Search (661 results, page 1 of 34)

0.11522326 = product of:
  0.23044652 = sum of:
    0.23044652 = sum of:
      0.18334983 = weight(_text_:desktop in 2543) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.18334983 = score(doc=2543,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.34311315 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049658924 = queryNorm
          0.5343713 = fieldWeight in 2543, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2543)
      0.04709669 = weight(_text_:22 in 2543) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04709669 = score(doc=2543,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17389709 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049658924 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2543, 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=2543)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Im vorliegenden Beitrag werden die Ergebnisse einer Analyse zusammengefasst, in der untersucht wurde, ob, und wenn ja welche Services für das Management von publikationsbezogenen Forschungsdaten gegenwärtig bei wissenschaftlichen Infrastrukturdienstleistern in den Sozial- und Wirtschaftswissenschaften bestehen. Die Analyse wurde Mithilfe von Desktop-Research sowie einer Online-Befragung, an der sich 22 von 46 angeschriebenen Institutionen beteiligten, durchgeführt. Untersucht wurden vor allem deutsche und europäische Forschungsdatenzentren, Bibliotheken und Archive. Insbesondere wurde untersucht, ob diese Organisationen extern erzeugte Forschungsdaten, den dazugehörigen Berechnungscode (Syntax) und ggf. genutzte (selbstgeschriebene) Software grundsätzlich speichern und hosten. Weitere Themenfelder waren Metadatenstandards, Persistente Identifikatoren, Verfügbarkeit von Schnittstellen (APIs) und Unterstützung von semantischen Technologien.

0.082302324 = product of:
  0.16460465 = sum of:
    0.16460465 = sum of:
      0.13096416 = weight(_text_:desktop in 5493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.13096416 = score(doc=5493,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.34311315 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049658924 = queryNorm
          0.3816938 = fieldWeight in 5493, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5493)
      0.033640493 = weight(_text_:22 in 5493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.033640493 = score(doc=5493,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17389709 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049658924 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5493, 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=5493)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose Web search is more and more moving into mobile contexts. However, screen size of mobile devices is limited and search engine result pages face a trade-off between offering informative snippets and optimal use of space. One factor clearly influencing this trade-off is snippet length. The purpose of this paper is to find out what snippet size to use in mobile web search. Design/methodology/approach For this purpose, an eye-tracking experiment was conducted showing participants search interfaces with snippets of one, three or five lines on a mobile device to analyze 17 dependent variables. In total, 31 participants took part in the study. Each of the participants solved informational and navigational tasks. Findings Results indicate a strong influence of page fold on scrolling behavior and attention distribution across search results. Regardless of query type, short snippets seem to provide too little information about the result, so that search performance and subjective measures are negatively affected. Long snippets of five lines lead to better performance than medium snippets for navigational queries, but to worse performance for informational queries. Originality/value Although space in mobile search is limited, this study shows that longer snippets improve usability and user experience. It further emphasizes that page fold plays a stronger role in mobile than in desktop search for attention distribution.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.07887153 = product of:
  0.15774307 = sum of:
    0.15774307 = product of:
      0.4732292 = sum of:
        0.4732292 = weight(_text_:3a in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.4732292 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4210089 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049658924 = queryNorm
            1.1240361 = fieldWeight in 973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=973)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fcreativechoice.org%2Fdoc%2FHansJonas.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1TM3teaYKgABL5H9yoIifA&opi=89978449.

0.06572628 = product of:
  0.13145256 = sum of:
    0.13145256 = product of:
      0.39435768 = sum of:
        0.39435768 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.39435768 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4210089 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049658924 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja

0.049381394 = product of:
  0.09876279 = sum of:
    0.09876279 = sum of:
      0.078578494 = weight(_text_:desktop in 3920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.078578494 = score(doc=3920,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.34311315 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049658924 = queryNorm
          0.22901627 = fieldWeight in 3920, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3920)
      0.020184295 = weight(_text_:22 in 3920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.020184295 = score(doc=3920,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17389709 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049658924 = queryNorm
          0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3920, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3920)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

