Search (192 results, page 10 of 10)

4.700756E-4 = product of:
  0.0018803024 = sum of:
    0.0018803024 = product of:
      0.005640907 = sum of:
        0.005640907 = weight(_text_:a in 4486) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005640907 = score(doc=4486,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.055348642 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04800207 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 4486, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4486)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Type

a

4.700756E-4 = product of:
  0.0018803024 = sum of:
    0.0018803024 = product of:
      0.005640907 = sum of:
        0.005640907 = weight(_text_:a in 4870) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005640907 = score(doc=4870,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.055348642 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04800207 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 4870, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4870)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Type

a

4.154921E-4 = product of:
  0.0016619684 = sum of:
    0.0016619684 = product of:
      0.0049859053 = sum of:
        0.0049859053 = weight(_text_:a in 1463) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0049859053 = score(doc=1463,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.055348642 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04800207 = queryNorm
            0.090081796 = fieldWeight in 1463, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1463)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The use of graphical representations is very common in information technology and engineering. Although these same tools could be applied effectively in other areas, they are not used because they are hardly known or are completely unheard of. This article aims to discuss the results of the experimentation carried out on graphical approaches to knowledge representation during research, analysis and problem-solving in the health care sector. The experimentation was carried out on conceptual mapping and Petri Nets, developed collaboratively online with the aid of the CMapTool and WoPeD graphic applications. Two distinct professional communities have been involved in the research, both pertaining to the Local Health Units in Tuscany. One community is made up of head physicians and health care managers whilst the other is formed by technical staff from the Department of Nutrition and Food Hygiene. It emerged from the experimentation that concept maps arc considered more effective in analyzing knowledge domain related to the problem to be faced (description of what it is). On the other hand, Petri Nets arc more effective in studying and formalizing its possible solutions (description of what to do to). For the same reason, those involved in the experimentation have proposed the complementary rather than alternative use of the two knowledge representation methods as a support for professional problem-solving.

Type

a

4.154921E-4 = product of:
  0.0016619684 = sum of:
    0.0016619684 = product of:
      0.0049859053 = sum of:
        0.0049859053 = weight(_text_:a in 3032) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0049859053 = score(doc=3032,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.055348642 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04800207 = queryNorm
            0.090081796 = fieldWeight in 3032, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3032)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This article aims to stimulate research on business process oriented knowledge infrastructures by pointing to the power of visualizations. It claims that business process oriented knowledge infrastructure research is stuck and therefore needs to reinvent and revitalize itself with new impulses. One such stimulus is the use of visualization techniques in business process oriented knowledge infrastructures, with the aim to improve knowledge transfer, knowledge communication, and knowledge creation. First, this article presents an overview on related visualization research. Second, it proposes the Knowledge Visualization Framework as a theoretical backbone where business process oriented knowledge infrastructure research can anchor itself. The framework points to the key questions that need to be answered when visual methods are used in business process oriented knowledge infrastructures. Finally, the article compares the Tube Map Visualization with the Gantt Chart, and proves that the new format excels the traditional approach in regards to various tasks. The findings from the evaluation of 44 interviews indicates that the Project Tube Map is more effective for (1) drawing attention and keeping interest, (2) presenting overview and detail, (3) visualizing who is collaborating with whom, (4) motivating people to participate in the project, and (5) increasing recall. The results presented in this paper are important for researchers and practitioners in the fields of Knowledge Management, Knowledge Visualization, Project Management, and Visual Communication Sciences.

Type

a

4.154921E-4 = product of:
  0.0016619684 = sum of:
    0.0016619684 = product of:
      0.0049859053 = sum of:
        0.0049859053 = weight(_text_:a in 3285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0049859053 = score(doc=3285,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.055348642 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04800207 = queryNorm
            0.090081796 = fieldWeight in 3285, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3285)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This book is the outcome of the Dagstuhl Seminar on "Information Visualization - Human-Centered Issues in Visual Representation, Interaction, and Evaluation" held at Dagstuhl Castle, Germany, from May 28 to June 1, 2007. Information Visualization (InfoVis) is a relatively new research area, which focuses on the use of visualization techniques to help people understand and analyze data.This book documents and extends the findings and discussions of the various sessions in detail. The seven contributions cover the most important topics: Part I is on general reflections on the value of information visualization; evaluating information visualizations; theoretical foundations of information visualization; teaching information visualization. Part II deals with specific aspects on creation and collaboration: engaging new audiences for information visualization; process and pitfalls in writing information visualization research papers; and visual analytics: definition, process, and challenges.

Editor

Kerren, A. u.a.

4.154921E-4 = product of:
  0.0016619684 = sum of:
    0.0016619684 = product of:
      0.0049859053 = sum of:
        0.0049859053 = weight(_text_:a in 3124) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0049859053 = score(doc=3124,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.055348642 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04800207 = queryNorm
            0.090081796 = fieldWeight in 3124, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3124)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Automated methods for the analysis, modeling, and visualization of large-scale scientometric data provide measures that enable the depiction of the state of world scientific development. We aimed to integrate minimum span clustering (MSC) and minimum spanning tree methods to cluster and visualize the global pattern of scientific publications (PSP) by analyzing aggregated Science Citation Index (SCI) data from 1994 to 2011. We hypothesized that PSP clustering is mainly affected by countries' geographic location, ethnicity, and level of economic development, as indicated in previous studies. Our results showed that the 100 countries with the highest rates of publications were decomposed into 12 PSP groups and that countries within a group tended to be geographically proximal, ethnically similar, or comparable in terms of economic status. Hubs and bridging nodes in each knowledge production group were identified. The performance of each group was evaluated across 16 knowledge domains based on their specialization, volume of publications, and relative impact. Awareness of the strengths and weaknesses of each group in various knowledge domains may have useful applications for examining scientific policies, adjusting the allocation of resources, and promoting international collaboration for future developments.

Type

a

4.1131617E-4 = product of:
  0.0016452647 = sum of:
    0.0016452647 = product of:
      0.004935794 = sum of:
        0.004935794 = weight(_text_:a in 3818) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004935794 = score(doc=3818,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.055348642 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04800207 = queryNorm
            0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 3818, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3818)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Type

a

4.1131617E-4 = product of:
  0.0016452647 = sum of:
    0.0016452647 = product of:
      0.004935794 = sum of:
        0.004935794 = weight(_text_:a in 3886) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004935794 = score(doc=3886,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.055348642 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04800207 = queryNorm
            0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 3886, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3886)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Type

a

4.0709745E-4 = product of:
  0.0016283898 = sum of:
    0.0016283898 = product of:
      0.004885169 = sum of:
        0.004885169 = weight(_text_:a in 3543) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004885169 = score(doc=3543,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.055348642 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04800207 = queryNorm
            0.088261776 = fieldWeight in 3543, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3543)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Representation in Scientific Practice, published by the MIT Press in 1990, helped coalesce a long-standing interest in scientific visualization among historians, philosophers, and sociologists of science and remains a touchstone for current investigations in science and technology studies. This volume revisits the topic, taking into account both the changing conceptual landscape of STS and the emergence of new imaging technologies in scientific practice. It offers cutting-edge research on a broad array of fields that study information as well as short reflections on the evolution of the field by leading scholars, including some of the contributors to the 1990 volume. The essays consider the ways in which viewing experiences are crafted in the digital era; the embodied nature of work with digital technologies; the constitutive role of materials and technologies -- from chalkboards to brain scans -- in the production of new scientific knowledge; the metaphors and images mobilized by communities of practice; and the status and significance of scientific imagery in professional and popular culture. ContributorsMorana Alac, Michael Barany, Anne Beaulieu, Annamaria Carusi, Catelijne Coopmans, Lorraine Daston, Sarah de Rijcke, Joseph Dumit, Emma Frow, Yann Giraud, Aud Sissel Hoel, Martin Kemp, Bruno Latour, John Law, Michael Lynch, Donald MacKenzie, Cyrus Mody, Natasha Myers, Rachel Prentice, Arie Rip, Martin Ruivenkamp, Lucy Suchman, Janet Vertesi, Steve Woolgar

4.0709745E-4 = product of:
  0.0016283898 = sum of:
    0.0016283898 = product of:
      0.004885169 = sum of:
        0.004885169 = weight(_text_:a in 595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004885169 = score(doc=595,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.055348642 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04800207 = queryNorm
            0.088261776 = fieldWeight in 595, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=595)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Science maps are visual representations of the structure and dynamics of scholarly knowl­edge. They aim to show how fields, disciplines, journals, scientists, publications, and scientific terms relate to each other. Science mapping is the body of methods and techniques that have been developed for generating science maps. This entry is an introduction to science maps and science mapping. It focuses on the conceptual, theoretical, and methodological issues of science mapping, rather than on the mathematical formulation of science mapping techniques. After a brief history of science mapping, we describe the general procedure for building a science map, presenting the data sources and the methods to select, clean, and pre-process the data. Next, we examine in detail how the most common types of science maps, namely the citation-based and the term-based, are generated. Both are based on networks: the former on the network of publications connected by citations, the latter on the network of terms co-occurring in publications. We review the rationale behind these mapping approaches, as well as the techniques and methods to build the maps (from the extraction of the network to the visualization and enrichment of the map). We also present less-common types of science maps, including co-authorship networks, interlocking editorship networks, maps based on patents' data, and geographic maps of science. Moreover, we consider how time can be represented in science maps to investigate the dynamics of science. We also discuss some epistemological and sociological topics that can help in the interpretation, contextualization, and assessment of science maps. Then, we present some possible applications of science maps in science policy. In the conclusion, we point out why science mapping may be interesting for all the branches of meta-science, from knowl­edge organization to epistemology.

Type

a

3.5255676E-4 = product of:
  0.001410227 = sum of:
    0.001410227 = product of:
      0.004230681 = sum of:
        0.004230681 = weight(_text_:a in 5953) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004230681 = score(doc=5953,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.055348642 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04800207 = queryNorm
            0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 5953, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5953)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Type

a

2.9379726E-4 = product of:
  0.001175189 = sum of:
    0.001175189 = product of:
      0.003525567 = sum of:
        0.003525567 = weight(_text_:a in 1725) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.003525567 = score(doc=1725,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.055348642 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04800207 = queryNorm
            0.06369744 = fieldWeight in 1725, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1725)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Type

a