Search (801 results, page 2 of 41)

  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Piros, A.: Az ETO-jelzetek automatikus interpretálásának és elemzésének kérdései (2018) 0.04 
    0.040677574 = product of:
  0.20338786 = sum of:
    0.20338786 = weight(_text_:3a in 855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20338786 = score(doc=855,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.43426615 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 855, 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=855)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Content
    Vgl. auch: New automatic interpreter for complex UDC numbers. Unter: <https%3A%2F%2Fudcc.org%2Ffiles%2FAttilaPiros_EC_36-37_2014-2015.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3kc9CwDDCWP7aArpfjrs5b>
  2. Curcio, R.: ¬Das virtuelle Reich : die Kolonialisierung der Phantasie und die soziale Kontrolle (2017) 0.04 
    0.040318966 = product of:
  0.100797415 = sum of:
    0.0660976 = weight(_text_:books in 5306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0660976 = score(doc=5306,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.2669927 = fieldWeight in 5306, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5306)
    0.03469981 = weight(_text_:22 in 5306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03469981 = score(doc=5306,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5306, 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=5306)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    18. 9.2018 12:57:22
    Imprint
    Wien : Bahoe Books
  3. Viti, E.: My first ten years : nuovo soggettario growing, development and integration with other knowledge organization systems (2017) 0.04 
    0.040318966 = product of:
  0.100797415 = sum of:
    0.0660976 = weight(_text_:books in 4143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0660976 = score(doc=4143,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.2669927 = fieldWeight in 4143, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4143)
    0.03469981 = weight(_text_:22 in 4143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03469981 = score(doc=4143,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4143, 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=4143)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The Nuovo Soggettario is a subject indexing system edited by the Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di Firenze. It was presented to librarians from across Italy on 8 February 2007 in Florence as a new edition of the Soggettario (1956), and it has become the official Italian subject indexing tool. This system is made up of two individual and interactive components: the general thesaurus, accessible on the web since 2007 and the rules of a conventional syntax for the construction of subject strings. The Nuovo soggettario thesaurus has grown significantly in terms of terminology and connections with other knowledge organization tools (e.g., encyclopedias, dictionaries, resources of archives and museums, and other information data sets), offering the users the possibility to browse through documents, books, objects, photographs, etc. The conversion of the Nuovo soggettario thesaurus into formats suitable for the semantic web and linked data world improves its function as an interlinking hub for direct searching and for organizing content by different professional communities. Thanks to structured data and the SKOS format, the Nuovo soggettario thesaurus is published on the Data Hub platform, thus giving broad visibility to the BNCF and its precious patrimony.
    Content
    Beitrag eines Special Issue: ISKO-Italy: 8' Incontro ISKO Italia, Università di Bologna, 22 maggio 2017, Bologna, Italia.
  4. Frâncu, V.; Popescu, T.: Twenty years after : scientific research in the field of knowledge organization in Romania (1993-2012) (2014) 0.04 
    0.040318966 = product of:
  0.100797415 = sum of:
    0.0660976 = weight(_text_:books in 4692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0660976 = score(doc=4692,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.2669927 = fieldWeight in 4692, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4692)
    0.03469981 = weight(_text_:22 in 4692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03469981 = score(doc=4692,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4692, 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=4692)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The main point that we want to state in this study is that research in the field of knowledge organization in Romania over the last twenty years is unequally and unjustly distributed among different professional categories ranging from library and information science faculty members, library professionals, software tools developers and independent researchers. The special condition of library and information science functioning as a university department in Romania with an interruption of 20 years (1970-1990) affected the overall situation of scientific research in the specific fields associated with this discipline. Our study has three stages: data collection, data recording and data interpretation. The primary outcomes of the scientific research activities considered are publications (books, book chapters and journal articles). Given this, our interest will be directed towards analyzing to what extent research and writing for publication have an impact on the evolution of Romanian libraries over this twenty years span.
