Search (80 results, page 1 of 4)

0.075560465 = product of:
  0.11334069 = sum of:
    0.08579248 = weight(_text_:index in 1628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08579248 = score(doc=1628,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2221244 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05083213 = queryNorm
        0.3862362 = fieldWeight in 1628, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1628)
    0.027548207 = product of:
      0.055096414 = sum of:
        0.055096414 = weight(_text_:22 in 1628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055096414 = score(doc=1628,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17800546 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05083213 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1628, 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=1628)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Reports on a dramatic shift from subject to periodical title searching at Colorado University Libraries. States possible reasons for the change, examines problems encountered by users with searching the periodical title index and suggests how this change in online catalogue searching may affect future catalogue design and bibliographic instruction

Date

29. 7.1998 10:57:22

0.063336655 = product of:
  0.09500498 = sum of:
    0.07506842 = weight(_text_:index in 508) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07506842 = score(doc=508,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2221244 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05083213 = queryNorm
        0.33795667 = fieldWeight in 508, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=508)
    0.019936562 = product of:
      0.039873123 = sum of:
        0.039873123 = weight(_text_:classification in 508) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039873123 = score(doc=508,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16188543 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05083213 = queryNorm
            0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 508, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=508)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Reports results of a questionnaire survey of lecturers and students, at Florida University at Gainesville, to determine the degree to which the information provided in catalogue records serve the needs of library users and the usefulness of including and displaying typical elements of catalogue records. Results indicate the highest level of agreement with usefulness of: title; primary author; date; subjects; other authors; and series. There were moderately high levels of agreement for: summary notes; contents notes; standard numbers; publisher; pagination; and related titles; and lower levels of agreement for reference notes; place of publication; index notes; illustrations; and size

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 23(1997) nos.3/4, S.47-63

0.055952705 = product of:
  0.16785811 = sum of:
    0.16785811 = weight(_text_:index in 7920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16785811 = score(doc=7920,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.2221244 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05083213 = queryNorm
        0.75569415 = fieldWeight in 7920, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7920)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Part of a larger study which aims to: empirically investigate book-index usage, behaviours, and the extent to which specific print index features affect a user's search for information; and to examine these features in an electronic environment and to determine the optimum specifications for indexes in electronic texts by gathering evidence from a controlled user study. Provides an overview of the research project, focusing on a subset of the results from the study of hard-copy book indexes. Describes observable behaviours of a sample of users when consulting different variations of a hard copy book index. Suggests a preliminary model at 3 levels of abstraction repressing users' behaviours when using a book index

0.05055371 = product of:
  0.15166113 = sum of:
    0.15166113 = weight(_text_:index in 6855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15166113 = score(doc=6855,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2221244 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05083213 = queryNorm
        0.6827756 = fieldWeight in 6855, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6855)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The authors conducted a controlled user study in both print and electronic environments and present here a subset of results from index use in the print format

0.050045617 = product of:
  0.15013684 = sum of:
    0.15013684 = weight(_text_:index in 383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15013684 = score(doc=383,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2221244 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05083213 = queryNorm
        0.67591333 = fieldWeight in 383, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=383)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Theme

Preserved Context Index System (PRECIS)

0.04289624 = product of:
  0.12868872 = sum of:
    0.12868872 = weight(_text_:index in 1104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12868872 = score(doc=1104,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.2221244 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05083213 = queryNorm
        0.5793543 = fieldWeight in 1104, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1104)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Search index usage in a large university online catalog system over a six-year period (representing about 15,3 million searches) was investigated using transaction monitor data. Mathematical models of trends and patterns in the data were developed and tested using regression techniques. The results of the analyses show a consistent decline in the frequency of subject index use by online catalog users, with a corresponding increase in the frequency of title keyword searching. Significant annual patterns in index usage were also identified. Analysis of the transaction data, and related previous studies of online catalog users, suggest a number of factors contributing to the decline in subject search frequency. Chief among these factors are user difficulties in formulating subject queries with LCSH, leading to search failure, and the problem of "information overload" as database size increases. This article presents the models and results of the transaction log analysis, discusses the underlying problems with subject searching contributing to the observed decline, and reviews some proposed improvements to online catalog systems to aid in overcoming these problems

0.04289624 = product of:
  0.12868872 = sum of:
    0.12868872 = weight(_text_:index in 5482) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12868872 = score(doc=5482,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.2221244 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05083213 = queryNorm
        0.5793543 = fieldWeight in 5482, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5482)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The paper presents the results of a study on usability methods for evaluating Web sites. It summarizes the "Heuristics for Web Communications," and reports the practical experiences with these heuristics, contrasting them with the "Keevil Index" and combining them with user testing with thinking aloud. It concludes that working with the "Heuristics for Web Communications" takes more time and effort than working with the "Keevil Index," but produces more consistent results. The heuristics proved to be applicable both in heuristic evaluation and in combination with user testing.

