Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Golub, K."
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Golub, K.; Soergel, D.; Buchanan, G.; Tudhope, D.; Lykke, M.; Hiom, D.: ¬A framework for evaluating automatic indexing or classification in the context of retrieval (2016) 0.10
    0.09524199 = product of:
      0.14286299 = sum of:
        0.08966068 = weight(_text_:systematic in 3311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08966068 = score(doc=3311,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28397155 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.31573826 = fieldWeight in 3311, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3311)
        0.053202312 = product of:
          0.106404625 = sum of:
            0.106404625 = weight(_text_:indexing in 3311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.106404625 = score(doc=3311,freq=14.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.55947536 = fieldWeight in 3311, product of:
                  3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                    14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3311)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Tools for automatic subject assignment help deal with scale and sustainability in creating and enriching metadata, establishing more connections across and between resources and enhancing consistency. Although some software vendors and experimental researchers claim the tools can replace manual subject indexing, hard scientific evidence of their performance in operating information environments is scarce. A major reason for this is that research is usually conducted in laboratory conditions, excluding the complexities of real-life systems and situations. The article reviews and discusses issues with existing evaluation approaches such as problems of aboutness and relevance assessments, implying the need to use more than a single "gold standard" method when evaluating indexing and retrieval, and proposes a comprehensive evaluation framework. The framework is informed by a systematic review of the literature on evaluation approaches: evaluating indexing quality directly through assessment by an evaluator or through comparison with a gold standard, evaluating the quality of computer-assisted indexing directly in the context of an indexing workflow, and evaluating indexing quality indirectly through analyzing retrieval performance.
  2. Golub, K.: Automatic subject indexing of text (2019) 0.02
    0.017734105 = product of:
      0.053202312 = sum of:
        0.053202312 = product of:
          0.106404625 = sum of:
            0.106404625 = weight(_text_:indexing in 5268) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.106404625 = score(doc=5268,freq=14.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.55947536 = fieldWeight in 5268, product of:
                  3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                    14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5268)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Automatic subject indexing addresses problems of scale and sustainability and can be at the same time used to enrich existing metadata records, establish more connections across and between resources from various metadata and resource collec-tions, and enhance consistency of the metadata. In this work, au-tomatic subject indexing focuses on assigning index terms or classes from established knowledge organization systems (KOSs) for subject indexing like thesauri, subject headings systems and classification systems. The following major approaches are dis-cussed, in terms of their similarities and differences, advantages and disadvantages for automatic assigned indexing from KOSs: "text categorization," "document clustering," and "document classification." Text categorization is perhaps the most wide-spread, machine-learning approach with what seems generally good reported performance. Document clustering automatically both creates groups of related documents and extracts names of subjects depicting the group at hand. Document classification re-uses the intellectual effort invested into creating a KOS for sub-ject indexing and even simple string-matching algorithms have been reported to achieve good results, because one concept can be described using a number of different terms, including equiv-alent, related, narrower and broader terms. Finally, applicability of automatic subject indexing to operative information systems and challenges of evaluation are outlined, suggesting the need for more research.
  3. Matthews, B.; Jones, C.; Puzon, B.; Moon, J.; Tudhope, D.; Golub, K.; Nielsen, M.L.: ¬An evaluation of enhancing social tagging with a knowledge organization system (2010) 0.01
    0.014988055 = product of:
      0.044964164 = sum of:
        0.044964164 = product of:
          0.08992833 = sum of:
            0.08992833 = weight(_text_:indexing in 4171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08992833 = score(doc=4171,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.47284302 = fieldWeight in 4171, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4171)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - Traditional subject indexing and classification are considered infeasible in many digital collections. This paper seeks to investigate ways of enhancing social tagging via knowledge organization systems, with a view to improving the quality of tags for increased information discovery and retrieval performance. Design/methodology/approach - Enhanced tagging interfaces were developed for exemplar online repositories, and trials were undertaken with author and reader groups to evaluate the effectiveness of tagging augmented with control vocabulary for subject indexing of papers in online repositories. Findings - The results showed that using a knowledge organisation system to augment tagging does appear to increase the effectiveness of non-specialist users (that is, without information science training) in subject indexing. Research limitations/implications - While limited by the size and scope of the trials undertaken, these results do point to the usefulness of a mixed approach in supporting the subject indexing of online resources. Originality/value - The value of this work is as a guide to future developments in the practical support for resource indexing in online repositories.
