Search (658 results, page 1 of 33)

0.07668333 = product of:
  0.15336666 = sum of:
    0.15336666 = product of:
      0.46009994 = sum of:
        0.46009994 = weight(_text_:3a in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.46009994 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.40932843 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = queryNorm
            1.1240361 = fieldWeight in 973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=973)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fcreativechoice.org%2Fdoc%2FHansJonas.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1TM3teaYKgABL5H9yoIifA&opi=89978449.

0.06390277 = product of:
  0.12780555 = sum of:
    0.12780555 = product of:
      0.38341662 = sum of:
        0.38341662 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.38341662 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.40932843 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja

0.056981597 = product of:
  0.113963194 = sum of:
    0.113963194 = product of:
      0.22792639 = sum of:
        0.22792639 = weight(_text_:1.5 in 1652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.22792639 = score(doc=1652,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4074348 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.43879 = idf(docFreq=25, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = queryNorm
            0.5594181 = fieldWeight in 1652, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.43879 = idf(docFreq=25, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1652)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.04748466 = product of:
  0.09496932 = sum of:
    0.09496932 = product of:
      0.18993863 = sum of:
        0.18993863 = weight(_text_:1.5 in 1105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18993863 = score(doc=1105,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4074348 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.43879 = idf(docFreq=25, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = queryNorm
            0.4661817 = fieldWeight in 1105, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.43879 = idf(docFreq=25, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1105)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Topic ontologies or web directories consist of large collections of links to websites, arranged by topic in different categories. The structure of these ontologies is typically not flat because there are hierarchical and nonhierarchical relationships among topics. As a consequence, websites classified under a certain topic may be relevant to other topics. Although some of these relevance relations are explicit, most of them must be discovered by an analysis of the structure of the ontologies. This article proposes a family of models of relevance propagation in topic ontologies. An efficient computational framework is described and used to compute nine different models for a portion of the Open Directory Project graph consisting of more than half a million nodes and approximately 1.5 million edges of different types. After performing a quantitative analysis, a user study was carried out to compare the most promising models. It was found that some general difficulties rule out the possibility of defining flawless models of relevance propagation that only take into account structural aspects of an ontology. However, there is a clear indication that including transitive relations induced by the nonhierarchical components of the ontology results in relevance propagation models that are superior to more basic approaches.

0.04748466 = product of:
  0.09496932 = sum of:
    0.09496932 = product of:
      0.18993863 = sum of:
        0.18993863 = weight(_text_:1.5 in 1824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18993863 = score(doc=1824,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4074348 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.43879 = idf(docFreq=25, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = queryNorm
            0.4661817 = fieldWeight in 1824, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.43879 = idf(docFreq=25, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1824)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Since the adoption of faceted search in a small number of academic libraries in 2006, faceted search interfaces have gained popularity in academic and public libraries. This article clarifies whether faceted search improves the interactions between searchers and library catalogs and sheds light on ways that facets are used during a library search. To study searchers' behaviors in natural situations, we collected from the servers a data set with more than 1.5 million useful search logs. Logs were parsed, statistically analyzed, and manually studied using visualization tools to gain a general understanding of how facets are used in the search process. A user experiment with 24 subjects was conducted to further understand contextual information, such as the searchers' motivations and perceptions. The results indicate that most searchers were able to understand the concept of facets naturally and easily. The faceted search was not able to shorten the search time but was able to improve the search accuracy. Facets were used more for open-ended tasks and difficult tasks that require more effort to learn, investigate, and explore. Overall, the results weaved a detailed "story" about the ways that people use facets and the ways that facets help people use library catalogs.

0.04748466 = product of:
  0.09496932 = sum of:
    0.09496932 = product of:
      0.18993863 = sum of:
        0.18993863 = weight(_text_:1.5 in 3075) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18993863 = score(doc=3075,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4074348 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.43879 = idf(docFreq=25, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = queryNorm
            0.4661817 = fieldWeight in 3075, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.43879 = idf(docFreq=25, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3075)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Twitter has emerged as a popular source of sharing and delivering news information. In tweet messages, URLs to web resources and hashtags are often included. This study investigates the potential of the hyperlinks and hashtags as topical clues and indicators to tweet messages. For this study, we crawled and analyzed about 1.5 million tweets for a 3-month period covering any topic or subject. The findings of this study revealed a power law relationship for the ranking and frequency of (a) the host names of URLs, and (b) a pair of hashtags and URLs that appeared in the tweet messages. This study also discovered that the most popular URLs used in tweets come from news and media websites, and a majority of the hyperlinked resources are news web pages. One implication of this study is that Twitter users are becoming more active in sharing already published information than producing new information. Finally, our investigation on hashtags for web resource indexing reveals that hashtags have the potential to be used as indexing terms for co-occurring URLs in the same tweet. We also discuss the implications of this study for web resource recommendation.