    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
  5. Panzer, M.: Dewey: how to make it work for you (2013) 0.04 
    0.040318966 = product of:
  0.100797415 = sum of:
    0.0660976 = weight(_text_:books in 5797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0660976 = score(doc=5797,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.2669927 = fieldWeight in 5797, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5797)
    0.03469981 = weight(_text_:22 in 5797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03469981 = score(doc=5797,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5797, 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=5797)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The article discusses various aspects of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system of classifying library books in 2013. Background is presented on some librarians' desire to stop using DDC and adopt a genre-based system of classification. It says librarians can use the DDC to deal with problems and issues related to library book classification. It highlights the benefits of using captions and relative index terms and semantic relationships in DDC.
    Source
    Knowledge quest. 42(2013) no.2, S.22-29
  6. Kousha, K.; Thelwall, M.; Rezaie, S.: Assessing the citation impact of books : the role of Google Books, Google Scholar, and Scopus (2011) 0.04 
    0.03739045 = product of:
  0.18695223 = sum of:
    0.18695223 = weight(_text_:books in 4920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18695223 = score(doc=4920,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.75516933 = fieldWeight in 4920, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4920)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Citation indictors are increasingly used in some subject areas to support peer review in the evaluation of researchers and departments. Nevertheless, traditional journal-based citation indexes may be inadequate for the citation impact assessment of book-based disciplines. This article examines whether online citations from Google Books and Google Scholar can provide alternative sources of citation evidence. To investigate this, we compared the citation counts to 1,000 books submitted to the 2008 U.K. Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) from Google Books and Google Scholar with Scopus citations across seven book-based disciplines (archaeology; law; politics and international studies; philosophy; sociology; history; and communication, cultural, and media studies). Google Books and Google Scholar citations to books were 1.4 and 3.2 times more common than were Scopus citations, and their medians were more than twice and three times as high as were Scopus median citations, respectively. This large number of citations is evidence that in book-oriented disciplines in the social sciences, arts, and humanities, online book citations may be sufficiently numerous to support peer review for research evaluation, at least in the United Kingdom.
    Object
    Google Books
  7. Jungbluth, A.: Vor Kindle : die Anfänge des E-Books (2015) 0.04 
    0.037014652 = product of:
  0.18507326 = sum of:
    0.18507326 = weight(_text_:books in 3033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18507326 = score(doc=3033,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.74757946 = fieldWeight in 3033, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3033)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    E-Books gewinnen in Bibliotheken immer stärker an Bedeutung. In Bezug auf Erwerbung, Einarbeitung und Benutzung gibt es bei E-Books im Vergleich zu klassischen Print-Büchern allerdings große Unterschiede, von denen einige in diesem Artikel erläutert werden. Grundlegende technische Enwicklungen, die bei der Verbreitung der eletronischen Bücher eine wichtige Rolle gespielt haben, darunter historische und heute übliche Dateiformate sowie eine Übersicht über die ersten Lesegeräte bis hin zum Kindle, mit dem der E-Book-Reader den Durchbruch auf dem Mainstream-Markt schaffte, werden vorgestellt. Ein kurzer Überblick über drei wichtige Problemfelder, mit denen gerade Bibliotheken im Zusammenhang mit der steigenden Verbreitung von E-Books zu kämpfen haben (Lizenzierung, Kosten und Datenschutz), rundet den Beitrag ab.
  8. Verleysen, F.T.; Engels, T.C.E.: ¬A label for peer-reviewed books (2013) 0.04 
    0.036635008 = product of:
  0.18317504 = sum of:
    0.18317504 = weight(_text_:books in 404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18317504 = score(doc=404,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.73991185 = fieldWeight in 404, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=404)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    The Publishers Association of Flanders, Belgium, has created a label for peer-reviewed books: the Guaranteed Peer Reviewed Content (GPRC) label (www.gprc.be/en). We introduce the label and the logic behind it. A label for peer-reviewed books encourages transparency in academic book publishing. It is especially relevant for the social sciences and humanities and in the context of performance-based funding of university research.