"Im Durchschnitt schafft das Programm das mit 19 Zügen", sagt Kociemba. Für Würfelfans ist das Programm essenziell, sie dankt dem Mathematiker frenetisch in Internetforen - die meisten Speedcuber, diejenigen, die den Würfel in möglichst kurzer Zeit lösen wollen, berechnen sich mit Cube Explorer die optimalen Drehkombinationen. "Aber eigentlich hat mich das zuletzt nicht mehr interessiert", sagt Kociemba. Gemeinsam mit dem kalifornischen Informatiker Tom Rokicki und dem Mathematiker Morley Davidson von der Kent State University in Ohio wollte er "Gottes Zahl" finden - den optimalen Weg mit möglichst wenigen Schritten um den Zauberwürfel zu lösen. Der Cube kann 43 Trillionen Positionen einnehmen. Für jede Stellung gibt es 18 Möglichkeiten für den ersten Zug - und dann wieder 18 für jeden folgenden. Wollte man die Gotteszahl so berechnen, dass man für jede Würfelstellung die optimalen Züge berechnet, müssten fünf Millionen Computer fünf Millionen Jahre lang rechnen - unmöglich. 1992 kam für Kociemba der erste Durchbruch bei der Suche nach der Gotteszahl. Er schrieb einen Zwei-Phasen-Algorithmus. Der Trick: Der Würfel wird aus einer beliebigen Anfangsstellung in maximal zwölf Zügen in eine Zwischenformation gebracht, das schränkt die Anzahl der verbleibenden Möglichkeiten auf 20 Milliarden ein, was Computer heute gut bewältigen. In einer zweiten Phase wird er dann in die Zielposition (alle Seiten des Würfels einfarbig) gebracht. Dazu braucht es höchstens 18 Drehungen, in der Summe sind also nach diesem Modell höchstens 30 notwendig. In den vergangenen 18 Jahren reduzierten die Forscher die Zahl. 2008 zeigte Rokicki, dass sie nicht größer als 25 sein kann. Er nutzte Kociembas Weg, unterteilte die Würfelpositionen aber in Gruppen, so dass er nicht jede einzeln berechnen musste. Dann fehlte ihm nur noch Rechnerleistung. Zunächst stellte Sony Pictures nachts die Computer zur Verfügung, auf denen sonst Trickfilme entstehen. Dann half Google mit seiner riesigen Rechner-Kapazität. Jetzt steht fest: Der Zauberwürfel kann, egal wie er verdreht ist, in 20 Zügen in die Zielposition gebracht werden. "Ein moderner Desktop-PC hätte für die Rechenarbeit 35 Jahre gebraucht", sagt Rokicki."

Date

17. 7.1996 9:33:22

0.048119307 = product of:
  0.09623861 = sum of:
    0.09623861 = product of:
      0.19247723 = sum of:
        0.19247723 = weight(_text_:desktop in 2133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19247723 = score(doc=2133,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.34311315 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049658924 = queryNorm
            0.56097305 = fieldWeight in 2133, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2133)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

