Search (721 results, page 1 of 37)

0.0964991 = product of:
  0.1929982 = sum of:
    0.1929982 = sum of:
      0.15182105 = weight(_text_:class in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.15182105 = score(doc=1428,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05065357 = queryNorm
          0.53008634 = fieldWeight in 1428, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1428)
      0.041177157 = weight(_text_:22 in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041177157 = score(doc=1428,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17738017 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05065357 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1428, 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=1428)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The paper discusses the challenges of faceted vocabulary organization in universal classifications which treat the universe of knowledge as a coherent whole and in which the concepts and subjects in different disciplines are shared, related and combined. The authors illustrate the challenges of the facet analytical approach using, as an example, the revision of class 72 in UDC. The paper reports on the research undertaken in 2013 as preparation for the revision. This consisted of analysis of concept organization in the UDC schedules in comparison with the Art & Architecture Thesaurus and class W of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification. The paper illustrates how such research can contribute to a better understanding of the field and may lead to improvements in the facet structure of this segment of the UDC vocabulary.

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

0.080451295 = product of:
  0.16090259 = sum of:
    0.16090259 = product of:
      0.48270774 = sum of:
        0.48270774 = weight(_text_:3a in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.48270774 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4294415 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = 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.

0.08041592 = product of:
  0.16083184 = sum of:
    0.16083184 = sum of:
      0.12651755 = weight(_text_:class in 4189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.12651755 = score(doc=4189,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05065357 = queryNorm
          0.44173864 = fieldWeight in 4189, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4189)
      0.034314297 = weight(_text_:22 in 4189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034314297 = score(doc=4189,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17738017 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05065357 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4189, 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=4189)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Effective patent management is essential for organizations to maintain their competitive advantage. The classification of patents is a critical part of patent management and industrial analysis. This study proposes a hybrid-patent-classification approach that combines a novel patent-network-based classification method with three conventional classification methods to analyze query patents and predict their classes. The novel patent network contains various types of nodes that represent different features extracted from patent documents. The nodes are connected based on the relationship metrics derived from the patent metadata. The proposed classification method predicts a query patent's class by analyzing all reachable nodes in the patent network and calculating their relevance to the query patent. It then classifies the query patent with a modified k-nearest neighbor classifier. To further improve the approach, we combine it with content-based, citation-based, and metadata-based classification methods to develop a hybrid-classification approach. We evaluate the performance of the hybrid approach on a test dataset of patent documents obtained from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and compare its performance with that of the three conventional methods. The results demonstrate that the proposed patent-network-based approach yields more accurate class predictions than the patent network-based approach.

Date

22. 1.2011 13:04:21

0.08041592 = product of:
  0.16083184 = sum of:
    0.16083184 = sum of:
      0.12651755 = weight(_text_:class in 2282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.12651755 = score(doc=2282,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05065357 = queryNorm
          0.44173864 = fieldWeight in 2282, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2282)
      0.034314297 = weight(_text_:22 in 2282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034314297 = score(doc=2282,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17738017 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05065357 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2282, 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=2282)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The structure of a classification system contributes in a variety of ways to representing semantic relationships between its topics in the context of subject authority control. We explore this claim using the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system as a case study. The DDC links its classes into a notational hierarchy, supplemented by a network of relationships between topics, expressed in class descriptions and in the Relative Index (RI). Topics/subjects are expressed both by the natural language text of the caption and notes (including Manual notes) in a class description and by the controlled vocabulary of the RI's alphabetic index, which shows where topics are treated in the classificatory structure. The expression of relationships between topics depends on paradigmatic and syntagmatic relationships between natural language terms in captions, notes, and RI terms; on the meaning of specific note types; and on references recorded between RI terms. The specific means used in the DDC for capturing hierarchical (including disciplinary), equivalence and associative relationships are surveyed.

Date

8.11.2015 21:27:22

0.06704275 = product of:
  0.1340855 = sum of:
    0.1340855 = product of:
      0.4022565 = sum of:
        0.4022565 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.4022565 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4294415 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = 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

0.063258775 = product of:
  0.12651755 = sum of:
    0.12651755 = product of:
      0.2530351 = sum of:
        0.2530351 = weight(_text_:class in 1308) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.2530351 = score(doc=1308,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.8834773 = fieldWeight in 1308, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1308)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In this brief communication, we show how a simple 3D bibliometric performance evaluation based on the zynergy-index (Prathap, 2013) can be simplified by the recently introduced 3-class approach (Ye & Leydesdorff, in press).

0.061887857 = product of:
  0.12377571 = sum of:
    0.12377571 = sum of:
      0.089461416 = weight(_text_:class in 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.089461416 = score(doc=2650,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05065357 = queryNorm
          0.31235638 = fieldWeight in 2650, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2650)
      0.034314297 = weight(_text_:22 in 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034314297 = score(doc=2650,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17738017 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05065357 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2650, 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=2650)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Online discussion forums have become a popular medium for users to discuss with and seek information from other users having similar interests. A typical discussion thread consists of a sequence of posts posted by multiple users. Each post in a thread serves a different purpose providing different types of information and, thus, may not be equally useful for all applications. Identifying the purpose and nature of each post in a discussion thread is thus an interesting research problem as it can help in improving information extraction and intelligent assistance techniques. We study the problem of classifying a given post as per its purpose in the discussion thread and employ features based on the post's content, structure of the thread, behavior of the participating users, and sentiment analysis of the post's content. We evaluate our approach on two forum data sets belonging to different genres and achieve strong classification performance. We also analyze the relative importance of different features used for the post classification task. Next, as a use case, we describe how the post class information can help in thread retrieval by incorporating this information in a state-of-the-art thread retrieval model.

Date

22. 1.2016 11:50:46

0.06001254 = product of:
  0.12002508 = sum of:
    0.12002508 = product of:
      0.24005017 = sum of:
        0.24005017 = weight(_text_:class in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.24005017 = score(doc=2339,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.83814013 = fieldWeight in 2339, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2339)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Text classification (TC) is a core technique for text mining and information retrieval. It has been applied to many applications in many different research and industrial areas. Term-weighting schemes assign an appropriate weight to each term to obtain a high TC performance. Although term weighting is one of the important modules for TC and TC has different peculiarities from those in information retrieval, many term-weighting schemes used in information retrieval, such as term frequency-inverse document frequency (tf-idf), have been used in TC in the same manner. The peculiarity of TC that differs most from information retrieval is the existence of class information. This article proposes a new term-weighting scheme that uses class information using positive and negative class distributions. As a result, the proposed scheme, log tf-TRR, consistently performs better than do other schemes using class information as well as traditional schemes such as tf-idf.

0.054783706 = product of:
  0.10956741 = sum of:
    0.10956741 = product of:
      0.21913482 = sum of:
        0.21913482 = weight(_text_:class in 5003) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.21913482 = score(doc=5003,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.7651138 = fieldWeight in 5003, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5003)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Real-time and accurate multi-class sentiment classification serves as a tool to gauge public user experiences and provide a decision-making basis for timely analysis. In the field of sentiment classification, there is an urgent need for an accurate and efficient multi-class sentiment classification method. With the aim to overcome the drawbacks of the existing methods, we propose a novel, unsupervised multi-class sentiment classification method called Gaussian mixture model of multi-class sentiment classification (GMSC). Based on the Gaussian mixture model (GMM), the GMSC consists of the following essential phases: first, combining a dictionary with microblog texts to calculate and construct the feature matrix of sentiment for each sample; second, introducing a dimension reduction method to avoid the in-fluence of a sparse feature matrix on the results; third, modeling the multi-class sentiment classification procedure based on GMM; and lastly, computing the probability distribution of different categories of sentiment by using GMM to partition sentiments in microblogs into distinct components and classify them via a Gaussian process regression. The results indicate the GMSC approach's accuracy is better and manual tagging time is reduced when compared to semi-supervised and unsupervised sentiment classification methods within the same parameters.

0.053676847 = product of:
  0.107353695 = sum of:
    0.107353695 = product of:
      0.21470739 = sum of:
        0.21470739 = weight(_text_:class in 2205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.21470739 = score(doc=2205,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.7496553 = fieldWeight in 2205, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2205)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.046929922 = product of:
  0.093859844 = sum of:
    0.093859844 = product of:
      0.28157952 = sum of:
        0.28157952 = weight(_text_:3a in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.28157952 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4294415 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = 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].