  9. Kousha, K.; Thelwall, M.: Can Amazon.com reviews help to assess the wider impacts of books? (2016) 0.04 
    0.03547169 = product of:
  0.17735845 = sum of:
    0.17735845 = weight(_text_:books in 2768) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17735845 = score(doc=2768,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.7164165 = fieldWeight in 2768, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2768)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Although citation counts are often used to evaluate the research impact of academic publications, they are problematic for books that aim for educational or cultural impact. To fill this gap, this article assesses whether a number of simple metrics derived from Amazon.com reviews of academic books could provide evidence of their impact. Based on a set of 2,739 academic monographs from 2008 and a set of 1,305 best-selling books in 15 Amazon.com academic subject categories, the existence of significant but low or moderate correlations between citations and numbers of reviews, combined with other evidence, suggests that online book reviews tend to reflect the wider popularity of a book rather than its academic impact, although there are substantial disciplinary differences. Metrics based on online reviews are therefore recommended for the evaluation of books that aim at a wide audience inside or outside academia when it is important to capture the broader impacts of educational or cultural activities and when they cannot be manipulated in advance of the evaluation.
  10. Xiong, C.: Knowledge based text representations for information retrieval (2016) 0.03 
    0.032542057 = product of:
  0.16271028 = sum of:
    0.16271028 = weight(_text_:3a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16271028 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.43426615 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Content
    Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Language and Information Technologies. Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cs.cmu.edu%2F~cx%2Fpapers%2Fknowledge_based_text_representation.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0SaTSvhWLTh__Uz_HtOtl3.
  11. Tsay, M.-y.; Shu, Z.-y.: Journal bibliometric analysis : a case study on the Journal of Documentation (2011) 0.03 
    0.032381076 = product of:
  0.16190538 = sum of:
    0.16190538 = weight(_text_:books in 294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16190538 = score(doc=294,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.6539958 = fieldWeight in 294, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=294)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Purpose - This study aims to explore the journal bibliometric characteristics of the Journal of Documentation (JOD) and the subject relationship with other disciplines by citation analysis. Design/methodology/approach - The citation data were drawn from references of each article of JOD during 1998 and 2008. Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, Library of Congress Subject Heading, retrieved from the WorldCat and LISA database were used to identify the main class, subclass and subject of cited journals and books. Findings - The results of this study revealed that journal articles are the most cited document, followed by books and book chapters, electronic resources, and conference proceedings, respectively. The three main classes of cited journals in JOD papers are library science, science, and social sciences. The three subclasses of non-LIS journals that were highly cited in JOD papers are Science, "Mathematics. Computer science", and "Industries. Land use. Labor". The three highly cited subjects of library and information science journals encompass searching, information work, and online information retrieval. The most cited main class of books in JOD papers is library and information science, followed by social sciences, science, "Philosophy. Psychology. Religion." The three highly cited subclasses of books in JOD papers are "Books (General). Writing. Paleography. Book industries and trade. Libraries. Bibliography," "Philology and linguistics," and Science, and the most cited subject of books is information storage and retrieval systems. Originality/value - Results for the present research found that information science, as represented by JOD, is a developing discipline with an expanding literature relating to multiple subject areas.
  12. Martin, K.; Quan-Haase, A.: Are e-books replacing print books? : tradition, serendipity, and opportunity in the adoption and use of e-books for historical research and teaching (2013) 0.03 
    0.032381076 = product of:
  0.16190538 = sum of:
    0.16190538 = weight(_text_:books in 748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16190538 = score(doc=748,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.6539958 = fieldWeight in 748, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=748)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    This article aims to understand the adoption of e-books by academic historians for the purpose of teaching and research. This includes an investigation into their knowledge about and perceived characteristics of this evolving research tool. The study relied on Rogers's model of the innovation-decision process to guide the development of an interview guide. Ten semistructured interviews were conducted with history faculty between October 2010 and December 2011. A grounded theory approach was employed to code and analyze the data. Findings about tradition, cost, teaching innovations, and the historical research process provide the background for designing learning opportunities for the professional development of historians and the academic librarians who work with them. While historians are open to experimenting with e-books, they are also concerned about the loss of serendipity in digital environments, the lack of availability of key resources, and the need for technological transparency. The findings show that Rogers's knowledge and persuasion stages are cyclical in nature, with scholars moving back and forth between these two stages. Participants interviewed were already weighing the five characteristics of the persuasion stage without having much knowledge about e-books. The study findings have implications for our understanding of the diffusion of innovations in academia: both print and digital collections are being used in parallel without one replacing the other.