0.04748466 = product of:
  0.09496932 = sum of:
    0.09496932 = product of:
      0.18993863 = sum of:
        0.18993863 = weight(_text_:1.5 in 3760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18993863 = score(doc=3760,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4074348 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.43879 = idf(docFreq=25, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = queryNorm
            0.4661817 = fieldWeight in 3760, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.43879 = idf(docFreq=25, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3760)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Although news stories target the general public and are sometimes inaccurate, they can serve as sources of real-world information for researchers. This article investigates the extent to which academics exploit journalism using content and citation analyses of online BBC News stories cited by Scopus articles. A total of 27,234 Scopus-indexed publications have cited at least one BBC News story, with a steady annual increase. Citations from the arts and humanities (2.8% of publications in 2015) and social sciences (1.5%) were more likely than citations from medicine (0.1%) and science (<0.1%). Surprisingly, half of the sampled Scopus-cited science and technology (53%) and medicine and health (47%) stories were based on academic research, rather than otherwise unpublished information, suggesting that researchers have chosen a lower-quality secondary source for their citations. Nevertheless, the BBC News stories that were most frequently cited by Scopus, Google Books, and Wikipedia introduced new information from many different topics, including politics, business, economics, statistics, and reports about events. Thus, news stories are mediating real-world knowledge into the academic domain, a potential cause for concern.

0.04473194 = product of:
  0.08946388 = sum of:
    0.08946388 = product of:
      0.26839164 = sum of:
        0.26839164 = weight(_text_:3a in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.26839164 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.40932843 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = queryNorm
            0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 5955, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5955)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: Philosophisch-ethische Rezensionen vom 09.11.2019 (Jürgen Czogalla), Unter: https://philosophisch-ethische-rezensionen.de/rezension/Goedert1.html. In: B.I.T. online 23(2020) H.3, S.345-347 (W. Sühl-Strohmenger) [Unter: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.b-i-t-online.de%2Fheft%2F2020-03-rezensionen.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0iY3f_zNcvEjeZ6inHVnOK]. In: Open Password Nr. 805 vom 14.08.2020 (H.-C. Hobohm) [Unter: https://www.password-online.de/?mailpoet_router&endpoint=view_in_browser&action=view&data=WzE0MywiOGI3NjZkZmNkZjQ1IiwwLDAsMTMxLDFd].

0.038341664 = product of:
  0.07668333 = sum of:
    0.07668333 = product of:
      0.23004997 = sum of:
        0.23004997 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.23004997 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.40932843 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = 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.

0.038341664 = product of:
  0.07668333 = sum of:
    0.07668333 = product of:
      0.23004997 = sum of:
        0.23004997 = weight(_text_:3a in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.23004997 = score(doc=484,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.40932843 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = 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.

