Search (81 results, page 1 of 5)

0.08911626 = product of:
  0.13367438 = sum of:
    0.11338161 = weight(_text_:book in 2416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11338161 = score(doc=2416,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.2237077 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.414126 = idf(docFreq=1454, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050679956 = queryNorm
        0.50682926 = fieldWeight in 2416, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.414126 = idf(docFreq=1454, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2416)
    0.02029277 = product of:
      0.04058554 = sum of:
        0.04058554 = weight(_text_:search in 2416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04058554 = score(doc=2416,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17614716 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050679956 = queryNorm
            0.230407 = fieldWeight in 2416, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2416)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Two library classification system interfaces have been implemented for navigating and searching large collections of document and book records. One interface allows the user to browse book records organized by the DDC hierarchy. A Book Shelf display reflects the facet position in the classification hierarchy during browsing, and it dynamically updates to reflect search hits and attribute selections. The other interface provides access to records describing computer science documents classified by the ACM Computing Reviews (CR) system. The CR classification system is a type of faceted classification in which documents can appear at several points in the hierarchy. These two interfaces demonstrate that classification structure can be effectively utilized for organizing digital libraries and, potentiall, collections of Internet-wide information services

0.07426354 = product of:
  0.11139531 = sum of:
    0.094484664 = weight(_text_:book in 2414) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.094484664 = score(doc=2414,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.2237077 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.414126 = idf(docFreq=1454, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050679956 = queryNorm
        0.42235768 = fieldWeight in 2414, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.414126 = idf(docFreq=1454, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2414)
    0.016910642 = product of:
      0.033821285 = sum of:
        0.033821285 = weight(_text_:search in 2414) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033821285 = score(doc=2414,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17614716 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050679956 = queryNorm
            0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 2414, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2414)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Two interfaces are described for navigating large collections of document and book records. An Online Public Access Catalog interface uses a classification hierarchy to facilitate browsing and searching. The system has been implemented and currently runs with over 50,000 book records. Interface widgets allow the hierarchy to be displayed and traversed easily. For example, the Book Shelf dynamically updates itself to reflect searches and attribute selections. A second interface, not yet fully implemented, allows access to the ACM Computing Reviews classification. By browsing a graphic structure such as a classification hierarchy or term network, the user can select or negate terms to incrementally enlarge or refine the query. A number of systems have been proposed that utilise this type of interface: Allen [1] allows users to traverse sections of a classification hierarchy that are adjacent to documents retrieved by a search; Doyle [6] discusses a graph-based interactive browsing environment; Croft [4] extends Doyle's termbased graph with vertices and edges representing individual documents and their degrees of similarity to each other; Frei and Jauslin [7] use tree structures to represent both system command menus and document indexing structures; and Godin [10] and Pedersen [16] model a collection's conceptual structure with termdocument lattices.

0.03811274 = product of:
  0.05716911 = sum of:
    0.043640595 = weight(_text_:book in 2) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043640595 = score(doc=2,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2237077 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.414126 = idf(docFreq=1454, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050679956 = queryNorm
        0.19507864 = fieldWeight in 2, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.414126 = idf(docFreq=1454, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2)
    0.013528514 = product of:
      0.027057027 = sum of:
        0.027057027 = weight(_text_:search in 2) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027057027 = score(doc=2,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17614716 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050679956 = queryNorm
            0.15360467 = fieldWeight in 2, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

In the present work we discuss opportunities, problems, tools and techniques encountered when interconnecting discipline-specific subject classifications, primarily organized as search devices in bibliographic databases, with general classifications originally devised for book shelving in public libraries. We first state the fundamental distinction between topical (or subject) classifications and object classifications. Then we trace the structural limitations that have constrained subject classifications since their library origins, and the devices that were used to overcome the gap with genuine knowledge representation. After recalling some general notions on structure, dynamics and interferences of subject classifications and of the objects they refer to, we sketch a synthetic overview on discipline-specific classifications in Mathematics, Computing and Physics, on one hand, and on general classifications on the other. In this setting we present The Scientific Classifications Page, which collects groups of Web pages produced by a pool of software tools for developing hypertextual presentations of single or paired subject classifications from sequential source files, as well as facilities for gathering information from KWIC lists of classification descriptions. Further we propose a concept-oriented methodology for interconnecting subject classifications, with the concrete support of a relational analysis of the whole Mathematics Subject Classification through its evolution since 1959. Finally, we recall a very basic method for interconnection provided by coreference in bibliographic records among index elements from different systems, and point out the advantages of establishing the conditions of a more widespread application of such a method. A part of these contents was presented under the title Mathematics Subject Classification and related Classifications in the Digital World at the Eighth International Conference Crimea 2001, "Libraries and Associations in the Transient World: New Technologies and New Forms of Cooperation", Sudak, Ukraine, June 9-17, 2001, in a special session on electronic libraries, electronic publishing and electronic information in science chaired by Bernd Wegner, Editor-in-Chief of Zentralblatt MATH.