  13. Kousha, K.; Thelwall, M.: ¬An automatic method for extracting citations from Google Books (2015) 0.03 
    0.032381076 = product of:
  0.16190538 = sum of:
    0.16190538 = weight(_text_:books in 1658) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16190538 = score(doc=1658,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.6539958 = fieldWeight in 1658, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1658)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Recent studies have shown that counting citations from books can help scholarly impact assessment and that Google Books (GB) is a useful source of such citation counts, despite its lack of a public citation index. Searching GB for citations produces approximate matches, however, and so its raw results need time-consuming human filtering. In response, this article introduces a method to automatically remove false and irrelevant matches from GB citation searches in addition to introducing refinements to a previous GB manual citation extraction method. The method was evaluated by manual checking of sampled GB results and comparing citations to about 14,500 monographs in the Thomson Reuters Book Citation Index (BKCI) against automatically extracted citations from GB across 24 subject areas. GB citations were 103% to 137% as numerous as BKCI citations in the humanities, except for tourism (72%) and linguistics (91%), 46% to 85% in social sciences, but only 8% to 53% in the sciences. In all cases, however, GB had substantially more citing books than did BKCI, with BKCI's results coming predominantly from journal articles. Moderate correlations between the GB and BKCI citation counts in social sciences and humanities, with most BKCI results coming from journal articles rather than books, suggests that they could measure the different aspects of impact, however.
    Object
    Google Books
  14. "Google Books" darf weitermachen wie bisher : Entscheidung des Supreme Court in den USA (2016) 0.03 
    0.032381076 = product of:
  0.16190538 = sum of:
    0.16190538 = weight(_text_:books in 2923) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16190538 = score(doc=2923,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.6539958 = fieldWeight in 2923, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2923)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Der Internet-Riese darf sein Projekt "Google Books" wie gehabt fortsetzen. Der Oberste US-Gerichtshof lehnte die von einer Autorenvereingung geforderte Revision ab. Google teste mit seinem Projekt zwar die Grenzen der Fairness aus, handele aber rechtens, sagten die Richter.
    Content
    " Im Streit mit Google um Urheberrechte ist eine Gruppe von Buchautoren am Obersten US-Gericht gescheitert. Der Supreme Court lehnte es ab, die google-freundliche Entscheidung eines niederen Gerichtes zur Revision zuzulassen. In dem Fall geht es um die Online-Bibliothek "Google Books", für die der kalifornische Konzern Gerichtsunterlagen zufolge mehr als 20 Millionen Bücher digitalisiert hat. Durch das Projekt können Internet-Nutzer innerhalb der Bücher nach Stichworten suchen und die entsprechenden Textstellen lesen. Die drei zuständigen Richter entschieden einstimmig, dass in dem Fall zwar die Grenzen der Fairness ausgetestet würden, aber das Vorgehen von Google letztlich rechtens sei. Entschädigungen in Milliardenhöhe gefürchtet Die von dem Interessensverband Authors Guild angeführten Kläger sahen ihre Urheberrechte durch "Google Books" verletzt. Dazu gehörten auch prominente Künstler wie die Schriftstellerin und Dichterin Margaret Atwood. Google führte dagegen an, die Internet-Bibliothek kurbele den Bücherverkauf an, weil Leser dadurch zusätzlich auf interessante Werke aufmerksam gemacht würden. Google reagierte "dankbar" auf die Entscheidung des Supreme Court. Der Konzern hatte befürchtet, bei einer juristischen Niederlage Entschädigungen in Milliardenhöhe zahlen zu müssen."