Content

Der Beitrag präsentiert eine Studie über Evaluationsmethoden zur WebUsability. Er beschreibt die "Heuristics for Web Communications" und berichtet von den praktischen Erfahrungen mit den Heuristiken, die mit dem "Keevil Index" verglichen und mit Benutzertests mit lautem Denken kombiniert werden. Das Ergebnis zeigt, dass eine Evaluation mit den beschriebenen Heuristiken gegenüber dem "Keevil Index" mehr Zeit und Aufwand erfordert, aber konsistentere Ergebnisse bringt. Die Heuristiken haben sich sowohl in der experten-zentrierten Evaluation als auch in Kombination mit dem Benutzertest insgesamt als geeignete Evaluationsmethode erwiesen

0.040442966 = product of:
  0.1213289 = sum of:
    0.1213289 = weight(_text_:index in 5710) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1213289 = score(doc=5710,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2221244 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05083213 = queryNorm
        0.5462205 = fieldWeight in 5710, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5710)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Louisiana State University conducted 6 user surveys of Information Access Company's InfroTrac 12-inch laser disc data bases (LegalTrac and Government Publications Index). Reports on the user studies.

0.039966214 = product of:
  0.11989864 = sum of:
    0.11989864 = weight(_text_:index in 5158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11989864 = score(doc=5158,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.2221244 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05083213 = queryNorm
        0.5397815 = fieldWeight in 5158, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5158)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Usability of Web sites has become an increasingly important area of research as Web sites proliferate and problems with use are noted. Generally, aspects of Web sites that have been investigated focus on such areas as overall design and navigation. The exploratory study reported on here investigates one specific component of a Web site-the index structure. By employing index usability metrics developed by Liddy and Jörgensen (1993; Jörgensen & Liddy, 1996) and modified to accommodate a hypertext environment, the study compared the effectiveness and efficiency of 20 subjects who used one existing index (the A-Z index on the FedStats Web site at http://www.fedstats.gov) and three experimental variants to complete five researcher-generated tasks. User satisfaction with the indexes was also evaluated. The findings indicate that a hypertext index with multiple access points for each concept, all linked to the same resource, led to greater effectiveness and efficiency of retrieval on almost all measures. Satisfaction measures were more variable. The study offers insight into potential improvements in the design of Web-based indexes and provides preliminary assessment of the validity of the measures employed

0.02476616 = product of:
  0.07429848 = sum of:
    0.07429848 = weight(_text_:index in 577) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07429848 = score(doc=577,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.2221244 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05083213 = queryNorm
        0.3344904 = fieldWeight in 577, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=577)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Users move from one state (or task) to another in an information system's labyrinth as they try to accomplish their work, and the amount of time they spend in each state varies. This article uses continuous-time stochastic models, mainly based on semi-Markov chains, to derive user state transition patterns (both in rates and in probabilities) in a Web-based information system. The methodology was demonstrated with 126,925 search sessions drawn from the transaction logs of the University of California's MELVYL® library catalog system (www.melvyLucop.edu). First, user sessions were categorized into six groups based on their similar use of the system. Second, by using a three-layer hierarchical taxonomy of the system Web pages, user sessions in each usage group were transformed into a sequence of states. All the usage groups but one have third-order sequential dependency in state transitions. The sole exception has fourth-order sequential dependency. The transition rates as well as transition probabilities of the semi-Markov model provide a background for interpreting user behavior probabilistically, at various levels of detail. Finally, the differences in derived usage patterns between usage groups were tested statistically. The test results showed that different groups have distinct patterns of system use. Knowledge of the extent of sequential dependency is beneficial because it allows one to predict a user's next move in a search space based on the past moves that have been made. It can also be used to help customize the design of the user interface to the system to facilitate interaction. The group CL6 labeled "knowledgeable and sophisticated usage" and the group CL7 labeled "unsophisticated usage" both had third-order sequential dependency and had the same most-frequently occurring search pattern: screen display, record display, screen display, and record display. The group CL8 called "highly interactive use with good search results" had fourth-order sequential dependency, and its most frequently occurring pattern was the same as CL6 and CL7 with one more screen display action added. The group CL13, called "known-item searching" had third-order sequential dependency, and its most frequently occurring pattern was index access, search with retrievals, screen display, and record display. Group CL14 called "help intensive searching," and CL18 called "relatively unsuccessful" both had thirdorder sequential dependency, and for both groups the most frequently occurring pattern was index access, search without retrievals, index access, and again, search without retrievals.