0.032865077 = product of:
  0.09859523 = sum of:
    0.09859523 = sum of:
      0.05739662 = weight(_text_:search in 4144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05739662 = score(doc=4144,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17614716 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050679956 = queryNorm
          0.3258447 = fieldWeight in 4144, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4144)
      0.041198608 = weight(_text_:22 in 4144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041198608 = score(doc=4144,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17747258 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050679956 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4144, 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=4144)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Exploring collections by their subject matter is an important functionality for library users. We developed an online tool called SciGator in order to allow users to browse the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) classes used in different libraries at the University of Pavia and to perform different types of search in the OPAC. Besides navigation of DDC hierarchies, SciGator suggests "see-also" relationships with related classes and maps equivalent classes in local shelving schemes, thus allowing the expansion of search queries to include subjects contiguous to the initial one. We are developing new features, including the possibility to expand searches even more to national and international catalogues.

Content

Beitrag eines Special Issue: ISKO-Italy: 8' Incontro ISKO Italia, Università di Bologna, 22 maggio 2017, Bologna, Italia.

0.03180495 = product of:
  0.09541484 = sum of:
    0.09541484 = sum of:
      0.0473498 = weight(_text_:search in 1673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0473498 = score(doc=1673,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17614716 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050679956 = queryNorm
          0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 1673, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1673)
      0.04806504 = weight(_text_:22 in 1673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04806504 = score(doc=1673,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17747258 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050679956 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1673, 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=1673)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The Wolverhampton Web Library (WWLib) is a WWW search engine that provides access to UK based information. The experimental version developed in 1995, was a success but highlighted the need for a much higher degree of automation. An interesting feature of the experimental WWLib was that it organised information according to DDC. Discusses the advantages of classification and describes the automatic classifier that is being developed in Java as part of the new, fully automated WWLib

Date

1. 8.1996 22:08:06

0.03180495 = product of:
  0.09541484 = sum of:
    0.09541484 = sum of:
      0.0473498 = weight(_text_:search in 4321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0473498 = score(doc=4321,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17614716 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050679956 = queryNorm
          0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 4321, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4321)
      0.04806504 = weight(_text_:22 in 4321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04806504 = score(doc=4321,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17747258 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050679956 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4321, 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=4321)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Ab Januar 2006 wird Die Deutsche Bibliothek ein neues Webangebot mit dem Namen Melvil starten, das ein Ergebnis ihres Engagements für die DDC und das Projekt DDC Deutsch ist. Der angebotene Webservice basiert auf der Übersetzung der 22. Ausgabe der DDC, die im Oktober 2005 als Druckausgabe im K. G. Saur Verlag erscheint. Er bietet jedoch darüber hinausgehende Features, die den Klassifizierer bei seiner Arbeit unterstützen und erstmals eine verbale Recherche für Endnutzer über DDCerschlossene Titel ermöglichen. Der Webservice Melvil gliedert sich in drei Anwendungen: - MelvilClass, - MelvilSearch und - MelvilSoap.

Object

Melvil Search

0.027261382 = product of:
  0.081784144 = sum of:
    0.081784144 = sum of:
      0.04058554 = weight(_text_:search in 4190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04058554 = score(doc=4190,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17614716 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050679956 = queryNorm
          0.230407 = fieldWeight in 4190, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4190)
      0.041198608 = weight(_text_:22 in 4190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041198608 = score(doc=4190,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17747258 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050679956 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4190, 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=4190)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

1. 8.1996 22:08:06

0.027261382 = product of:
  0.081784144 = sum of:
    0.081784144 = sum of:
      0.04058554 = weight(_text_:search in 3697) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04058554 = score(doc=3697,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17614716 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050679956 = queryNorm
          0.230407 = fieldWeight in 3697, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3697)
      0.041198608 = weight(_text_:22 in 3697) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041198608 = score(doc=3697,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17747258 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050679956 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3697, 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=3697)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In order to enhance the use of Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) numbers in information retrieval, the authors have represented classification with multilingual thesaurus descriptors and implemented this solution in an automated way. The authors illustrate a solution implemented in a BiblioPhil library system. The standard formats used are UNIMARC for subject authority records (i.e. the UDC-based multilingual thesaurus) and MARC XML support for data transfer. The multilingual thesaurus was built according to existing standards, the constituent parts of the classification notations being used as the basis for search terms in the multilingual information retrieval. The verbal equivalents, descriptors and non-descriptors, are used to expand the number of concepts and are given in Romanian, English and French. This approach saves the time of the indexer and provides more user-friendly and easier access to the bibliographic information. The multilingual aspect of the thesaurus enhances information access for a greater number of online users

Date

22. 7.2010 20:40:56

0.02382046 = product of:
  0.03573069 = sum of:
    0.02727537 = weight(_text_:book in 2467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02727537 = score(doc=2467,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2237077 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.414126 = idf(docFreq=1454, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050679956 = queryNorm
        0.12192415 = fieldWeight in 2467, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.414126 = idf(docFreq=1454, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2467)
    0.008455321 = product of:
      0.016910642 = sum of:
        0.016910642 = weight(_text_:search in 2467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016910642 = score(doc=2467,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17614716 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050679956 = queryNorm
            0.09600292 = fieldWeight in 2467, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2467)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This is a classified, annotated bibliography about how to design faceted classification systems and make them usable on the World Wide Web. It is the first of three works I will be doing. The second, based on the material here and elsewhere, will discuss how to actually make the faceted system and put it online. The third will be a report of how I did just that, what worked, what didn't, and what I learned. Almost every article or book listed here begins with an explanation of what a faceted classification system is, so I won't (but see Steckel in Background below if you don't already know). They all agree that faceted systems are very appropriate for the web. Even pre-web articles (such as Duncan's in Background, below) assert that hypertext and facets will go together well. Combined, it is possible to take a set of documents and classify them or apply subject headings to describe what they are about, then build a navigational structure so that any user, no matter how he or she approaches the material, no matter what his or her goals, can move and search in a way that makes sense to them, but still get to the same useful results as someone else following a different path to the same goal. There is no one way that everyone will always use when looking for information. The more flexible the organization of the information, the more accommodating it is. Facets are more flexible for hypertext browsing than any enumerative or hierarchical system.

0.018310493 = product of:
  0.054931477 = sum of:
    0.054931477 = product of:
      0.10986295 = sum of:
        0.10986295 = weight(_text_:22 in 7684) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10986295 = score(doc=7684,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17747258 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050679956 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 7684, 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=7684)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Journal of academic librarianship. 10(1984), S.17-22

0.016568977 = product of:
  0.04970693 = sum of:
    0.04970693 = product of:
      0.09941386 = sum of:
        0.09941386 = weight(_text_:search in 5698) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09941386 = score(doc=5698,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.17614716 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050679956 = queryNorm
            0.5643796 = fieldWeight in 5698, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5698)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Describes the shortcomings of search engines for the WWW comparing their current capabilities to those of the first generation CD-ROM products. Some allow phrase searching and most are improving their Boolean searching. Few allow truncation, wild cards or nested logic. They are stateless, losing previous search criteria. Unlike the indexing and classification systems for today's CD-ROMs, those for Web pages are random, unstructured and of variable quality. Considers that at best Web search engines can only offer free text searching. Discusses whether automatic data classification systems such as Infoseek Ultra can overcome the haphazard nature of the Web with neural network technology, and whether Boolean search techniques may be redundant when replaced by technology such as the Euroferret search engine. However, artificial intelligence is rarely successful on huge, varied databases. Relevance ranking and automatic query expansion still use the same simple inverted indexes. Most Web search engines do nothing more than word counting. Further complications arise with foreign languages

