Search (49 results, page 2 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Verbale Doksprachen im Online-Retrieval"
  1. Schabas, A.H.: Postcoordinate retrieval : a comparison of two retrieval languages (1982) 0.01
    0.011375135 = product of:
      0.034125403 = sum of:
        0.034125403 = product of:
          0.068250805 = sum of:
            0.068250805 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.068250805 = score(doc=1202,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.3588626 = fieldWeight in 1202, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1202)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This article reports on a comparison of the postcoordinate retrieval effectiveness of two indexing languages: LCSH and PRECIS. The effect of augmenting each with title words was also studies. The database for the study was over 15.000 UK MARC records. Users returned 5.326 relevant judgements for citations retrieved for 61 SDI profiles, representing a wide variety of subjects. Results are reported in terms of precision and relative recall. Pure/applied sciences data and social science data were analyzed separately. Cochran's significance tests for ratios were used to interpret the findings. Recall emerged as the more important measure discriminating the behavior of the two languages. Addition of title words was found to improve recall of both indexing languages significantly. A direct relationship was observed between recall and exhaustivity. For the social sciences searches, recalls from PRECIS alone and from PRECIS with title words were significantly higher than those from LCSH alone and from LCSH with title words, respectively. Corresponding comparisons for the pure/applied sciences searches revealed no significant differences
  2. Svenonius, E.: Präkoordination - ja oder nein? (1994) 0.01
    0.011375135 = product of:
      0.034125403 = sum of:
        0.034125403 = product of:
          0.068250805 = sum of:
            0.068250805 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.068250805 = score(doc=1643,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.3588626 = fieldWeight in 1643, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1643)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Die Diskussion um Vor- und Nachteile von Präkoordination oder Postkoordination wird unter den in der verbalen Sacherschließung Engagierten in Deutschland seit Jahren geführt. Mit zunehmender Verbreitung der RSWK gewinnen die Überlegungen, die sich angesichts der Ausbreitung des OPAC für das 'Zerschlagen' der Schlagwortketten aussprechen, an Bedeutung. In diesem Zusammenhang trägt eine Berücksichtigung der internationalen Debatte um Prä- und Postkoordination zur Erweiterung des nationalen Horizontes bei. Der Beitrag ist eine leicht gekürzte Übersetzung eines Referates, das die Autorin beim IFLA Satellite Meeting zum Thema 'Subject indexing in the 90's - principles and practices' im August 1993 in Lissabon gehalten hat
    Footnote
    Original in: Subject indexing: principles and practices in the 90's. Proceedings ... Ed.: R.P. Holley et al. München: Saur 1995, S.231-255. - Übersetzt und mit einem Nachwort (S.294-296) versehen von M. Heiner-Freiling
  3. Wool, G.: Filing and precoordination : how subject headings are displayed in online catalogs and why it matters (2000) 0.01
    0.011375135 = product of:
      0.034125403 = sum of:
        0.034125403 = product of:
          0.068250805 = sum of:
            0.068250805 = weight(_text_:indexing in 5612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.068250805 = score(doc=5612,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.3588626 = fieldWeight in 5612, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5612)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Library of Congress Subjecl Headings retrieved as the results of a search in an online catalog are likely to be filed in straight alphabetical, word-by-word order, ignoring the semantic structures of these headings and scattering headings of a similar type. This practice makes LC headings unnecessarily difficult to use and negates much of their indexing power. Enthusiasm for filing simplicity and postcoordinate indexing are likely contributing factors to this phenomenon. Since the report Headings for Tomorrow (1992) first raised this issue, filing practices favoring postcoordination over precoordination appear to have become more widespread and more entrenched
  4. Lucarelli, A.; Viti, E.: Florence-Washington round trip : ways and intersections between semantic indexing tools in different languages (2015) 0.01
    0.011375135 = product of:
      0.034125403 = sum of:
        0.034125403 = product of:
          0.068250805 = sum of:
            0.068250805 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1886) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.068250805 = score(doc=1886,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.3588626 = fieldWeight in 1886, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1886)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This article presents an Italian experience of developing streamlined semantic interoperability between the Italian Thesaurus of Nuovo soggettario and the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH). This ongoing project must take into consideration the differences between the two indexing tools, while the criteria on which the resulting actions are based are being clarified continually. Reciprocal interoperability, thanks to the Simple Knowledge Organization System format, enables us to create links with English language subject headings. The National Central Library of Florence is studying methods of automatically catching LCSH equivalents and the question of how to take advantage of both Semantic Web outputs and the multilingual dataset of Wikidata.
  5. Meikle, D.: Syndetic structure and OPACs : a literature review (1995) 0.01
    0.01072458 = product of:
      0.032173738 = sum of:
        0.032173738 = product of:
          0.064347476 = sum of:
            0.064347476 = weight(_text_:indexing in 3349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.064347476 = score(doc=3349,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.3383389 = fieldWeight in 3349, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3349)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Attempts to gauge whether syndetic structure, the cross reference system long regarded as an integral component of the controlled vocabulary which predominates as the indexing framework for online subject searching, still has a role to play in assisting end users in their information quests. To this end, examines a number of existing and proposed enhancements to OPACs by means of a literatur review. These include: Boolean and keyword searching; online browsing; artificial intelligence; classification clustering; and hypertext. Discusses Dervin's sensemaking theories and methodologies
  6. Bates, M.J.: How to use controlled vocabularies more effectively in online searching (1989) 0.01
    0.009384007 = product of:
      0.02815202 = sum of:
        0.02815202 = product of:
          0.05630404 = sum of:
            0.05630404 = weight(_text_:indexing in 2883) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05630404 = score(doc=2883,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.29604656 = fieldWeight in 2883, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2883)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Optimal retrieval in on-line searching can be achieved through combined use of both natural language and controlled vocabularies. However, there is a large variety of types of controlled vocabulary in data bases and often more than one in a single data base. Optimal use of these vocabularies requires understanding what types of languages are involved, and taking advantage of the particular mix of vocabularies in a given data base. Examples 4 major types of indexing and classification used in data bases and puts these 4 in the context of 3 other approaches to subject access. Discusses how to evaluate a new data base for various forms of subject access.
  7. Bates, M.J.: How to use controlled vocabularies more effectively in online searching (1989) 0.01
    0.009384007 = product of:
      0.02815202 = sum of:
        0.02815202 = product of:
          0.05630404 = sum of:
            0.05630404 = weight(_text_:indexing in 207) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05630404 = score(doc=207,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.29604656 = fieldWeight in 207, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=207)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Optimal retrieval in on-line searching can be achieved through combined use of both natural language and controlled vocabularies. However, there is a large variety of types of controlled vocabulary in data bases and often more than one in a single data base. Optimal use of these vocabularies requires understanding what types of languages are involved, and taking advantage of the particular mix of vocabularies in a given data base. Examples 4 major types of indexing and classification used in data bases and puts these 4 in the context of 3 other approaches to subject access. Discusses how to evaluate a new data base for various forms of subject access.
  8. Voorbij, H.: ¬Een goede titel behoeft geen trefwoord, of toch wel? : een vergelijkend oderzoek titelwoorden - trefwoorden (1997) 0.01
    0.009384007 = product of:
      0.02815202 = sum of:
        0.02815202 = product of:
          0.05630404 = sum of:
            0.05630404 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1446) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05630404 = score(doc=1446,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.29604656 = fieldWeight in 1446, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1446)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    A recent survey at the Royal Library in the Netherlands showed that subject headings are more efficient than title keywords for retrieval purposes. 475 Dutch publications were selected at random and assigned subject headings. The study showed that subject headings provided additional useful information in 56% of titles. Subsequent searching of the library's online catalogue showed that 88% of titles were retrieved via subject headings against 57% through title keywords. Further precision may be achieved with the help of indexing staff, but at considerable cost
  9. Ashton, J.; Kent, C.: FAST: a journey toward sustainability in subject indexing at the British Library (2023) 0.01
    0.009384007 = product of:
      0.02815202 = sum of:
        0.02815202 = product of:
          0.05630404 = sum of:
            0.05630404 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05630404 = score(doc=1172,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.29604656 = fieldWeight in 1172, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1172)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
  10. Nicholson, J.; Lake, S.: Implementation of FAST in two digital repositories : breaking silos, unifying subject practices (2023) 0.01
    0.009384007 = product of:
      0.02815202 = sum of:
        0.02815202 = product of:
          0.05630404 = sum of:
            0.05630404 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1174) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05630404 = score(doc=1174,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.29604656 = fieldWeight in 1174, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1174)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This study traces evolving approaches to the use of the FAST (Faceted Application of Subject Terminology) in digital repositories at Atkins Library at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, where changes in staffing, the launch of an institutional repository, and efforts to address problematic language in metadata have necessitated a shift from an in-depth indexing approach to FAST to a lightweight "tagging" model more suited to present-day metadata needs. Despite the subject schema's apparent simplicity, Atkins' experience with FAST has shown that it still requires significant time, effort, and experimentation in order to deploy it to best effect.
  11. Lambert, N.: Of thesauri and computers : reflections on the need for thesauri (1995) 0.01
    0.008975455 = product of:
      0.026926363 = sum of:
        0.026926363 = product of:
          0.053852726 = sum of:
            0.053852726 = weight(_text_:22 in 3734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.053852726 = score(doc=3734,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3734, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3734)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Searcher. 3(1995) no.8, S.18-22
  12. Cousins, S.A.: Enhancing subject access to OPACs : controlled vocabulary vs. natural language (1992) 0.01
    0.0080434345 = product of:
      0.024130303 = sum of:
        0.024130303 = product of:
          0.048260607 = sum of:
            0.048260607 = weight(_text_:indexing in 2230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048260607 = score(doc=2230,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.2537542 = fieldWeight in 2230, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2230)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Experimental evidence suggests that enhancing the subject content of OPAC records can improve retrieval performance. This is based on the use of natural language index terms derived from the table of contents and back-of-the-book index of documents. The research reported here investigates the alternative approach of translating these natural language terms into controlled vocabulary. Subject queries were collected by interview at the catalogue, and indexing of the queries demonstrated the impressive ability of PRECIS, and to a lesser extent LCSH, to represent users' information needs. DDC performed poorly in this respect. The assumption was made that an index language adequately specific to represent users' queries should be adequate to represent document contents. Searches were carried out on three test databases, and both natural language and PRECIS enhancement of MARC records increased the number of relevant documents found, with PRECIS showing the better performance. However, with weak stemming the advantage of PRECIS was lost. Consideration must also be given to the potential advantages of controlled vocabulary, over and above basic retrieval performance measures
  13. Bodoff, D.; Kambil, A.: Partial coordination : II. A preliminary evaluation and failure analysis (1998) 0.01
    0.0080434345 = product of:
      0.024130303 = sum of:
        0.024130303 = product of:
          0.048260607 = sum of:
            0.048260607 = weight(_text_:indexing in 2323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048260607 = score(doc=2323,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.2537542 = fieldWeight in 2323, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2323)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Partial coordination is a new method for cataloging documents for subject access. It is especially designed to enhance the precision of document searches in online environments. This article reports a preliminary evaluation of partial coordination that shows promising results compared with full-text retrieval. We also report the difficulties in empirically evaluating the effectiveness of automatic full-text retrieval in contrast to mixed methods such as partial coordination which combine human cataloging with computerized retrieval. Based on our study, we propose research in this area will substantially benefit from a common framework for failure analysis and a common data set. This will allow information retrieval researchers adapting 'library style'cataloging to large electronic document collections, as well as those developing automated or mixed methods, to directly compare their proposals for indexing and retrieval. This article concludes by suggesting guidelines for constructing such as testbed
  14. Hoerman, H.L.; Furniss, K.A.: Turning practice into principles : a comparison of the IFLA Principles underlying Subject Heading Languages (SHLs) and the principles underlying the Library of Congress Subject Headings system (2000) 0.01
    0.0080434345 = product of:
      0.024130303 = sum of:
        0.024130303 = product of:
          0.048260607 = sum of:
            0.048260607 = weight(_text_:indexing in 5611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048260607 = score(doc=5611,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.2537542 = fieldWeight in 5611, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5611)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The IFLA Section on Classification and Indexing's Working Group on Principles Underlying Subject Headings Languages has identified a set of eleven principles for subject heading languages and excerpted the texts that match each principle from the instructions for each of eleven national subject indexing systems, including excerpts from the LC's Subject Cataloging Manual: Subject Headings. This study compares the IFLA principles with other texts that express the principles underlying LCSH, especially Library of Congress Subject Headings: Principles of Structure and Policies for Application, prepared by Lois Mai Chan for the Library of Congress in 1990, Chan's later book on LCSH, and earlier documents by Haykin and Cutter. The principles are further elaborated for clarity and discussed
  15. Poynder, R.: Web research engines? (1996) 0.01
    0.0080434345 = product of:
      0.024130303 = sum of:
        0.024130303 = product of:
          0.048260607 = sum of:
            0.048260607 = weight(_text_:indexing in 5698) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048260607 = score(doc=5698,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.2537542 = fieldWeight in 5698, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, 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
  16. Principles underlying subject heading languages (SHLs) (1999) 0.01
    0.0080434345 = product of:
      0.024130303 = sum of:
        0.024130303 = product of:
          0.048260607 = sum of:
            0.048260607 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048260607 = score(doc=1659,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.2537542 = fieldWeight in 1659, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1659)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Issue
    Working Group on Principles Underlying Subject Heading Languages; approved by the Standing Committee of the IFLA Section on Classification and Indexing.
  17. O'Neill, E.T.; Chan, L.M.: FAST - a new approach to controlled subject access (2008) 0.01
    0.0080434345 = product of:
      0.024130303 = sum of:
        0.024130303 = product of:
          0.048260607 = sum of:
            0.048260607 = weight(_text_:indexing in 2181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048260607 = score(doc=2181,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.2537542 = fieldWeight in 2181, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2181)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    New pespectives on subject indexing and classification: essays in honour of Magda Heiner-Freiling. Red.: K. Knull-Schlomann, u.a
  18. O'Neill, E.T.; Bennett, R.; Kammerer, K.: Using authorities to improve subject searches (2012) 0.01
    0.0080434345 = product of:
      0.024130303 = sum of:
        0.024130303 = product of:
          0.048260607 = sum of:
            0.048260607 = weight(_text_:indexing in 310) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048260607 = score(doc=310,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.2537542 = fieldWeight in 310, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=310)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Authority files have played an important role in improving the quality of indexing and subject cataloging. Although authorities can significantly improve search by increasing the number of access points, they are rarely an integral part of the information retrieval process, particularly end-users searches. A retrieval prototype, searchFAST, was developed to test the feasibility of using an authority file as an index to bibliographic records. searchFAST uses FAST (Faceted Application of Subject Terminology) as an index to OCLC's WorldCat.org bibliographic database. The searchFAST methodology complements, rather than replaces, existing WorldCat.org access. The bibliographic file is searched indirectly; first the authority file is searched to identify appropriate subject headings, then the headings are used to retrieve the matching bibliographic records. The prototype demonstrates the effectiveness and practicality of using an authority file as an index. Searching the authority file leverages authority control work by increasing the number of access points while supporting a simple interface designed for end-users.
  19. Stone, A.T.: Up-ending Cutter's pyramid : the case for making subject references to broader terms (1996) 0.01
    0.007853523 = product of:
      0.023560567 = sum of:
        0.023560567 = product of:
          0.047121134 = sum of:
            0.047121134 = weight(_text_:22 in 7238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047121134 = score(doc=7238,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7238, 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=7238)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 4.1997 20:43:23
  20. Chan, L.M.; Hodges, T.: Entering the millennium : a new century for LCSH (2000) 0.01
    0.0067315903 = product of:
      0.02019477 = sum of:
        0.02019477 = product of:
          0.04038954 = sum of:
            0.04038954 = weight(_text_:22 in 5920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04038954 = score(doc=5920,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5920, 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=5920)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    27. 5.2001 16:22:21

Years

Languages

  • e 42
  • d 4
  • f 1
  • i 1
  • nl 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 43
  • m 5
  • s 3
  • el 2
  • i 1
  • More… Less…