0.02144812 = product of:
  0.06434436 = sum of:
    0.06434436 = weight(_text_:index in 6988) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06434436 = score(doc=6988,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2221244 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05083213 = queryNorm
        0.28967714 = fieldWeight in 6988, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6988)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Reviews work of the Getty Art History Information Program (AHIP), recently renamed the Getty Information Institute, where humanities scholars were trained in DIALOG online searching and then allowed 24 hour unlimited access to DIALOG searching and DIALOG databases and where complete transaction logs were taken to yield the data upon which the Getty Online Searching Project was based. Summarizes results of the study of this subsidized access which was reported in a series of papers by M.J. Bates, who found that searching patterns of humanities researchers differed substantially from previous studies in the sciences and social sciences disciplines. Presents a model of the relative merits and opportunities associated with the various contractual arrangements and incentive strategies employed by AHIP with vendors such as DIALOG, consortia such as the Research Libraries Group, and a CD-ROM publication programme, compared to print publications and the experimental offer of access to some of the AHIP databases over the WWW. The arguments are illustrated by means of 2 case studies, involving: changes in pricing of the Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals; and the Getty Online Searching Project

0.02144812 = product of:
  0.06434436 = sum of:
    0.06434436 = weight(_text_:index in 473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06434436 = score(doc=473,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2221244 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05083213 = queryNorm
        0.28967714 = fieldWeight in 473, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=473)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In this study descriptions of a novel by 100 users at 2 Swedish public libraries, Malmö and Molndal, Mar-Apr 95, were compared to the index terms used for the novels at these libraries. Describes previous systems for fiction indexing, the 2 libraries, and the users interviewed. Compares the AMP system with their own model. The latter operates with terms under the headings phenomena, frame and author's intention. The similarities between the users' and indexers' descriptions were sufficiently close to make it possible to retrieve fiction in accordance with users' wishes in Molndal, and would have been in Malmö, had more books been indexed with more terms. Sometimes the similarities were close enough for users to retrieve fiction on their own

0.017873434 = product of:
  0.0536203 = sum of:
    0.0536203 = weight(_text_:index in 5691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0536203 = score(doc=5691,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2221244 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05083213 = queryNorm
        0.24139762 = fieldWeight in 5691, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5691)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The second half of a 'before and after' study to evaluate the impact of an online catalogue on subject searching behaviour is reported. A holistic approach is adopted encompassing both catalogue use and browsing at the shelves for catalogue users and non-users. Verbal and non-verbal data were elicited from searchers using a combined methodology including talk-aloud technique, observation and a screen logging facility. An extensive qualitative analysis was carried out correlating expressed topics, search formulation strategies and documents retrieved at the shelves. The online catalogue environment does not appear to have increased the extent of subject searching nor the use of the bibliographic tool. The manual PRECIS index supported a contextual approach for broad and more interactive search formulations whereas the OPAC encouraged a matching approach and narrow formulations with fewer but user generated formulations. The success rate of the online catalogue was slightly better than that of the manual tools but fewer items were retrieved at the shelves. Non-users of the bibliographic tools seemed to be just as successful. To improve retrieval effectiveness it is suggested that online catalogues should cater for both matching and contextual approaches to searching. Recent research indicates that a more interactive process could be promoted by providing query expansion through a combination of searching aids for matching, for search formulation assistance and for structured contextual retrieval