    Object
    Google books
    Source
    https://www.tagesschau.de/wirtschaft/google-books-entscheidung-101.html
  15. Kousha, K.; Thelwall, M.: ¬An automatic method for assessing the teaching impact of books from online academic syllabi (2016) 0.03 
    0.032381076 = product of:
  0.16190538 = sum of:
    0.16190538 = weight(_text_:books in 3226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16190538 = score(doc=3226,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.6539958 = fieldWeight in 3226, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3226)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Scholars writing books that are widely used to support teaching in higher education may be undervalued because of a lack of evidence of teaching value. Although sales data may give credible evidence for textbooks, these data may poorly reflect educational uses of other types of books. As an alternative, this article proposes a method to search automatically for mentions of books in online academic course syllabi based on Bing searches for syllabi mentioning a given book, filtering out false matches through an extensive set of rules. The method had an accuracy of over 90% based on manual checks of a sample of 2,600 results from the initial Bing searches. Over one third of about 14,000 monographs checked had one or more academic syllabus mention, with more in the arts and humanities (56%) and social sciences (52%). Low but significant correlations between syllabus mentions and citations across most fields, except the social sciences, suggest that books tend to have different levels of impact for teaching and research. In conclusion, the automatic syllabus search method gives a new way to estimate the educational utility of books in a way that sales data and citation counts cannot.
  16. Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K.: Goodreads : a social network site for book readers (2017) 0.03 
    0.032381076 = product of:
  0.16190538 = sum of:
    0.16190538 = weight(_text_:books in 3534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16190538 = score(doc=3534,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.6539958 = fieldWeight in 3534, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3534)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Goodreads is an Amazon-owned book-based social web site for members to share books, read, review books, rate books, and connect with other readers. Goodreads has tens of millions of book reviews, recommendations, and ratings that may help librarians and readers to select relevant books. This article describes a first investigation of the properties of Goodreads users, using a random sample of 50,000 members. The results suggest that about three quarters of members with a public profile are female, and that there is little difference between male and female users in patterns of behavior, except for females registering more books and rating them less positively. Goodreads librarians and super-users engage extensively with most features of the site. The absence of strong correlations between book-based and social usage statistics (e.g., numbers of friends, followers, books, reviews, and ratings) suggests that members choose their own individual balance of social and book activities and rarely ignore one at the expense of the other. Goodreads is therefore neither primarily a book-based website nor primarily a social network site but is a genuine hybrid, social navigation site.
  17. Hook, P.A.; Gantchev, A.: Using combined metadata sources to visualize a small library (OBL's English Language Books) (2017) 0.03 
    0.032381076 = product of:
  0.16190538 = sum of:
    0.16190538 = weight(_text_:books in 3870) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16190538 = score(doc=3870,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.6539958 = fieldWeight in 3870, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3870)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Data from multiple knowledge organization systems are combined to provide a global overview of the content holdings of a small personal library. Subject headings and classification data are used to effectively map the combined book and topic space of the library. While harvested and manipulated by hand, the work reveals issues and potential solutions when using automated techniques to produce topic maps of much larger libraries. The small library visualized consists of the thirty-nine, digital, English language books found in the Osama Bin Laden (OBL) compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan upon his death. As this list of books has garnered considerable media attention, it is worth providing a visual overview of the subject content of these books - some of which is not readily apparent from the titles. Metadata from subject headings and classification numbers was combined to create book-subject maps. Tree maps of the classification data were also produced. The books contain 328 subject headings. In order to enhance the base map with meaningful thematic overlay, library holding count data was also harvested (and aggregated from duplicates). This additional data revealed the relative scarcity or popularity of individual books.