  4. Golub, K.; Lykke, M.; Tudhope, D.: Enhancing social tagging with automated keywords from the Dewey Decimal Classification (2014) 0.01
    0.009479279 = product of:
      0.028437834 = sum of:
        0.028437834 = product of:
          0.05687567 = sum of:
            0.05687567 = weight(_text_:indexing in 2918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05687567 = score(doc=2918,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.29905218 = fieldWeight in 2918, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2918)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to explore the potential of applying the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) as an established knowledge organization system (KOS) for enhancing social tagging, with the ultimate purpose of improving subject indexing and information retrieval. Design/methodology/approach - Over 11.000 Intute metadata records in politics were used. Totally, 28 politics students were each given four tasks, in which a total of 60 resources were tagged in two different configurations, one with uncontrolled social tags only and another with uncontrolled social tags as well as suggestions from a controlled vocabulary. The controlled vocabulary was DDC comprising also mappings from the Library of Congress Subject Headings. Findings - The results demonstrate the importance of controlled vocabulary suggestions for indexing and retrieval: to help produce ideas of which tags to use, to make it easier to find focus for the tagging, to ensure consistency and to increase the number of access points in retrieval. The value and usefulness of the suggestions proved to be dependent on the quality of the suggestions, both as to conceptual relevance to the user and as to appropriateness of the terminology. Originality/value - No research has investigated the enhancement of social tagging with suggestions from the DDC, an established KOS, in a user trial, comparing social tagging only and social tagging enhanced with the suggestions. This paper is a final reflection on all aspects of the study.
  5. Golub, K.; Hansson, J.; Soergel, D.; Tudhope, D.: Managing classification in libraries : a methodological outline for evaluating automatic subject indexing and classification in Swedish library catalogues (2015) 0.01
    0.009479279 = product of:
      0.028437834 = sum of:
        0.028437834 = product of:
          0.05687567 = sum of:
            0.05687567 = weight(_text_:indexing in 2300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05687567 = score(doc=2300,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.29905218 = fieldWeight in 2300, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2300)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Subject terms play a crucial role in resource discovery but require substantial effort to produce. Automatic subject classification and indexing address problems of scale and sustainability and can be used to enrich existing bibliographic records, establish more connections across and between resources and enhance consistency of bibliographic data. The paper aims to put forward a complex methodological framework to evaluate automatic classification tools of Swedish textual documents based on the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) recently introduced to Swedish libraries. Three major complementary approaches are suggested: a quality-built gold standard, retrieval effects, domain analysis. The gold standard is built based on input from at least two catalogue librarians, end-users expert in the subject, end users inexperienced in the subject and automated tools. Retrieval effects are studied through a combination of assigned and free tasks, including factual and comprehensive types. The study also takes into consideration the different role and character of subject terms in various knowledge domains, such as scientific disciplines. As a theoretical framework, domain analysis is used and applied in relation to the implementation of DDC in Swedish libraries and chosen domains of knowledge within the DDC itself.
  6. Golub, K.; Tudhope, D.; Zeng, M.L.; Zumer, M.: Terminology registries for knowledge organization systems : functionality, use, and attributes (2014) 0.01
    0.0067315903 = product of:
      0.02019477 = sum of:
        0.02019477 = product of:
          0.04038954 = sum of:
            0.04038954 = weight(_text_:22 in 1347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04038954 = score(doc=1347,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1347, 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=1347)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 8.2014 17:12:54