0.017873434 = product of:
  0.0536203 = sum of:
    0.0536203 = weight(_text_:index in 1237) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0536203 = score(doc=1237,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2221244 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05083213 = queryNorm
        0.24139762 = fieldWeight in 1237, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1237)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The study reported here tested the efficacy of an information retrieval system output summary and visualization scheme for undergraduates taking a Vietnam War history who were in Kuhlthau's Stage 3 of researching a history essay. The visualization scheme consisted of (a) the undergraduate's own visualization of his or her essay topic, drawn by the student an the bottom half of a sheet of paper, and (b) a visualization of the information space (determined by index term counting) an the tophalf of the same page. To test the visualization scheme, students enrolled in a Vietnam War history course were randomly assigned to either the visualization scheme group, who received a high recall search output, or the nonvisualization group, who received a high precision search output. The dependent variable was the mark awarded the essay by the course instructor. There was no significant difference between the mean marks for the two groups. We were pleasantly surprised with this result given the bad reputation of high recall as a practical search strategy. We hypothesize that a more proactive visualization system is needed that takes the student through the process of using the visualization scheme, including steps that induce student cognition about task-subject objectives.

0.017873434 = product of:
  0.0536203 = sum of:
    0.0536203 = weight(_text_:index in 1687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0536203 = score(doc=1687,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2221244 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05083213 = queryNorm
        0.24139762 = fieldWeight in 1687, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1687)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

A search for information can be viewed as a series of decisions made by the searcher. Two dimensions of the search environment affect a user's decisions: the user's knowledge, and the configuration of the information retrieval system. Drawing an previous findings an users' lack of search or domain knowledge, this article investigates what the user needs to know to make informed search decisions at the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Web site, which provides statistical information an labor and related topics. Its extensive Web site is a rich collection of statistical information, ranging from individual statistics such as the current Consumer Price Index (CM), to a [arge statistical database called LABSTAT that can be queried to construct a tabie or time series an the fly. Two models of the search environment and the query process in LABSTAT are presented. They provide complementary views of the decision points at which help may be needed, and also suggest useful help content. Extensive examples based an the industry concept illustrate how the information could assist users' search decisions. The article concludes with a discussion of the role of help facilities in Web searching, and the interesting question of how to initiate the provision of help.

0.017873434 = product of:
  0.0536203 = sum of:
    0.0536203 = weight(_text_:index in 4535) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0536203 = score(doc=4535,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2221244 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05083213 = queryNorm
        0.24139762 = fieldWeight in 4535, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4535)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose - This exploratory study sets out to describe the ways in which end-users exchanged information between the web and a web online catalog, how they searched one device based on what they knew about the other, and their experiences in navigating between the two devices. Design/methodology/approach - Thirty-one participants were observed searching the web or a web online catalog. After the observations, an interview guide was used to ask targeted questions. Findings - The findings suggest that people familiar with the use of traditional online catalogs were more comfortable using web tools than those who lacked online catalog experience. People who had recent web experience expected online catalog searching to be similar to web searching. However, drawing too close an association between the two systems sometimes caused difficulties when the searching protocols varied, like keyword searching versus selecting an index. Research limitations/implications - Some limitations of the study include a small sampling size, varied responses to interview questions, obtrusive procedures, and lack of generalizability to groups or settings dissimilar from the one in this study. Originality/value - This study provides a rare look into the challenges faced by a diverse group of public library users on the web. It is instructive for practicing librarians and researchers.

0.016069788 = product of:
  0.04820936 = sum of:
    0.04820936 = product of:
      0.09641872 = sum of:
        0.09641872 = weight(_text_:22 in 7585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09641872 = score(doc=7585,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17800546 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05083213 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7585, 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=7585)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 1.2000 17:52:11

0.016069788 = product of:
  0.04820936 = sum of:
    0.04820936 = product of:
      0.09641872 = sum of:
        0.09641872 = weight(_text_:22 in 3924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09641872 = score(doc=3924,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17800546 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05083213 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3924, 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=3924)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Library and information science research. 22(2000) no.4, S.371-382

0.0137741035 = product of:
  0.04132231 = sum of:
    0.04132231 = product of:
      0.08264462 = sum of:
        0.08264462 = weight(_text_:22 in 2973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08264462 = score(doc=2973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17800546 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05083213 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2973, 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=2973)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

9. 2.2008 17:52:22

0.013291041 = product of:
  0.039873123 = sum of:
    0.039873123 = product of:
      0.07974625 = sum of:
        0.07974625 = weight(_text_:classification in 315) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07974625 = score(doc=315,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16188543 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05083213 = queryNorm
            0.49260917 = fieldWeight in 315, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=315)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 4(1984) no.3, S.75-83