the inter-indexer consistency of information professionals when assigning keywords to a scientific abstract. This study examined first, the inter-indexer consistency of potential HIVE users; second, the impact HIVE had on consistency; and third, challenges associated with using HIVE. Design/methodology/approach - A within-subjects quasi-experimental research design was used for this study. Data were collected using a task-scenario based questionnaire. Analysis was performed on consistency results using Hooper's and Rolling's inter-indexer consistency measures. A series of t-tests was used to judge the significance between consistency measure results. Findings - Results suggest that HIVE improves inter-indexing consistency. Working with HIVE increased consistency rates by 22 percent (Rolling's) and 25 percent (Hooper's) when selecting relevant terms from all vocabularies. A statistically significant difference exists between the assignment of free-text keywords and machine-aided keywords. Issues with homographs, disambiguation, vocabulary choice, and document structure were all identified as potential challenges. Research limitations/implications - Research limitations for this study can be found in the small number of vocabularies used for the study. Future research will include implementing HIVE into the Dryad Repository and studying its application in a repository system. Originality/value - This paper showcases several features used in HIVE system. By using traditional consistency measures to evaluate a semantic web technology, this paper emphasizes the link between traditional indexing and next generation machine-aided indexing (MAI) tools.
  15. Gretz, M.; Thomas, M.: Indexierungen in biomedizinischen Literaturdatenbanken : eine vergleichende Analyse (1991) 0.01 
    0.006920641 = product of:
  0.034603205 = sum of:
    0.034603205 = weight(_text_:1 in 5104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034603205 = score(doc=5104,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12878966 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.26867998 = fieldWeight in 5104, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5104)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Auf der Grundlage von vier Originaldokumenten, d.h. dokumentarischen Bezugseinheiten (DBEs), wird die Indexierung in vier biomedizinischen Online-Datenbanken (MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS PREVIEWS, SCISEARCH) analysiert. Anhand von Beispielen werden inahltliche Erschließung, Indexierungstiefe, Indexierungsbreite, Indexierungskonsistenz, Präzision (durch syntaktisches Indexieren, Gewichtung, Proximity Operatoren) und Wiederauffindbarkeit (Recall) der in den Datenbanken gespeicherten Dokumentationseinheien (DBEs) untersucht. Die zeitaufwendigere intellektuelle Indexierung bei MEDLINE und EMBASE erweist sich als wesentlich präziser als die schneller verfügbare maschinelle Zuteilung von Deskriptoren in BIOSIS PREVIEWS und SCISEARCH. In Teil 1 der Untersuchung werden die Indexierungen in MEDLINE und EMBASE, in Teil 2 die Deskriptorenzuteilungen in BIOSIS PREVIEWS und SCISEARCH verglichen
    Source
    Nachrichten für Dokumentation. 42(1991) H.5, S.337-344 (T.1); 42(1991) H.6, S.405-411 (T.2)
  16. Chan, L.M.: Inter-indexer consistency in subject cataloging (1989) 0.01 
    0.005592722 = product of:
  0.02796361 = sum of:
    0.02796361 = weight(_text_:1 in 2276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02796361 = score(doc=2276,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12878966 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.2171262 = fieldWeight in 2276, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2276)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    The purpose of the current study has been twofold: (1) to develop a valid methodology for studying indexing consistency in MARC records and, (2) to study such consistency in subject cataloging practice between non-LC libraries and the Library of Congress
  17. Saarti, J.: Consistency of subject indexing of novels by public library professionals and patrons (2002) 0.01 
    0.005592722 = product of:
  0.02796361 = sum of:
    0.02796361 = weight(_text_:1 in 4473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02796361 = score(doc=4473,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12878966 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.2171262 = fieldWeight in 4473, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4473)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 58(2002) no.1, S.49-65
  18. Keen, E.M.: Designing and testing an interactive ranked retrieval system for professional searchers (1994) 0.00 
    0.004943315 = product of:
  0.024716575 = sum of:
    0.024716575 = weight(_text_:1 in 1066) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024716575 = score(doc=1066,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12878966 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.19191428 = fieldWeight in 1066, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1066)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Reports 3 explorations of ranked system design. 2 tests used a 'cystic fibrosis' test collection with 100 queries. Experiment 1 compared a Boolean with a ranked interactive system using a subject qualified trained searcher, and reporting recall and precision results. Experiment 2 compared 15 different ranked match algorithms in a batch mode using 2 test collections, and included some new proximate pairs and term weighting approaches. Experiment 3 is a design plan for an interactive ranked prototype offering mid search algorithm choices plus other manual search devices (such as obligatory and unwanted terms), as influenced by thinking aloud comments from experiment 1. Concludes that, in Boolean versus ranked using inverse collection frequency, the searcher inspected more records on ranked than Boolean and so achieved a higher recall but lower precision; however, the presentation order of the relevant records, was, on average, very similar in both systems. Concludes also that: query reformulation was quite strongly practised in ranked searching but does not appear to have been effective; the term pairs proximate weithing methods in experiment 2 enhanced precision on both test collections when used with inverse collection frequency weighting (ICF); and the design plan for an interactive prototype adds to a selection of match algorithms other devices, such as obligatory and unwanted term marking, evidence for this being found from think aloud comments
  19. Chen, X.: Indexing consistency between online catalogues (2008) 0.00 
    0.004943315 = product of:
  0.024716575 = sum of:
    0.024716575 = weight(_text_:1 in 2209) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024716575 = score(doc=2209,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12878966 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.19191428 = fieldWeight in 2209, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2209)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    In der globalen Online-Umgebung stellen viele bibliographische Dienstleistungen integrierten Zugang zu unterschiedlichen internetbasierten OPACs zur Verfügung. In solch einer Umgebung erwarten Benutzer mehr Übereinstimmungen innerhalb und zwischen den Systemen zu sehen. Zweck dieser Studie ist, die Indexierungskonsistenz zwischen Systemen zu untersuchen. Währenddessen werden einige Faktoren, die die Indexierungskonsistenz beeinflussen können, untersucht. Wichtigstes Ziel dieser Studie ist, die Gründe für die Inkonsistenzen herauszufinden, damit sinnvolle Vorschläge gemacht werden können, um die Indexierungskonsistenz zu verbessern. Eine Auswahl von 3307 Monographien wurde aus zwei chinesischen bibliographischen Katalogen gewählt. Nach Hooper's Formel war die durchschnittliche Indexierungskonsistenz für Indexterme 64,2% und für Klassennummern 61,6%. Nach Rolling's Formel war sie für Indexterme 70,7% und für Klassennummern 63,4%. Mehrere Faktoren, die die Indexierungskonsistenz beeinflussen, wurden untersucht: (1) Indexierungsbereite; (2) Indexierungsspezifizität; (3) Länge der Monographien; (4) Kategorie der Indexierungssprache; (5) Sachgebiet der Monographien; (6) Entwicklung von Disziplinen; (7) Struktur des Thesaurus oder der Klassifikation; (8) Erscheinungsjahr. Gründe für die Inkonsistenzen wurden ebenfalls analysiert. Die Analyse ergab: (1) den Indexieren mangelt es an Fachwissen, Vertrautheit mit den Indexierungssprachen und den Indexierungsregeln, so dass viele Inkonsistenzen verursacht wurden; (2) der Mangel an vereinheitlichten oder präzisen Regeln brachte ebenfalls Inkonsistenzen hervor; (3) verzögerte Überarbeitungen der Indexierungssprachen, Mangel an terminologischer Kontrolle, zu wenige Erläuterungen und "siehe auch" Referenzen, sowie die hohe semantische Freiheit bei der Auswahl von Deskriptoren oder Klassen, verursachten Inkonsistenzen.
  20. Morris, L.R.: ¬The frequency of use of Library of Congress Classification numbers and Dewey Decimal Classification numbers in the MARC file in the field of library science (1991) 0.00 
    0.004893632 = product of:
  0.02446816 = sum of:
    0.02446816 = weight(_text_:1 in 2308) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02446816 = score(doc=2308,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12878966 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052428056 = queryNorm
        0.18998542 = fieldWeight in 2308, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2308)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Technical services quarterly. 8(1991) no.1, S.37-49

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 24
  • d 1
  • ru 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 22
  • r 2
  • m 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Themes