"Open Semantic Desktop Search Zur Tagung des Netzwerk Recherche ist die Desktop Suchmaschine Open Semantic Desktop Search zum unabhängigen und datenschutzfreundlichen Erschliessen und Analysieren von Dokumentenbergen nun erstmals auch als deutschsprachige Version verfügbar. Dank mächtiger Open Source Basis kann die auf Debian GNU/Linux und Apache Solr basierende freie Software als unter Linux, Windows oder Mac lauffähige virtuelle Maschine kostenlos heruntergeladen, genutzt, weitergegeben und weiterentwickelt werden. Dokumentenberge erschliessen Ob grösserer Leak oder Zusammenwürfeln oder (wieder) Erschliessen umfangreicherer (kollaborativer) Recherche(n) oder Archive: Hin und wieder müssen größere Datenberge bzw. Dokumentenberge erschlossen werden, die so viele Dokumente enthalten, dass Mensch diese Masse an Dokumenten nicht mehr alle nacheinander durchschauen und einordnen kann. Auch bei kontinuierlicher Recherche zu Fachthemen sammeln sich mit der Zeit größere Mengen digitalisierter oder digitaler Dokumente zu grösseren Datenbergen an, die immer weiter wachsen und deren Informationen mit einer Suchmaschine für das Archiv leichter auffindbar bleiben. Moderne Tools zur Datenanalyse in Verbindung mit Enterprise Search Suchlösungen und darauf aufbauender Recherche-Tools helfen (halb)automatisch.
Virtuelle Maschine für mehr Plattformunabhängigkeit Die nun auch deutschsprachig verfügbare und mit deutschen Daten wie Ortsnamen oder Bundestagsabgeordneten vorkonfigurierte virtuelle Maschine Open Semantic Desktop Search ermöglicht nun auch auf einzelnen Desktop Computern oder Notebooks mit Windows oder iOS (Mac) die Suche und Analyse von Dokumenten mit der Suchmaschine Open Semantic Search. Als virtuelle Maschine (VM) lässt sich die Suchmaschine Open Semantic Search nicht nur für besonders sensible Dokumente mit dem verschlüsselten Live-System InvestigateIX als abgeschottetes System auf verschlüsselten externen Datenträgern installieren, sondern als virtuelle Maschine für den Desktop auch einfach unter Windows oder auf einem Mac in eine bzgl. weiterer Software und Daten bereits existierende Systemumgebung integrieren, ohne hierzu auf einen (für gemeinsame Recherchen im Team oder für die Redaktion auch möglichen) Suchmaschinen Server angewiesen zu sein. Datenschutz & Unabhängigkeit: Grössere Unabhängigkeit von zentralen IT-Infrastrukturen für unabhängigen investigativen Datenjournalismus Damit ist investigative Recherche weitmöglichst unabhängig möglich: ohne teure, zentrale und von Administratoren abhängige Server, ohne von der Dokumentenanzahl abhängige teure Software-Lizenzen, ohne Internet und ohne spionierende Cloud-Dienste. Datenanalyse und Suche finden auf dem eigenen Computer statt, nicht wie bei vielen anderen Lösungen in der sogenannten Cloud."

0.0460084 = product of:
  0.0920168 = sum of:
    0.0920168 = product of:
      0.2760504 = sum of:
        0.2760504 = weight(_text_:3a in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.2760504 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4210089 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049658924 = queryNorm
            0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 5955, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5955)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: Philosophisch-ethische Rezensionen vom 09.11.2019 (Jürgen Czogalla), Unter: https://philosophisch-ethische-rezensionen.de/rezension/Goedert1.html. In: B.I.T. online 23(2020) H.3, S.345-347 (W. Sühl-Strohmenger) [Unter: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.b-i-t-online.de%2Fheft%2F2020-03-rezensionen.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0iY3f_zNcvEjeZ6inHVnOK]. In: Open Password Nr. 805 vom 14.08.2020 (H.-C. Hobohm) [Unter: https://www.password-online.de/?mailpoet_router&endpoint=view_in_browser&action=view&data=WzE0MywiOGI3NjZkZmNkZjQ1IiwwLDAsMTMxLDFd].

0.039435767 = product of:
  0.07887153 = sum of:
    0.07887153 = product of:
      0.2366146 = sum of:
        0.2366146 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.2366146 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4210089 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049658924 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.

0.039435767 = product of:
  0.07887153 = sum of:
    0.07887153 = product of:
      0.2366146 = sum of:
        0.2366146 = weight(_text_:3a in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.2366146 = score(doc=484,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4210089 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049658924 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 484, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=484)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

https%3A%2F%2Fjournals.univie.ac.at%2Findex.php%2Fvoebm%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F5332%2F5271%2F&usg=AOvVaw2yQdFGHlmOwVls7ANCpTii.

0.039289247 = product of:
  0.078578494 = sum of:
    0.078578494 = product of:
      0.15715699 = sum of:
        0.15715699 = weight(_text_:desktop in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15715699 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.34311315 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049658924 = queryNorm
            0.45803255 = fieldWeight in 2840, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2840)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Finding a place of interest (e.g., a restaurant, hotel, or attraction) is often related to a group information need, however, the actual multiparty collaboration in such searches has not been explored, and little is known about its significance and related practices. We surveyed 100 computer science students and found that 94% (of respondents) searched for places online; 87% had done so as part of a group. Search for place by multiple active participants was experienced by 78%, with group sizes typically being 2 or 3. Search occurred in a range of settings with both desktop PCs and mobile devices. Difficulties were reported with coordinating tasks, sharing results, and making decisions. The results show that finding a place of interest is a quite different group-based search than other multiparty information-seeking activities. The results suggest that local search systems, their interfaces and the devices that access them can be made more usable for collaborative search if they include support for coordination, sharing of results, and decision making.