0.044730708 = product of:
  0.089461416 = sum of:
    0.089461416 = product of:
      0.17892283 = sum of:
        0.17892283 = weight(_text_:class in 2836) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17892283 = score(doc=2836,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.62471277 = fieldWeight in 2836, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2836)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Classification is the process of assigning objects to pre-defined classes based on observations or characteristics of those objects, and there are many approaches to performing this task. The overall objective of this study is to demonstrate the use of two learning techniques to analyze the results of a manual classification system. Our sample consisted of 1,026 documents, from the ACM Computing Classification System, classified by their authors as belonging to one of the groups of the classification system: "H.3 Information Storage and Retrieval." A singular value decomposition of the documents' weighted term-frequency matrix was used to represent each document in a 50-dimensional vector space. The analysis of the representation using both supervised (decision tree) and unsupervised (clustering) techniques suggests that two pairs of the ACM classes are closely related to each other in the vector space. Class 1 (Content Analysis and Indexing) is closely related to Class 3 (Information Search and Retrieval), and Class 4 (Systems and Software) is closely related to Class 5 (Online Information Services). Further analysis was performed to test the diffusion of the words in the two classes using both cosine and Euclidean distance.

0.044730708 = product of:
  0.089461416 = sum of:
    0.089461416 = product of:
      0.17892283 = sum of:
        0.17892283 = weight(_text_:class in 3861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17892283 = score(doc=3861,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.62471277 = fieldWeight in 3861, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3861)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

We surveyed the classes on women's studies in different editions in the LCC (from the 1980 to the 2010 edition) to determine what the main classes consisted of and how they changed over that period. We broke down the main subtopics on women's studies, doing a statistical analysis at the class and subclass level, and then selected several typical examples for in-depth examination. The goal was to show the relationship between the disciplinary development of women's studies and classes on this topic in the LCC. We found that studies about women historically interweaved with family and marriage, but its development should have its own avenue. We found six patterns in the revising of classes associated with women's studies: synthesis, analysis, new creation, expansion, class name change, and removal. Through the comparison and analysis of classes with the additions and revisions to LCCs, supplemented by the bibliographic records from the LC online catalog, we determined that: historic revisions of a certain class show its disciplinary development; synthesis, analysis, comparison, and deduction played important roles in revisions and reflected the discipline's self - understanding on a subject; and a threshold, in terms of number of titles (or "sub-sub topics"), can be established for the creation of a new class . We concluded that a well-systematized classification system facilitates predictions concerning new directions in a discipline. Also, revisions of classification, based on the development of a discipline, will influence that discipline's future development.

0.040225647 = product of:
  0.080451295 = sum of:
    0.080451295 = product of:
      0.24135387 = sum of:
        0.24135387 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.24135387 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4294415 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = 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.

0.040225647 = product of:
  0.080451295 = sum of:
    0.080451295 = product of:
      0.24135387 = sum of:
        0.24135387 = weight(_text_:3a in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.24135387 = score(doc=484,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4294415 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = 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.

0.03873793 = product of:
  0.07747586 = sum of:
    0.07747586 = product of:
      0.15495172 = sum of:
        0.15495172 = weight(_text_:class in 3370) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15495172 = score(doc=3370,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.5410171 = fieldWeight in 3370, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3370)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

