Search (10 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Automatisches Indexieren"
  • × year_i:[1980 TO 1990}
  1. Liedloff, V.: Anwendung eines existenten Klassifikationssystems im Bereich der computerunterstützten Inhaltsanalyse (1985) 0.03 
    0.029382406 = product of:
  0.14691202 = sum of:
    0.14691202 = weight(_text_:thesaurus in 2921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14691202 = score(doc=2921,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.23732872 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051357865 = queryNorm
        0.6190234 = fieldWeight in 2921, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2921)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    In universitärer Grundlagenforschung wurde das Computergestützte TeXterschließungssystem (CTX) entwickelt. Es ist ein wörterbuchorientiertes Verfahren, das aufbauend auf einer wort- und satzorientierten Verarbeitung von Texten zu einem deutschsprachigen Text/ Dokument formal-inhaltliche Stichwörter (Grundformen, systemintern "Deskriptoren" genannt) erstellt. Diese dienen als Input für die Computer-Unterstützte Inhaltsanalyse (CUI). Mit Hilfe eines Thesaurus werden die Deskriptoren zu Oberbegriffen zusammengefaßt und die durch CTX erstellte Deskriptorliste über eine Vergleichsliste auf die Kategorien (=Oberbegriffe) des Thesaurus abgebildet. Das Ergebnis wird über mathematisch-statistische Auswertungsverfahren weiterverarbeitet. Weitere Vorteile der Einbringung eines Thesaurus werden genannt
  2. Thönssen, B.: Automatische Indexierung und Schnittstellen zu Thesauri (1988) 0.02 
    0.024234196 = product of:
  0.12117098 = sum of:
    0.12117098 = weight(_text_:thesaurus in 30) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12117098 = score(doc=30,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.23732872 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051357865 = queryNorm
        0.5105618 = fieldWeight in 30, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=30)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  3. Voorhees, E.M.: Implementing agglomerative hierarchic clustering algorithms for use in document retrieval (1986) 0.02 
    0.022266502 = product of:
  0.111332506 = sum of:
    0.111332506 = weight(_text_:22 in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.111332506 = score(doc=402,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1798465 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051357865 = queryNorm
        0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 22(1986) no.6, S.465-476
  4. Fuhr, N.; Niewelt, B.: ¬Ein Retrievaltest mit automatisch indexierten Dokumenten (1984) 0.02 
    0.01948319 = product of:
  0.09741595 = sum of:
    0.09741595 = weight(_text_:22 in 262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09741595 = score(doc=262,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1798465 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051357865 = queryNorm
        0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 262, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=262)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    20.10.2000 12:22:23
  5. Chartron, G.; Dalbin, S.; Monteil, M.-G.; Verillon, M.: Indexation manuelle et indexation automatique : dépasser les oppositions (1989) 0.02 
    0.01696394 = product of:
  0.0848197 = sum of:
    0.0848197 = weight(_text_:thesaurus in 3516) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0848197 = score(doc=3516,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.23732872 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051357865 = queryNorm
        0.3573933 = fieldWeight in 3516, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3516)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Report of a study comparing 2 methods of indexing: LEXINET, a computerised system for indexing titles and summaries only; and manual indexing of full texts, using the thesaurus developed by French Electricity (EDF). Both systems were applied to a collection of approximately 2.000 documents on artifical intelligence from the EDF data base. The results were then analysed to compare quantitative performance (number and range of terms) and qualitative performance (ambiguity of terms, specificity, variability, consistency). Overall, neither system proved ideal: LEXINET was deficient as regards lack of accessibility and excessive ambiguity; while the manual system gave rise to an over-wide variation of terms. The ideal system would appear to be a combination of automatic and manual systems, on the evidence produced here.
  6. Salton, G.: Automatic processing of foreign language documents (1985) 0.02 
    0.016789947 = product of:
  0.08394973 = sum of:
    0.08394973 = weight(_text_:thesaurus in 3650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08394973 = score(doc=3650,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.23732872 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051357865 = queryNorm
        0.35372764 = fieldWeight in 3650, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3650)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    The attempt to computerize a process, such as indexing, abstracting, classifying, or retrieving information, begins with an analysis of the process into its intellectual and nonintellectual components. That part of the process which is amenable to computerization is mechanical or algorithmic. What is not is intellectual or creative and requires human intervention. Gerard Salton has been an innovator, experimenter, and promoter in the area of mechanized information systems since the early 1960s. He has been particularly ingenious at analyzing the process of information retrieval into its algorithmic components. He received a doctorate in applied mathematics from Harvard University before moving to the computer science department at Cornell, where he developed a prototype automatic retrieval system called SMART. Working with this system he and his students contributed for over a decade to our theoretical understanding of the retrieval process. On a more practical level, they have contributed design criteria for operating retrieval systems. The following selection presents one of the early descriptions of the SMART system; it is valuable as it shows the direction automatic retrieval methods were to take beyond simple word-matching techniques. These include various word normalization techniques to improve recall, for instance, the separation of words into stems and affixes; the correlation and clustering, using statistical association measures, of related terms; and the identification, using a concept thesaurus, of synonymous, broader, narrower, and sibling terms. They include, as weIl, techniques, both linguistic and statistical, to deal with the thorny problem of how to automatically extract from texts index terms that consist of more than one word. They include weighting techniques and various documentrequest matching algorithms. Significant among the latter are those which produce a retrieval output of citations ranked in relevante order. During the 1970s, Salton and his students went an to further refine these various techniques, particularly the weighting and statistical association measures. Many of their early innovations seem commonplace today. Some of their later techniques are still ahead of their time and await technological developments for implementation. The particular focus of the selection that follows is an the evaluation of a particular component of the SMART system, a multilingual thesaurus. By mapping English language expressions and their German equivalents to a common concept number, the thesaurus permitted the automatic processing of German language documents against English language queries and vice versa. The results of the evaluation, as it turned out, were somewhat inconclusive. However, this SMART experiment suggested in a bold and optimistic way how one might proceed to answer such complex questions as What is meant by retrieval language compatability? How it is to be achieved, and how evaluated?
  7. Fuhr, N.: Ranking-Experimente mit gewichteter Indexierung (1986) 0.02 
    0.016699877 = product of:
  0.08349938 = sum of:
    0.08349938 = weight(_text_:22 in 58) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08349938 = score(doc=58,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1798465 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051357865 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 58, 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=58)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    14. 6.2015 22:12:44
  8. Fuhr, N.: Rankingexperimente mit gewichteter Indexierung (1986) 0.02 
    0.016699877 = product of:
  0.08349938 = sum of:
    0.08349938 = weight(_text_:22 in 2051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08349938 = score(doc=2051,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1798465 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051357865 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2051, 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=2051)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    14. 6.2015 22:12:56
  9. Biebricher, N.; Fuhr, N.; Lustig, G.; Schwantner, M.; Knorz, G.: ¬The automatic indexing system AIR/PHYS : from research to application (1988) 0.01 
    0.013916564 = product of:
  0.06958282 = sum of:
    0.06958282 = weight(_text_:22 in 1952) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06958282 = score(doc=1952,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1798465 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051357865 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1952, 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=1952)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    16. 8.1998 12:51:22
  10. Hodges, P.R.: Keyword in title indexes : effectiveness of retrieval in computer searches (1983) 0.01 
    0.009741595 = product of:
  0.048707973 = sum of:
    0.048707973 = weight(_text_:22 in 5001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048707973 = score(doc=5001,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1798465 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051357865 = queryNorm
        0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5001, 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=5001)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    14. 3.1996 13:22:21

Authors

Languages

Themes