0.015621383 = product of:
  0.04686415 = sum of:
    0.04686415 = product of:
      0.0937283 = sum of:
        0.0937283 = weight(_text_:search in 26) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0937283 = score(doc=26,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.17614716 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050679956 = queryNorm
            0.5321022 = fieldWeight in 26, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=26)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

We live in an information age that requires us, more than ever, to represent, access, and use information. Over the last several decades, we have developed a modern science and technology for information retrieval, relentlessly pursuing the vision of a "memex" that Vannevar Bush proposed in his seminal article, "As We May Think." Faceted search plays a key role in this program. Faceted search addresses weaknesses of conventional search approaches and has emerged as a foundation for interactive information retrieval. User studies demonstrate that faceted search provides more effective information-seeking support to users than best-first search. Indeed, faceted search has become increasingly prevalent in online information access systems, particularly for e-commerce and site search. In this lecture, we explore the history, theory, and practice of faceted search. Although we cannot hope to be exhaustive, our aim is to provide sufficient depth and breadth to offer a useful resource to both researchers and practitioners. Because faceted search is an area of interest to computer scientists, information scientists, interface designers, and usability researchers, we do not assume that the reader is a specialist in any of these fields. Rather, we offer a self-contained treatment of the topic, with an extensive bibliography for those who would like to pursue particular aspects in more depth.

LCSH

Web search engines / Research

Subject

Web search engines / Research

0.015125338 = product of:
  0.045376014 = sum of:
    0.045376014 = product of:
      0.09075203 = sum of:
        0.09075203 = weight(_text_:search in 5138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09075203 = score(doc=5138,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.17614716 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050679956 = queryNorm
            0.51520574 = fieldWeight in 5138, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5138)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Free text searching with keywords in a complete data store is not necessarily the best automatic retrieval method. There must be a proper classification of documents and concepts and the use of a proper classification system avoids problems of terminological deficiency. The dialogue search form makes the on-line catalogue a new information medium. A bibliographic unit must be created with as many search access points as possible, using verbal and classificatory search elements. Verbal search categories must include free text elements for individual search access requirements and a controlled vocabulary with syntactic connections. Classified data should consist of a universal classification system with clear structural notation for access and surface searching, together with several specialist subject classifications for differentiated documentation and retrieval. The universal classification needs no detailed subdivision: it serves mainly as a guide and entry to the detailed sub-systems

0.014260306 = product of:
  0.042780917 = sum of:
    0.042780917 = product of:
      0.085561834 = sum of:
        0.085561834 = weight(_text_:search in 2643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.085561834 = score(doc=2643,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.17614716 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050679956 = queryNorm
            0.48574063 = fieldWeight in 2643, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2643)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Selection of search terms in an online search environment can be facilitated by the visual display of a knowledge map showing the various concepts and their links. This paper reports an a preliminary research aimed at designing a prototype knowledge map using DDC and its visual display. The prototype knowledge map created using the Protégé and TGViz freeware has been demonstrated, and further areas of research in this field are discussed.

Content

1. Introduction Web search engines and digital libraries usually expect the users to use search terms that most accurately represent their information needs. Finding the most appropriate search terms to represent an information need is an age old problem in information retrieval. Keyword or phrase search may produce good search results as long as the search terms or phrase(s) match those used by the authors and have been chosen for indexing by the concerned information retrieval system. Since this does not always happen, a large number of false drops are produced by information retrieval systems. The retrieval results become worse in very large systems that deal with millions of records, such as the Web search engines and digital libraries. Vocabulary control tools are used to improve the performance of text retrieval systems. Thesauri, the most common type of vocabulary control tool used in information retrieval, appeared in the late fifties, designed for use with the emerging post-coordinate indexing systems of that time. They are used to exert terminology control in indexing, and to aid in searching by allowing the searcher to select appropriate search terms. A large volume of literature exists describing the design features, and experiments with the use, of thesauri in various types of information retrieval systems (see for example, Furnas et.al., 1987; Bates, 1986, 1998; Milstead, 1997, and Shiri et al., 2002).