"Last week, I received an email from Yulia Skora in Ukraine who is working on the mapping between UDC Summary and BBK (Bibliographic Library Classification) Summary. It reminded me of yet another challenging area of work. When responding to Yulia I realised that the issues with mapping, for instance, UDC Summary to Dewey Summaries [pdf] are often made more difficult because we have to deal with classification summaries in both systems and we cannot use a known exactMatch in many situations. In 2008, following advice received from colleagues in the HILT project, two of our colleagues quickly mapped 1000 classes of Dewey Summaries to UDC Master Reference File as a whole. This appeared to be relatively simple. The mapping in this case is simply an answer to a question "and how would you say e.g. Art metal work in UDC?" But when in 2009 we realised that we were going to release 2000 classes of UDC Summary as linked data, we decided to wait until we had our UDC Summary set defined and completed to be able to publish it mapped to the Dewey Summaries. As we arrived at this stage, little did we realise how much more complex the reversed mapping of UDC Summary to Dewey Summaries would turn out to be. Mapping the Dewey Summaries to UDC highlighted situations in which the logic and structure of two systems do not agree. Especially because Dewey tends to enumerate combinations of subject and attributes that do not always logically belong together. For instance, 850 Literatures of Italian, Sardinian, Dalmatian, Romanian, Rhaeto-Romanic languages Italian literature. This class mixes languages from three different subgroups of Romance languages. Italian and Sardinian belong to Italo Romance sub-family; Romanian and Dalmatian are Balkan Romance languages and Rhaeto Romance is the third subgroup that includes Friulian Ladin and Romanch. As UDC literature is based on a strict classification of language families, Dewey class 850 has to be mapped to 3 narrower UDC classes 821.131 Literature of Italo-Romance Languages , 821.132 Literature of Rhaeto-Romance languages and 821.135 Literature of Balkan-Romance Languages, or to a broader class 821.13 Literature of Romance languages. Hence we have to be sure that we have all these classes listed in the UDC Summary to be able to express UDC-DDC many-to-one, specific-to-broader relationships.
Another challenge appears when, e.g., mapping Dewey class 890 Literatures of other specific languages and language families, which does not make sense in UDC in which all languages and literatures have equal status. Standard UDC schedules do not have a selection of preferred literatures and other literatures. In principle, UDC does not allow classes entitled 'others' which do not have defined semantic content. If entities are subdivided and there is no provision for an item outside the listed subclasses then this item is subsumed to a top class or a broader class where all unspecifiied or general members of that class may be expected. If specification is needed this can be divised by adding an alphabetical extension to the broader class. Here we have to find and list in the UDC Summary all literatures that are 'unpreferred' i.e. lumped in the 890 classes and map them again as many-to-one specific-to-broader match. The example below illustrates another interesting case. Classes Dewey 061 and UDC 06 cover roughy the same semantic field but in the subdivision the Dewey Summaries lists a combination of subject and place and as an enumerative classification, provides ready made numbers for combinations of place that are most common in an average (American?) library. This is a frequent approach in the schemes created with the physical book arrangement, i.e. library schelves, in mind. UDC, designed as an indexing language for information retrieval, keeps subject and place in separate tables and allows for any concept of place such as, e.g. (7) North America to be used in combination with any subject as these may coincide in documents. Thus combinations such as Newspapers in North America, or Organizations in North America would not be offered as ready made combinations. There is no selection of 'preferred' or 'most needed countries' or languages or cultures in the standard UDC edition: <Tabelle>
If we map the Dewey Summaries to UDC in general and do not have to worry about a reverse relationship the situation is very simple as shown above. Mapping of UDC Summary to Dewey Summaries requires more thought. Firstly, UDC class (7) North America (common auxiliary of place) which simply represents the place has to be mapped to all occurences in which this place is 'built in' to the Dewey subjects: 063 Organization of North America 073 Journalism of North America 917 Geography of North America 970 History of North America 277 Christianity in North America 317 General Statistics in North America 557 Earth Sciences of North America The type of mapping from what is a general UDC concept of place (7) North America to a specific subject is clearly a broader-to-narrow match. Mapping of, for instance , UDC class 07 Newspapers. The press (includes journalism) to DDC class of 073 Journalim of North America is again broad-to-narrow match.
Precombined subjects, such as those shown above from Dewey, may be expressed in UDC Summary as examples of combination within various records. To express an exact match UDC class 07 has to contain example of combination 07(7) Journals. The Press - North America. In some cases we have, therefore, added examples to UDC Summary that represent exact match to Dewey Summaries. It is unfortunate that DDC has so many classes on the top level that deal with a selection of countries or languages that are given a preferred status in the scheme, and repeating these preferences in examples of combinations of UDC emulates an unwelcome cultural bias which we have to balance out somehow. This brings us to another challenge.. UDC 913(7) Regional Geography - North America [contains 2 concepts each of which has its URI] is an exact match to Dewey 917 [represented as one concept, 1 URI]. It seems that, because they represent an exact match to Dewey numbers, these UDC examples of combinations may also need a separate URIs so that they can be published as SKOS data. Albeit challenging, mapping proves to be a very useful exercise and I am looking forward to future work here especially in relation to our plans to map UDC Summary to Colon Classification. We are discussing this project with colleagues from DRTC in Bangalore (India)."

0.03873793 = product of:
  0.07747586 = sum of:
    0.07747586 = product of:
      0.15495172 = sum of:
        0.15495172 = weight(_text_:class in 650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15495172 = score(doc=650,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.5410171 = fieldWeight in 650, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=650)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The DDC is constantly changing. In order to keep the classification up-todate with scientific advancement and literary warrant, the editorial process regularly revises specific areas in the tables or schedules and, as a result, particular topics in a class are relocated into other classes or new, subordinate classes are created. In the German National Library, the DDC is the most important system for classification and indexing. Strictly speaking it is necessary to regularly review the correctness of the DDC notations, since their new meaning may not correctly reflect the contents of the bibliographic medium any longer. However for economic reasons this is not possible with the result that a search for literature on a specific topic may return improper resources, as that topic might not be represented by the used DDC notation anymore. In a small research project, the German National Library is currently investigating if it is possible to solve this problem by giving each version of a DDC class a unique identifier. By doing this it would be possible to explicitly label which version - and thus which topics are contained - of a DDC class was used for the classification of a particular resource. If those identifiers conform to the generic URI syntax, we can model the relations between the bibliographic resources, the subject headings and the different versions of the DDC classes as a semantic network using RDF and then investigate if this approach can improve retrieval in heterogeneously indexed collections. This article presents some preliminary results.

0.03873793 = product of:
  0.07747586 = sum of:
    0.07747586 = product of:
      0.15495172 = sum of:
        0.15495172 = weight(_text_:class in 2299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15495172 = score(doc=2299,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.5410171 = fieldWeight in 2299, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2299)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Subjects in a classification scheme are often related to other subjects belonging to different hierarchies. This problem was identified already by Hugh of Saint Victor (1096?-1141). Still with present-time bibliographic classifications, a user browsing the class of architecture under the hierarchy of arts may miss relevant items classified in building or in civil engineering under the hierarchy of applied sciences. To face these limitations we have developed SciGator, a browsable interface to explore the collections of all scientific libraries at the University of Pavia. Besides showing subclasses of a given class, the interface points users to related classes in the Dewey Decimal Classification, or in other local schemes, and allows for expanded queries that include them. This is made possible by using a special field for related classes in the database structure which models classification authority data. Ontologically, many relationships between classes in different hierarchies are cases of existential dependence. Dependence can occur between disciplines in such disciplinary classifications as Dewey (e.g. architecture existentially depends on building), or between phenomena in such phenomenon-based classifications as the Integrative Levels Classification (e.g. fishing as a human activity existentially depends on fish as a class of organisms). We provide an example of its representation in OWL and discuss some details of it.

0.03795526 = product of:
  0.07591052 = sum of:
    0.07591052 = product of:
      0.15182105 = sum of:
        0.15182105 = weight(_text_:class in 1002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15182105 = score(doc=1002,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.53008634 = fieldWeight in 1002, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1002)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The digital environment provides an abundance of images and multimedia and offers a new potential for using resources in multiple modes of representation for teaching and learning. This article reports the findings of a case study that investigated the use of image and multimedia resources in an undergraduate classroom. The study assumed a contextual approach and focused on different class contexts and students' literacy practices. The class, which took place in a resource-rich, multimodal environment, was perceived by students as a positive learning experience. The distribution of resources and their role in teaching and learning varied and depended on the context of use. The findings indicate that images fulfilled important descriptive and mnemonic functions when students were introduced to new concepts, but their role was limited in practices that required students to analyze and synthesize knowledge.

0.03795526 = product of:
  0.07591052 = sum of:
    0.07591052 = product of:
      0.15182105 = sum of:
        0.15182105 = weight(_text_:class in 1912) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15182105 = score(doc=1912,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.53008634 = fieldWeight in 1912, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1912)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

I discuss the concept of Item as stated by the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) in the conceptual model Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) and the object-oriented version of it (FRBRoo). Using object-oriented modeling techniques I analyze the relationship of the Item with the Manifestation entity, the concept of Document, and the physical object as a Carrier of a Content. A class scheme is proposed, not only as an implementation example, but as a way of clarifying some bibliographic concepts as well.We discusses the concept of Item as stated by IFLA in the conceptual model FRBR and the object oriented version of it (FRBRoo). Using object oriented modelling techniques we analize the relationship of the Item with the Manifestation entity, the concept of Document and the physical object as a Carrier of a Content. A class scheme is proposed, not only as an implementation example, but as a way of clarify some bibliographic concepts as well.