0.039289247 = product of:
  0.078578494 = sum of:
    0.078578494 = product of:
      0.15715699 = sum of:
        0.15715699 = weight(_text_:desktop in 451) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15715699 = score(doc=451,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.34311315 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049658924 = queryNorm
            0.45803255 = fieldWeight in 451, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=451)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This research is focused on the continuation of the Hypertext Map prototype implementation - MHTX, proposed by Lima, (2004), with the general objective of transforming the MHTX into a semantic content management product facilitating navigation in context supported by customizable software that is easy to use, through high end desktop/web interfaces that sustain the operation of its functions. Besides, these studies aim, in the long run, to achieve the simplification of the information organization, access and recovery processes in digital libraries, making archive management by authors, content managers and information professionals possible.

0.03286314 = product of:
  0.06572628 = sum of:
    0.06572628 = product of:
      0.19717884 = sum of:
        0.19717884 = weight(_text_:3a in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19717884 = score(doc=4997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4210089 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049658924 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4997, 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=4997)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

PhD Dissertation at International Doctorate School in Information and Communication Technology. Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Fcore.ac.uk%2Fdownload%2Fpdf%2F150083013.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2n-qisNagpyT0lli_6QbAQ.

0.03286314 = product of:
  0.06572628 = sum of:
    0.06572628 = product of:
      0.19717884 = sum of:
        0.19717884 = weight(_text_:3a in 4388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19717884 = score(doc=4388,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4210089 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049658924 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4388, 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=4388)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Vgl. unter: https://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwizweHljdbcAhVS16QKHXcFD9QQFjABegQICRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublication%2F271200105_Die_Autonomie_des_Menschen_und_der_Maschine_-_gegenwartige_Definitionen_von_Autonomie_zwischen_philosophischem_Hintergrund_und_technologischer_Umsetzbarkeit_Redigierte_Version_der_Magisterarbeit_Karls&usg=AOvVaw06orrdJmFF2xbCCp_hL26q.

0.03286314 = product of:
  0.06572628 = sum of:
    0.06572628 = product of:
      0.19717884 = sum of:
        0.19717884 = weight(_text_:3a in 855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19717884 = score(doc=855,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4210089 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049658924 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

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>

0.03274104 = product of:
  0.06548208 = sum of:
    0.06548208 = product of:
      0.13096416 = sum of:
        0.13096416 = weight(_text_:desktop in 4937) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13096416 = score(doc=4937,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.34311315 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049658924 = queryNorm
            0.3816938 = fieldWeight in 4937, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4937)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.03274104 = product of:
  0.06548208 = sum of:
    0.06548208 = product of:
      0.13096416 = sum of:
        0.13096416 = weight(_text_:desktop in 1666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13096416 = score(doc=1666,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.34311315 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049658924 = queryNorm
            0.3816938 = fieldWeight in 1666, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1666)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In recent years, searching the web on mobile devices has become enormously popular. Because mobile devices have relatively small screens and show fewer search results, search behavior with mobile devices may be different from that with desktops or laptops. Therefore, examining these differences may suggest better, more efficient designs for mobile search engines. In this experiment, we use eye tracking to explore user behavior and performance. We analyze web searches with 2 task types on 2 differently sized screens: one for a desktop and the other for a mobile device. In addition, we examine the relationships between search performance and several search behaviors to allow further investigation of the differences engendered by the screens. We found that users have more difficulty extracting information from search results pages on the smaller screens, although they exhibit less eye movement as a result of an infrequent use of the scroll function. However, in terms of search performance, our findings suggest that there is no significant difference between the 2 screens in time spent on search results pages and the accuracy of finding answers. This suggests several possible ideas for the presentation design of search results pages on small devices.