  18. Dousa, T.M.: Classificatory structure and the evaluation of document classifications : the case of constitutive classification (2014) 0.03 
    0.03225517 = product of:
  0.080637924 = sum of:
    0.052878078 = weight(_text_:books in 1424) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052878078 = score(doc=1424,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.21359414 = fieldWeight in 1424, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1424)
    0.027759846 = weight(_text_:22 in 1424) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027759846 = score(doc=1424,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1424, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1424)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Some scholars argue that certain classificatory structures possess inherent social-semantic values and that the desirability (or lack thereof) of these values should form a basis for evaluating the classificatory goodness of such structures. Others hold that it is possible to distinguish between the structural properties of a given classificatory structure and the semantic content (and values) of the classification in which it is used, and that the classificatory goodness of a given structural form is best evaluated by its capacity to support effectively the organization of re-sources in a given context. This paper illustrates the second, "functionalist" position by means of a historical case study examining the contrasting evaluations of a single structural form - namely, the flat (a)hierarchical structure known as constitutive classification - by two early pioneers of knowledge organization, Julius Otto Kaiser and James Duff Brown. Both men knew of the use of constitutive classification for the organization of documents and were aware of its affordances, yet formed highly different opinions of it: Kaiser, a special librarian who sought to classify documents by documentary form in business offices and business libraries, endorsed it, whil Brown, a public librarian concerned with subject-based classification of books, rejected it. In both cases, it was the functional capacity (or lack thereof) of constitutive classification to enable an adequate classification of documents with respect to a given semantic content and in a certain context that determined the evaluation of its structural form. This example suggests that structural form is analytically separable from semantic context and social context and that it is its functional alignment with the latter, rather than any supposedly inherent socio-semantic values, that has, in the past, served as a norm for evaluating the goodness of classificatory structures.
    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
  19. Batorowska, H.; Kaminska-Czubala, B.: Information retrieval support : visualisation of the information space of a document (2014) 0.03 
    0.03225517 = product of:
  0.080637924 = sum of:
    0.052878078 = weight(_text_:books in 1444) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052878078 = score(doc=1444,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.21359414 = fieldWeight in 1444, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1444)
    0.027759846 = weight(_text_:22 in 1444) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027759846 = score(doc=1444,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1444, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1444)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Acquiring knowledge in any field involves information retrieval, i.e. searching the available documents to identify answers to the queries concerning the selected objects. Knowing the keywords which are names of the objects will enable situating the user's query in the information space organized as a thesaurus or faceted classification. Objectives: Identification the areas in the information space which correspond to gaps in the user's personal knowledge or in the domain knowledge might become useful in theory or practice. The aim of this paper is to present a realistic information-space model of a self-authored full-text document on information culture, indexed by the author of this article. Methodology: Having established the relations between the terms, particular modules (sets of terms connected by relations used in facet classification) are situated on a plain, similarly to a communication map. Conclusions drawn from the "journey" on the map, which is a visualization of the knowledge contained in the analysed document, are the crucial part of this paper. Results: The direct result of the research is the created model of information space visualization of a given document (book, article, website). The proposed procedure can practically be used as a new form of representation in order to map the contents of academic books and articles, beside the traditional index form, especially as an e-book auxiliary tool. In teaching, visualization of the information space of a document can be used to help students understand the issues of: classification, categorization and representation of new knowledge emerging in human mind.
    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
  20. Engels, T.C.E; Istenic Starcic, A.; Kulczycki, E.; Pölönen, J.; Sivertsen, G.: Are book publications disappearing from scholarly communication in the social sciences and humanities? (2018) 0.03 
    0.03225517 = product of:
  0.080637924 = sum of:
    0.052878078 = weight(_text_:books in 4631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052878078 = score(doc=4631,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.21359414 = fieldWeight in 4631, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4631)
    0.027759846 = weight(_text_:22 in 4631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027759846 = score(doc=4631,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 4631, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4631)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Content
    Teil eines Special Issue: Scholarly books and their evaluation context in the social sciences and humanities. Vgl.: https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-05-2018-0127.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Authors

Languages

  • e 590
  • d 200
  • a 1
  • hu 1
  • m 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 677
  • m 81
  • el 73
  • s 21
  • x 12
  • r 7
  • b 5
  • i 1
  • z 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications