Search (587 results, page 1 of 30)

0.079871394 = product of:
  0.15974279 = sum of:
    0.15974279 = sum of:
      0.11147633 = weight(_text_:encyclopedia in 1438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11147633 = score(doc=1438,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.270842 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05089233 = queryNorm
          0.41159177 = fieldWeight in 1438, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1438)
      0.04826646 = weight(_text_:22 in 1438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04826646 = score(doc=1438,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17821628 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05089233 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1438, 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=1438)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper discusses the classification of popular songs by studying how six online systems for different purposes (a service broadcaster, a library, a guide, an encyclopedia, a radio and an on demand music seller) describe and retrieve this kind of object. It investigates some aspects of faceted classification and proposes a reflection about the path towards a synthetic approach considering the concept of complexity and their implications. These discussions are based on the "That Music" prototype - an ontology-based system built specifically for popular songs.

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.07354207 = product of:
  0.14708415 = sum of:
    0.14708415 = sum of:
      0.1126081 = weight(_text_:encyclopedia in 1412) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.1126081 = score(doc=1412,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.270842 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05089233 = queryNorm
          0.41577047 = fieldWeight in 1412, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1412)
      0.03447604 = weight(_text_:22 in 1412) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03447604 = score(doc=1412,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17821628 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05089233 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1412, 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=1412)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Scholarly domains have been analyzed using various tools and techniques to reveal complex genealogies of scholarship, authorship, citation and ontology, resulting in not only deeper knowledge of each area studied, but in a better developed set of methodologies for domain exploration in general. While domain analysis itself is being used frequently in LIS, there remain many areas against which domain analytical tools have not yet been applied. This is the case with encyclopedic collections of knowledge, such as that which is being developed as the Encyclopedia of Milwaukee (EMKE) within the history department at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. This descriptive study will analyze resources categorized under race and ethnicity from a comprehensive bibliography on the history of metropolitan Milwaukee that was designed to serve those who would research and write entries for the EMKE. Bibliometric and analytic techniques are employed to explore the intension and extension of the domain as it is developing.

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.044512264 = product of:
  0.08902453 = sum of:
    0.08902453 = product of:
      0.17804906 = sum of:
        0.17804906 = weight(_text_:encyclopedia in 3633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17804906 = score(doc=3633,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.270842 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.6573909 = fieldWeight in 3633, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3633)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to discuss the second edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica (2007) within its broader historical context of the production of encyclopedias in the twentieth and the twenty-first centuries. The paper contrasts the 2007 edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica to the Jewish Encyclopedia published between 1901 and 1905, and to the first edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica published in 1972; then contrasts the 2007 edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica to Wikipedia and to other projects of online encyclopedias. Design/methodology/approach - The paper provides a personal reflective review of the sources in question. Findings - That Encyclopaedia Judaica in its latest edition does not adequately replace the original first edition in terms of depth of scholarly work. It is considered that the model offered by Wikipedia could work well for the Encyclopaedia Judaica, allowing it to retain the core of the expert knowledge, and at the same time channel the energy of volunteer editors which has made Wikipedia such a success. Practical implications - The paper is of interest to those with an interest in encyclopedia design or Jewish studies. Originality/value - This paper provides a unique reflection on the latest edition of the encyclopedia and considers future models for its publication based on traditional and non-traditional methods.

Object

Encyclopedia Judaica

0.040415257 = product of:
  0.080830514 = sum of:
    0.080830514 = product of:
      0.24249153 = sum of:
        0.24249153 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.24249153 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.43146574 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = 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.

0.040415257 = product of:
  0.080830514 = sum of:
    0.080830514 = product of:
      0.24249153 = sum of:
        0.24249153 = weight(_text_:3a in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.24249153 = score(doc=484,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.43146574 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = 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.

0.03447905 = product of:
  0.0689581 = sum of:
    0.0689581 = product of:
      0.1379162 = sum of:
        0.1379162 = weight(_text_:encyclopedia in 4417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1379162 = score(doc=4417,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.270842 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.5092128 = fieldWeight in 4417, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4417)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to provide a clear image of the information architecture used in the Encyclopedia of Iranian Architectural History (EIAH) and to show how it was crafted to meet the need for accessibility, expressiveness and interoperability. Design/methodology/approach - In order to assess the level of interoperability in the system, two essential concepts of the system are identified and traced in every level of the three-layer information architecture. Federated repositories are studied for the level of accessibility that they can offer. Knowledge representation level, mediator level and the semantic portal are studied for expressiveness capabilities. Findings - EIAH information architecture is capable of establishing links among resources available in the information pools connected to the system by using EIAH metadata application profile (EMAP). Different modules in this architecture, which are localized for the Persian language, can work on similar environments for other languages, for example Arabic. Originality/value - EIAH is the first example of a digital encyclopedia for the history of Iranian architecture, which is basically different from other digital encyclopedias in the way that it offers information to users. EIAH is aimed at domain experts and provides them not with pre-written and quality articles but with a wide range of resources and documents relative to what they are seeking.

Object

Encyclopedia of Iranian Architectural History

0.03378243 = product of:
  0.06756486 = sum of:
    0.06756486 = product of:
      0.13512972 = sum of:
        0.13512972 = weight(_text_:encyclopedia in 391) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13512972 = score(doc=391,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.270842 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.49892458 = fieldWeight in 391, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=391)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Wikipedia is frequently viewed as an inclusive medium. But inclusivity within this online encyclopedia is not a simple matter of just allowing anyone to contribute. In its quest for legitimacy as an encyclopedia, Wikipedia relies on outsiders to judge claims championed by rival editors. In choosing these experts, Wikipedians define the boundaries of acceptable comment on any given subject. Inclusivity then becomes a matter of how the boundaries of expertise are drawn. In this article I examine the nature of these boundaries and the implications they have for inclusivity and credibility as revealed through the talk pages produced and sources used by a particular subset of Wikipedia's creators-those involved in writing articles on the topic of Philippine history.

0.03209561 = product of:
  0.06419122 = sum of:
    0.06419122 = sum of:
      0.03981298 = weight(_text_:encyclopedia in 2171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03981298 = score(doc=2171,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.270842 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05089233 = queryNorm
          0.14699706 = fieldWeight in 2171, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2171)
      0.024378244 = weight(_text_:22 in 2171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024378244 = score(doc=2171,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17821628 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05089233 = queryNorm
          0.13679022 = fieldWeight in 2171, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2171)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Der neue Herausgeber des Brockhaus, ein Tochterverlag von Bertelsmann, hat unterdessen angekündigt, zum gedruckten Lexikon zurückzukehren. Etwa Anfang 2015 soll die 22. Auflage erscheinen. In Zeiten des virtuellen Informationsoverkills gebe es einen Bedarf an Orientierung, an Relevanzvorgaben, sagt Geschäftsführer Christoph Hünermann. Ausgerechnet Bertelsmann druckte 2008 ein knapp 1 000 Seiten langes Wikipedia-Lexikon mit den 50 000 meist gesuchten Begriffen. Eine Experten-Redaktion überprüfte die Einträge sicherheitshalber zuvor - soll allerdings kaum Fehler gefunden haben."

Object

Encyclopedia Britannica

Source

Frankfurter Rundschau. Nr.76 vom 29.3.2012, S.22-23

0.028152024 = product of:
  0.05630405 = sum of:
    0.05630405 = product of:
      0.1126081 = sum of:
        0.1126081 = weight(_text_:encyclopedia in 251) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1126081 = score(doc=251,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.270842 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.41577047 = fieldWeight in 251, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=251)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article explores the opportunities and challenges of creating and sustaining large-scale "content curation communities" through an in-depth case study of the Encyclopedia of Life (EOL). Content curation communities are large-scale crowdsourcing endeavors that aim to curate existing content into a single repository, making these communities different from content creation communities such as Wikipedia. In this article, we define content curation communities and provide examples of this increasingly important genre. We then follow by presenting EOL, a compelling example of a content curation community, and describe a case study of EOL based on analysis of interviews, online discussions, and survey data. Our findings are characterized into two broad categories: information integration and social integration. Information integration challenges at EOL include the need to (a) accommodate and validate multiple sources and (b) integrate traditional peer reviewed sources with user-generated, nonpeer-reviewed content. Social integration challenges at EOL include the need to (a) establish the credibility of open-access resources within the scientific community and (b) facilitate collaboration between experts and novices. After identifying the challenges, we discuss the potential strategies EOL and other content curation communities can use to address them, and provide technical, content, and social design recommendations for overcoming them.

0.027869083 = product of:
  0.055738166 = sum of:
    0.055738166 = product of:
      0.11147633 = sum of:
        0.11147633 = weight(_text_:encyclopedia in 4657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11147633 = score(doc=4657,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.270842 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.41159177 = fieldWeight in 4657, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4657)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

It is argued that to evaluate an information source (e.g., a Wikipedia article), it is necessary to relate the content of that source to an interpretation of the state of knowledge at the research front (which is typically developing dynamically). In the research literature, there is a controversy about the effect of screening programs for breast cancer. This controversy is used to compare the value of Wikipedia with Encyclopedia Britannica and two Danish encyclopedias as information sources. It is argued that this method of examining information sources is preferable to other methods which have been suggested in the literature.

