Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

Carlyle, A.: Ordering author and work records : an evaluation of collocation in online catalog displays (1996) 0.02
```
0.0161016 = product of:
  0.0322032 = sum of:
    0.0322032 = product of:
      0.0644064 = sum of:
        0.0644064 = weight(_text_:online in 4383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0644064 = score(doc=4383,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05220068 = queryNorm
            0.4065447 = fieldWeight in 4383, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4383)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
```
Abstract

To investigate the extent to which online catalogs arrange together, or collocate, records representing particular authors and works, a survey compared the displays resulting from 5 author and 5 work queries in 18 online catalogs. Dependent variables to measure collocation included the number of items irrelevant records were interfiled among relevant records. Searches for worst-case authors and works associated with large retrieval sets, including 'Homer' and 'Paradise lost', revealed the effects of Boolean versus string matching, query type, and catalog size on the collocation of relevant records. Results of the survey showed that string matching collocated relevant records more successfully than Boolean matching, that author records were collocated more successfully than work records, and, surprisingly, that catalog size had only a small effect on collocation

Carlyle, A.: Matching LSCH and user vocabulary in the library catalog (1989) 0.02

0.015936451 = product of:
  0.031872902 = sum of:
    0.031872902 = product of:
      0.063745804 = sum of:
        0.063745804 = weight(_text_:online in 347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.063745804 = score(doc=347,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05220068 = queryNorm
            0.40237486 = fieldWeight in 347, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=347)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source: Subject control in online catalogs. Ed.: R.P. Holley

Carlyle, A.: Exploring bibliographic classification in new environments (1997) 0.02

0.015936451 = product of:
  0.031872902 = sum of:
    0.031872902 = product of:
      0.063745804 = sum of:
        0.063745804 = weight(_text_:online in 6184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.063745804 = score(doc=6184,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05220068 = queryNorm
            0.40237486 = fieldWeight in 6184, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6184)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Theme: Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval

Carlyle, A.: Fulfilling the second objective in the online catalog : schemes for organizing author and work records into usable displays (1997) 0.01
```
0.014847913 = product of:
  0.029695826 = sum of:
    0.029695826 = product of:
      0.05939165 = sum of:
        0.05939165 = weight(_text_:online in 908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05939165 = score(doc=908,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05220068 = queryNorm
            0.37489069 = fieldWeight in 908, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=908)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
```
Abstract

The 2nd objective of the catalogue, adopted internationally in the Paris Principles, requires that cataloguing records for particular authors and particular works be easily identified (IFLA 1991). Analysis of the requirements of the 2nd objective of the catalogue shows that it has 2 components: a retrieval component; and a display component; and that it may be interpreted broadly to include related works and works about a work or author. Investigates 2 schemes for their contributions to the creation of online catalogue displays that meet 2nd objective requirements. Analyzes the catalogue filing rule scheme to show that author and work displays in card catalogues have been composed of many groups or classes of materials that may also be used to create organized displays in online catalogues. The groups used in the filing rule scheme are based on relationships among items. Proposes a scheme based on Tillet's bibliographic relationship taxonomy to discover additional types of relationships that may be used to group record in online catalogue displays leading to a new scheme for the creation of organized display in online catalogues. Incorporates elements from both the filing rule scheme and the bibliographic relationship taxonomy to create displays that meet the requirements of the 2nd objective more fully than either scheme does alone
Carlyle, A.: User categorisation of works : toward improved organisation of online catalogue displays (1999) 0.01
```
0.013801372 = product of:
  0.027602743 = sum of:
    0.027602743 = product of:
      0.055205487 = sum of:
        0.055205487 = weight(_text_:online in 4612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055205487 = score(doc=4612,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05220068 = queryNorm
            0.34846687 = fieldWeight in 4612, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4612)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
```
Abstract

This paper examines a user categorisation of documents related to a particular literary work. 50 study participants completed an unconstrained sorting rask of documents related to Charles Dickens' 'A christmas carol'. After they had finished the sorting task, participants wrote desriptions of the attributes they used to create each group. Content analysis of theses descriptions revealed categories of attributes used for grouping. Participants used physical format, audience, content description, pictorial elements, usage, and language most frequently for grouping. Many of the attributes participants used for grouping already exist in bibliographic records and may be used to cluster records related to works automatically in online catalogue displays. The attributes used by people in classifying or grouping documents related to a work may be used to guide the design of summary online catalogue work displays
Lee, H.-L.; Carlyle, A.: Academic library gateways to online information : a taxonomy of organizational structures (2003) 0.01
```
0.011268772 = product of:
  0.022537544 = sum of:
    0.022537544 = product of:
      0.04507509 = sum of:
        0.04507509 = weight(_text_:online in 2698) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04507509 = score(doc=2698,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05220068 = queryNorm
            0.284522 = fieldWeight in 2698, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2698)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
```
Abstract

Reports a preliminary analysis of organizational schemes applied by academic libraries worldwide to arrange their electronic resources an their Web-based information gateways. The unsystematic sample consists of 41 academic libraries in 10 countries representing 4 languages, Chinese, English, German, and Spanish. The study reveals a widely accepted practice in applying 6 simplistic methods to organizing online information: by resource type, alphabetical by title, alphabetical by subject (mostly discipline and genre), by vendor/publisher, by broad classification, and random. In addition, it notes a marked difference between libraries in the English-speaking world and those in other countries in that the former present significantly more systematic characteristics.
Carlyle, A.: Matching LCSH and user vocabulary in the library catalog (1989) 0.01
```
0.011268772 = product of:
  0.022537544 = sum of:
    0.022537544 = product of:
      0.04507509 = sum of:
        0.04507509 = weight(_text_:online in 449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04507509 = score(doc=449,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05220068 = queryNorm
            0.284522 = fieldWeight in 449, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=449)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
```
Abstract

Central to subject searching is the match between user vocabulary and the headings from Library of Congress Subject-Headings (LCSH) used in a library catalog. This paper evaluates previous matching studies, proposes a detailed list of matching categories, and tests LCSH in a study using these categories. Exact and partial match categories are defined for single LCSH and multiple LCSH matches to user expressions. One no-match category is included. Transaction logs from ORION, UCLA's online Information system, were used to collect user expressions for a comparison of LCSH and user language. Results show that single LCSH headings match user expressions exactly about 47% of the time; that single subject heading matches, including exact matches, comprise 74% of the total; that partial matches, to both single and multiple headings, comprise about 21% of the total; and that no match occurs 5% of the time.

Footnote

Simultaneously published as Subject Control in Online Catalogs

Carlyle, A.: Understanding FRBR as a conceptual model : FRBR and the bibliographic universe (2006) 0.01

0.010608707 = product of:
  0.021217413 = sum of:
    0.021217413 = product of:
      0.042434826 = sum of:
        0.042434826 = weight(_text_:22 in 1050) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042434826 = score(doc=1050,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18279788 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05220068 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1050, 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=1050)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date: 10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

Years

Themes