0.03798773 = product of:
  0.07597546 = sum of:
    0.07597546 = product of:
      0.15195093 = sum of:
        0.15195093 = weight(_text_:1.5 in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15195093 = score(doc=2246,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4074348 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.43879 = idf(docFreq=25, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = queryNorm
            0.37294537 = fieldWeight in 2246, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.43879 = idf(docFreq=25, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2246)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Kapitel 1; Corporate Semantic Web; 1.1 Das Semantic Web; 1.2 Semantische Anwendungen im Unternehmenseinsatz; 1.3 Bereitstellen von Linked Data reicht nicht; 1.4 Eine global vernetzte Wissensbasis -- Fiktion oder Realität?; 1.5 Semantik)=)RDF?; 1.6 Richtig vorgehen; 1.7 Modellieren ist einfach (?!); 1.8 Juristische Fragen; 1.9 Semantische Anwendungen stiften Nutzen in Unternehmen -- nachweislich!; 1.10 Fazit; Literatur; Kapitel 2; Einordnung und Abgrenzung des Corporate Semantic Webs; 2.1 Grundlegende Begriffe; 2.2 Corporate Semantic Web 2.3 Public Semantic Web2.4 Social Semantic Web 3.0; 2.5 Pragmatic Web; 2.6 Zusammenfassung und Ausblick "Ubiquitous Pragmatic Web 4.0"; Literatur; Kapitel 3; Marktstudie: Welche Standards und Tools werden in Unternehmen eingesetzt?; 3.1 Einleitung; 3.2 Semantische Suche in Webarchiven (Quantinum AG); 3.2.1 Kundenanforderungen; 3.2.2 Technische Umsetzung; 3.2.3 Erfahrungswerte; 3.3 Semantische Analyse und Suche in Kundenspezifikationen (Ontos AG); 3.3.1 Kundenanforderungen; 3.3.2 Technische Umsetzung; 3.3.3 Erfahrungswerte 3.4 Sicherheit für Banken im Risikomanagement (VICO Research & Consulting GmbH)3.4.1 Kundenanforderungen; 3.4.2 Technische Umsetzung; 3.4.3 Erfahrungswerte; 3.5 Interaktive Fahrzeugdiagnose (semafora GmbH); 3.5.1 Kundenanforderungen; 3.5.2 Technische Umsetzung; 3.5.3 Erfahrungswerte; 3.6 Quo Vadis?; 3.7 Umfrage-Ergebnisse; 3.8 Semantic Web Standards & Tools; 3.9 Ausblick; Literatur; Kapitel 4; Modellierung des Sprachraums von Unternehmen; 4.1 Hintergrund; 4.2 Eine Frage der Bedeutung; 4.3 Bedeutung von Begriffen im Unternehmenskontext; 4.3.1 Website-Suche bei einem Industrieunternehmen 4.3.2 Extranet-Suche bei einem Marktforschungsunternehmen4.3.3 Intranet-Suche bei einem Fernsehsender; 4.4 Variabilität unserer Sprache und unseres Sprachgebrauchs; 4.4.1 Konsequenzen des Sprachgebrauchs; 4.5 Terminologiemanagement und Unternehmensthesaurus; 4.5.1 Unternehmensthesaurus; 4.5.2 Mut zur Lücke: Arbeiten mit unvollständigen Terminologien; 4.6 Pragmatischer Aufbau von Unternehmensthesauri; 4.6.1 Begriffsanalyse des Anwendungsbereichs; 4.6.2 Informationsquellen; 4.6.3 Häufigkeitsverteilung; 4.6.4 Aufwand und Nutzen; Literatur; Kapitel 5 Schlendern durch digitale Museen und Bibliotheken5.1 Einleitung; 5.2 Anwendungsfall 1: Schlendern durch das Digitale Museum; 5.3 Anwendungsfall 2: Literatur in Bibliotheken finden; 5.4 Herausforderungen; 5.5 Die Anforderungen treiben die Architektur; 5.5.1 Semantic ETL; 5.5.2 Semantic Logic; 5.5.3 Client; 5.6 Diskussion; 5.7 Empfehlungen und Fazit; Literatur; Kapitel 6; Semantische Suche im Bereich der Energieforschungsförderung; 6.1 Das Projekt EnArgus®; 6.2 Die Fachontologie; 6.2.1 Semantische Suche; 6.2.2 Repräsentation der semantischen Relationen in der Fachontologie

0.033239264 = product of:
  0.06647853 = sum of:
    0.06647853 = product of:
      0.13295706 = sum of:
        0.13295706 = weight(_text_:1.5 in 5027) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13295706 = score(doc=5027,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4074348 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.43879 = idf(docFreq=25, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = queryNorm
            0.3263272 = fieldWeight in 5027, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.43879 = idf(docFreq=25, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5027)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl. auch: http://www.basiswissen-rda.de/. IAllgemeiner Teil; 1 Formalerschließung: Konzepte und Standards; 1.1 Ziele von Formalerschließung; 1.2 Bisherige Regelwerke; 1.3 Bibliografische Beschreibung; 1.4 Eintragungen und Verweisungen; 1.5 EDV-Katalogisierung; 1.6 Aktuelle Herausforderungen; 2 Das FRBR-Modell; 2.1 Grundlagen; 2.2 Entitäten der Gruppe 1; 2.3 Entitäten der Gruppe 2; 2.4 FRBR in der Praxis; 3 RDA: Grundlagen; 3.1 Die Entwicklung von RDA; 3.2 RDA und FRBR; 3.3 Weitere Grundprinzipien von RDA; 3.4 Das RDA Toolkit; Haupteil; 4 Manifestationen und Exemplare; 4.1 Allgemeines 4.2 Grundprinzipien beim Erfassen und Übertragen4.3 Informationsquellen; 4.4 Titel der Manifestation; 4.5 Verantwortlichkeitsangabe; 4.6 Ausgabevermerk; 4.7 Erscheinungsvermerk; 4.8 Gesamttitelangabe; 4.9 Erscheinungsweise; 4.10 Identifikator für die Manifestation; 4.11 Anmerkung zur Manifestation; 4.12 Medientyp und Datenträgertyp; 4.13 Umfang; 4.14 Weitere Merkmale von Datenträgern; 4.15 Bezugs- und Zugangsinformationen; 4.16 Merkmale auf Exemplar-Ebene; 4.17 Begleitmaterial; 4.18 Beschreibung von mehrteiligen Monografien; 4.19 Beschreibung von monografischen Reihen 4.20 Beschreibung von integrierenden Ressourcen

0.031951386 = product of:
  0.06390277 = sum of:
    0.06390277 = product of:
      0.19170831 = sum of:
        0.19170831 = weight(_text_:3a in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19170831 = score(doc=4997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.40932843 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4997, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4997)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

PhD Dissertation at International Doctorate School in Information and Communication Technology. Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Fcore.ac.uk%2Fdownload%2Fpdf%2F150083013.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2n-qisNagpyT0lli_6QbAQ.

0.031951386 = product of:
  0.06390277 = sum of:
    0.06390277 = product of:
      0.19170831 = sum of:
        0.19170831 = weight(_text_:3a in 4388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19170831 = score(doc=4388,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.40932843 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4388, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4388)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Vgl. unter: https://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwizweHljdbcAhVS16QKHXcFD9QQFjABegQICRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublication%2F271200105_Die_Autonomie_des_Menschen_und_der_Maschine_-_gegenwartige_Definitionen_von_Autonomie_zwischen_philosophischem_Hintergrund_und_technologischer_Umsetzbarkeit_Redigierte_Version_der_Magisterarbeit_Karls&usg=AOvVaw06orrdJmFF2xbCCp_hL26q.

0.031951386 = product of:
  0.06390277 = sum of:
    0.06390277 = product of:
      0.19170831 = sum of:
        0.19170831 = weight(_text_:3a in 855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19170831 = score(doc=855,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.40932843 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 855, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=855)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl. auch: New automatic interpreter for complex UDC numbers. Unter: <https%3A%2F%2Fudcc.org%2Ffiles%2FAttilaPiros_EC_36-37_2014-2015.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3kc9CwDDCWP7aArpfjrs5b>

0.026165735 = product of:
  0.05233147 = sum of:
    0.05233147 = product of:
      0.10466294 = sum of:
        0.10466294 = weight(_text_:22 in 2851) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10466294 = score(doc=2851,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16907248 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2851, 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=2851)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.025561107 = product of:
  0.051122215 = sum of:
    0.051122215 = product of:
      0.15336664 = sum of:
        0.15336664 = weight(_text_:3a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15336664 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.40932843 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = queryNorm
            0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Language and Information Technologies. Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cs.cmu.edu%2F~cx%2Fpapers%2Fknowledge_based_text_representation.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0SaTSvhWLTh__Uz_HtOtl3.

0.02312746 = product of:
  0.04625492 = sum of:
    0.04625492 = product of:
      0.09250984 = sum of:
        0.09250984 = weight(_text_:22 in 2810) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09250984 = score(doc=2810,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16907248 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = 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

0.02312746 = product of:
  0.04625492 = sum of:
    0.04625492 = product of:
      0.09250984 = sum of:
        0.09250984 = weight(_text_:22 in 3582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09250984 = score(doc=3582,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16907248 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = 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

0.02312746 = product of:
  0.04625492 = sum of:
    0.04625492 = product of:
      0.09250984 = sum of:
        0.09250984 = weight(_text_:22 in 3975) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09250984 = score(doc=3975,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16907248 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048281185 = 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