0.013732869 = product of:
  0.041198608 = sum of:
    0.041198608 = product of:
      0.082397215 = sum of:
        0.082397215 = weight(_text_:22 in 6040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.082397215 = score(doc=6040,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17747258 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050679956 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6040, 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=6040)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 6.2002 19:42:47

0.013528514 = product of:
  0.04058554 = sum of:
    0.04058554 = product of:
      0.08117108 = sum of:
        0.08117108 = weight(_text_:search in 256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08117108 = score(doc=256,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17614716 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050679956 = queryNorm
            0.460814 = fieldWeight in 256, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=256)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.013528514 = product of:
  0.04058554 = sum of:
    0.04058554 = product of:
      0.08117108 = sum of:
        0.08117108 = weight(_text_:search in 3815) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08117108 = score(doc=3815,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.17614716 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050679956 = queryNorm
            0.460814 = fieldWeight in 3815, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3815)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

To determine the potential benefits of providing classified displays of search results, we analyzed the classification features of the OCLC NetFirst database using criteria developed by the Subject Analysis Committee (SAC) subcommittee an Metadata and Classification. We also studied NetFirst search logs to better understand how the classification-based searching and limiting functions implemented in the system are being used. Our findings suggest that to increase the use of classification-based features in systems for general users, classificatory functions must be well integrated with the basic search and display functions.

0.013528514 = product of:
  0.04058554 = sum of:
    0.04058554 = product of:
      0.08117108 = sum of:
        0.08117108 = weight(_text_:search in 3991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08117108 = score(doc=3991,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.17614716 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050679956 = queryNorm
            0.460814 = fieldWeight in 3991, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3991)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Although researchers have theorized the critical importance of classification in the organization of information, the classification approach seems to have given way to the alphabetical subject approach in retrieval tools widely used in libraries, and research an how users utilize classification or classification-like arrangements in information seeking has been scant. To better understand whether searchers consider classificatory structures a viable alternative to information retrieval, this article reports an a study of how 24 library and information science students used Yahoo! directories, a popular search service resembling classification, in completing an assigned simple task. Several issues emerged from the students' reporting of their search process and a comparison between hierarchical navigation and keyword searching: citation order of facets, precision vs. recall, and other factors influencing searchers' successes and preferences. The latter included search expertise, knowledge of the discipline, and time required to complete the search. Without a definitive conclusion, we suggest a number of directoons for further research.

0.013528514 = product of:
  0.04058554 = sum of:
    0.04058554 = product of:
      0.08117108 = sum of:
        0.08117108 = weight(_text_:search in 726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08117108 = score(doc=726,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.17614716 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050679956 = queryNorm
            0.460814 = fieldWeight in 726, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=726)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This paper documents the continuing relevance of facet analysis as a technique for searching and organising WWW based materials. The 2 approaches underlying WWW searching and indexing - word and concept based indexing - are outlined. It is argued that facet analysis as an a posteriori approach to classification using words from the subject field as the concept terms in the classification derived represents an excellent approach to searching and organising the results of WWW searches using either search engines or search directories. Finally it is argued that the underlying philosophy of facet analysis is better suited to the disparate nature of WWW resources and searchers than the assumptions of contemporaray IR research.
This article gives a cheerfully brief and undetailed account of how to make a faceted classification system, then describes information retrieval and searching on the web. It concludes by saying that facets would be excellent in helping users search and browse the web, but offers no real clues as to how this can be done.

0.012604448 = product of:
  0.037813343 = sum of:
    0.037813343 = product of:
      0.075626686 = sum of:
        0.075626686 = weight(_text_:search in 84) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.075626686 = score(doc=84,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.17614716 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050679956 = queryNorm
            0.4293381 = fieldWeight in 84, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=84)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to determine some of the structural features of the classification schemes used in the directories (guides, channels) of search engines to organise information sources on the Internet. Ten search engines were examined at the main class level and the full hierarchies of a sample of three specific subjects were analysed in four of these engines, namely Excite, Infoseek, Lycos and Yahoo! It was found that there are major differences between the main classes of the search engines and those found in standard library schemes like Dewey, UDC and LCC. There are large gaps in subject coverage at main class level in the search engines and the general tendency is to use a topic-based approach in the formation of classes, rather than a discipline-based approach. The subdivision of the main classes is according to hierarchical tree structures, but a number of anomalies in this regard were identified. Another deviation from library classification theory is that various principles of division are employed to form classes at the same hierarchical level. In an analysis of citation orders many examples were found that conform to the principles followed in library classifications, but a number of inconsistencies in this regard were also noted