0.024378244 = product of:
  0.048756488 = sum of:
    0.048756488 = product of:
      0.097512975 = sum of:
        0.097512975 = weight(_text_:22 in 2810) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.097512975 = score(doc=2810,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17821628 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 2810, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2810)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 7.2004 9:42:33
22. 4.2017 11:58:05

0.024378244 = product of:
  0.048756488 = sum of:
    0.048756488 = product of:
      0.097512975 = sum of:
        0.097512975 = weight(_text_:22 in 3582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.097512975 = score(doc=3582,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17821628 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3582, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3582)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 4.2017 10:42:05
22. 4.2017 10:48:38

0.024378244 = product of:
  0.048756488 = sum of:
    0.048756488 = product of:
      0.097512975 = sum of:
        0.097512975 = weight(_text_:22 in 3975) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.097512975 = score(doc=3975,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17821628 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3975, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3975)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 2.2018 12:06:44
22. 2.2018 12:13:53

0.02413323 = product of:
  0.04826646 = sum of:
    0.04826646 = product of:
      0.09653292 = sum of:
        0.09653292 = weight(_text_:22 in 4347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09653292 = score(doc=4347,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17821628 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4347, 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=4347)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 3.2013 16:18:36

0.02413323 = product of:
  0.04826646 = sum of:
    0.04826646 = product of:
      0.09653292 = sum of:
        0.09653292 = weight(_text_:22 in 1601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09653292 = score(doc=1601,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17821628 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 1601, 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=1601)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

27.12.2014 18:54:22

0.023887785 = product of:
  0.04777557 = sum of:
    0.04777557 = product of:
      0.09555114 = sum of:
        0.09555114 = weight(_text_:encyclopedia in 3761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09555114 = score(doc=3761,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.270842 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.35279295 = fieldWeight in 3761, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3761)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates

0.023887785 = product of:
  0.04777557 = sum of:
    0.04777557 = product of:
      0.09555114 = sum of:
        0.09555114 = weight(_text_:encyclopedia in 4764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09555114 = score(doc=4764,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.270842 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.35279295 = fieldWeight in 4764, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4764)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Wikipedia advocates a strict "neutral point of view" (NPOV) policy. However, although originally a U.S-based, English-language phenomenon, the online, user-created encyclopedia now has versions in many languages. This study examines the extent to which content and perspectives vary across cultures by comparing articles about famous persons in the Polish and English editions of Wikipedia. The results of quantitative and qualitative content analyses reveal systematic differences related to the different cultures, histories, and values of Poland and the United States; at the same time, a U.S./English-language advantage is evident throughout. In conclusion, the implications of these findings for the quality and objectivity of Wikipedia as a global repository of knowledge are discussed, and recommendations are advanced for Wikipedia end users and content developers.

0.023887785 = product of:
  0.04777557 = sum of:
    0.04777557 = product of:
      0.09555114 = sum of:
        0.09555114 = weight(_text_:encyclopedia in 3143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09555114 = score(doc=3143,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.270842 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.35279295 = fieldWeight in 3143, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3143)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

One of the key challenges for innovation and technology-mediated knowledge collaboration within organizational settings is motivating contributors to share their knowledge. Drawing upon self-determination theory, we investigate 2 forms of motivation: internally driven (autonomous motivation) and externally driven (controlled motivation). Knowledge sharing could be viewed as a required in-role activity or as discretionary extra-role behavior. In this study, we examine the moderating effect of role perceptions on the relations between each of the two motivational constructs and knowledge sharing, paying particular attention to the affordances of the enabling information technology. An analysis of survey data from a wiki-based organizational encyclopedia in a large, multinational firm reveals that when contributors' motivation is externally driven, they are more likely to share knowledge if this activity is viewed as in-role behavior. However, when contributors' motivation is internally driven, they are more likely to participate in knowledge sharing when this activity is viewed as extra-role behavior. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

0.020685624 = product of:
  0.04137125 = sum of:
    0.04137125 = product of:
      0.0827425 = sum of:
        0.0827425 = weight(_text_:22 in 6224) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0827425 = score(doc=6224,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17821628 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6224, 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=6224)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 1.2012 13:17:00

0.020685624 = product of:
  0.04137125 = sum of:
    0.04137125 = product of:
      0.0827425 = sum of:
        0.0827425 = weight(_text_:22 in 7297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0827425 = score(doc=7297,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17821628 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 7297, 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=7297)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

26. 4.2015 19:27:22