0.03274104 = product of:
  0.06548208 = sum of:
    0.06548208 = product of:
      0.13096416 = sum of:
        0.13096416 = weight(_text_:desktop in 3148) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13096416 = score(doc=3148,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.34311315 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049658924 = queryNorm
            0.3816938 = fieldWeight in 3148, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3148)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Compared to the early versions of smart phones, recent mobile devices have bigger screens that can present more web search results. Several previous studies have reported differences in user interaction between conventional desktop computer and mobile device-based web searches, so it is imperative to consider the differences in user behavior for web search engine interface design on mobile devices. However, it is still unknown how the diversification of screen sizes on hand-held devices affects how users search. In this article, we investigate search performance and behavior on three different small screen sizes: early smart phones, recent smart phones, and phablets. We found no significant difference with respect to the efficiency of carrying out tasks, however participants exhibited different search behaviors: less eye movement within top links on the larger screen, fast reading with some hesitation before choosing a link on the medium, and frequent use of scrolling on the small screen. This result suggests that the presentation of web search results for each screen needs to take into account differences in search behavior. We suggest several ideas for presentation design for each screen size.

0.026912395 = product of:
  0.05382479 = sum of:
    0.05382479 = product of:
      0.10764958 = sum of:
        0.10764958 = weight(_text_:22 in 2851) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10764958 = score(doc=2851,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17389709 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049658924 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2851, 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=2851)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.026290512 = product of:
  0.052581023 = sum of:
    0.052581023 = product of:
      0.15774307 = sum of:
        0.15774307 = weight(_text_:3a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15774307 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4210089 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049658924 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

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.

0.026192833 = product of:
  0.052385665 = sum of:
    0.052385665 = product of:
      0.10477133 = sum of:
        0.10477133 = weight(_text_:desktop in 4094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10477133 = score(doc=4094,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.34311315 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049658924 = queryNorm
            0.30535504 = fieldWeight in 4094, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.9093957 = idf(docFreq=119, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4094)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Seit den 90er Jahren wird intensiv in verschiedensten Projekten an multimodalen Interaktionstechniken und verschiedenartigsten Modalitätskombinationen aus Sprache, Gesten, Mimik, Blickbewegungen etc. geforscht. Man hofft, im Rahmen von multimodalen Interaktionsparadigmen natürlichere, robustere, flexiblere und leistungsfähigere Benutzerschnittstellen gestalten zu können. Traditionelle Entwicklungsansätze f¨ur multimodale Interaktion bieten Implementierungs- und Prototyping-Hilfsmittel und Formalismen zur Spezifikation der Benutzerschnittstelle. Andere Ansätze legen ihren Fokus auf guidelinebasierte Entscheidungsunterstützung für die Anfangsphasen der Anforderungsanalyse. Ziel dieser Arbeit ist es, diese traditionellen Ansätze zu ergänzen. Mit Hilfe von User Interface Patterns - von Mustern erfolgreicher Systemrealisierungen - sollen nicht nur frühe Designphasen, sondern auch spätere Stufen des detaillierten Designs durch konkrete Entscheidungshilfen unterstützt werden. In dieser Arbeit wurde im Rahmen einer Metastudie über die Forschungsliteratur ein Katalog von User Interface Patterns identifiziert. Hierzu wurden allgemeine aus Forschungsergebnissen der Psychologie und Mensch- Maschine-Interaktion abgeleitete Prinzipien, Beschreibungen der im Rahmen von Forschungsprojekten entstandenen multimodalen Prototypen und auf diesen basierende empirische Forschungsergebnisse analysiert. Im Rahmen des praktischen Teils der Arbeit wurden f¨ur zwei Szenarien (PDA und Desktop) jeweils ein Wizard-of-Oz-Prototyp und ein eigenständiger "Stand-alone"-Prototyp zur E-Mail-Kommunikation umgesetzt. Diese Prototypen dienten zunächst zur exemplarischen Verifikation einiger der Patterns. Benutzertests zeigten die Plausibilität und Akzeptanz der eingesetzten Muster, insbesondere der Patterns Sprachkürzel, alternative Eingabemöglichkeiten und sprachgestütztes Formular, auf. Die Untersuchung der Augenbewegungen zeigte, dass Blickbewegungsdaten Hinweise auf Benutzerabsichten bieten können, dies allerdings von der aktuellen Aufgabe abhängt. Hier ist weitere Forschung notwendig, um neue, natürlichere und einfacher zu verwendende multimodale Bedienkonzepte zu entwickeln.