Search (32 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Klassifikationstheorie: Elemente / Struktur"
  1. Parrochia, D.: Mathematical theory of classification (2018) 0.04 
    0.035037026 = product of:
  0.10511108 = sum of:
    0.10511108 = weight(_text_:objects in 4308) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10511108 = score(doc=4308,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.25313336 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047625583 = queryNorm
        0.41523993 = fieldWeight in 4308, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4308)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    One of the main topics of scientific research, classification is the operation consisting of distributing objects in classes or groups which are, in general, less numerous than them. From Antiquity to the Classical Age, it has a long history where philosophers (Aristotle), and natural scientists (Linnaeus), took a great part. But from the nineteenth century (with the growth of chemistry and information science) and the twentieth century (with the arrival of mathematical models and computer science), mathematics (especially theory of orders and theory of graphs or hypergraphs) allows us to compute all the possible partitions, chains of partitions, covers, hypergraphs or systems of classes we can construct on a domain. In spite of these advances, most of classifications are still based on the evaluation of ressemblances between objects that constitute the empirical data. However, all these classifications remain, for technical and epistemological reasons we detail below, very unstable ones. We lack a real algebra of classifications, which could explain their properties and the relations existing between them. Though the aim of a general theory of classifications is surely a wishful thought, some recent conjecture gives the hope that the existence of a metaclassification (or classification of all classification schemes) is possible
  2. Zackland, M.; Fontaine, D.: Systematic building of conceptual classification systems with C-KAT (1996) 0.03 
    0.034684885 = product of:
  0.10405465 = sum of:
    0.10405465 = weight(_text_:objects in 5145) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10405465 = score(doc=5145,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25313336 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047625583 = queryNorm
        0.41106653 = fieldWeight in 5145, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5145)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    C-KAT is a method and a tool which supports the design of feature oriented classification systems for knowlegde based systems. It uses a specialized Heuristic Classification conceptual model named 'classification by structural shift' which sees the classification process as the matching of different classifications of the same set of objects or situations organized around different structural principles. To manage the complexity induced by the cross-product, C-KAT supports the use of a leastcommittment strategy which applies in a context of constraint-directed reasoning. Presents this method using an example from the field of industrial fire insurance
  3. Broughton, V.: Faceted classification as a basis for knowledge organization in a digital environment : the Bliss Bibliographic Classification as a model for vocabulary management and the creation of multidimensional knowledge structures (2003) 0.03 
    0.0297299 = product of:
  0.0891897 = sum of:
    0.0891897 = weight(_text_:objects in 2631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0891897 = score(doc=2631,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25313336 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047625583 = queryNorm
        0.35234275 = fieldWeight in 2631, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2631)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The paper examines the way in which classification schemes can be applied to the organization of digital resources. The case is argued for the particular suitability of schemes based an faceted principles for the organization of complex digital objects. Details are given of a co-operative project between the School of Library Archive & Information Studies, University College London, and the United Kingdom Higher Education gateways Arts and Humanities Data Service and Humbul, in which a faceted knowledge structure is being developed for the indexing and display of digital materials within a new combined humanities portal.
  4. Tennis, J.T.: Foundational, first-order, and second-order classification theory (2015) 0.03 
    0.0297299 = product of:
  0.0891897 = sum of:
    0.0891897 = weight(_text_:objects in 2204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0891897 = score(doc=2204,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25313336 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047625583 = queryNorm
        0.35234275 = fieldWeight in 2204, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2204)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Both basic and applied research on the construction, implementation, maintenance, and evaluation of classification schemes is called classification theory. If we employ Ritzer's metatheoretical method of analysis on the over one-hundred year-old body of literature, we can se categories of theory emerge. This paper looks at one particular part of knowledge organization work, namely classification theory, and asks 1) what are the contours of this intellectual space, and, 2) what have we produced in the theoretical reflection on constructing, implementing, and evaluating classification schemes? The preliminary findings from this work are that classification theory can be separated into three kinds: foundational classification theory, first-order classification theory, and second-order classification theory, each with its own concerns and objects of study.
  5. Broughton, V.: Faceted classification as a basis for knowledge organization in a digital environment : the Bliss Bibliographic Classification as a model for vocabulary management and the creation of multi-dimensional knowledge structures (2001) 0.02 
    0.02477492 = product of:
  0.07432476 = sum of:
    0.07432476 = weight(_text_:objects in 5895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07432476 = score(doc=5895,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25313336 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047625583 = queryNorm
        0.29361898 = fieldWeight in 5895, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5895)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Broughton is one of the key people working on the second edition of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification (BC2). Her article has a brief, informative history of facets, then discusses semantic vs. syntactic relationships, standard facets used by Ranganathan and the Classification Research Group, facet analysis and citation order, and how to build subject indexes out of faceted classifications, all with occasional reference to digital environments and hypertext, but never with any specifics. It concludes by saying of faceted classification that the "capacity which it has to create highly sophisticated structures for the accommodation of complex objects suggests that it is worth investigation as an organizational tool for digital materials, and that the results of such investigation would be knowledge structures of unparalleled utility and elegance." How to build them is left to the reader, but this article provides an excellent starting point. It includes an example that shows how general concepts can be applied to a small set of documents and subjects, and how terms can be adapted to suit the material and users
  6. Howarth, L.C.: Creating pathways to memory : enhancing life histories through category clusters (2008) 0.02 
    0.02477492 = product of:
  0.07432476 = sum of:
    0.07432476 = weight(_text_:objects in 2281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07432476 = score(doc=2281,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25313336 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047625583 = queryNorm
        0.29361898 = fieldWeight in 2281, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2281)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Content
    For individuals whose memory and language are intact, making sense of unfamiliar information or objects is a process of matching what is unknown, to what is known through previous learning or experience. The unfamiliar is linked to clusters or categories of the familiar, identifying what is "like" or "nearly like" and excluding all others (De Mey 1982). Most commonly, these are categories on which there is general agreement, sometimes collocated under established terms, labels, or shared naming devices. Classification systems are built on the basis of shared understandings of human knowledge and culture. When memory and/or language are impaired, how does such contextualizing and categorizing occur? Since perception is individual, can a person with cognitive impairment "make sense" of information, an object, a situation, using alternative modes of expression that are less or not language-dependent? This paper reports on preliminary results from a pilot study undertaken as part of exploratory mixed methods research examining the sense-making, sorting, categorization, and recall strategies of individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) resulting from early stage dementia.
  7. Hjoerland, B.: Theories of knowledge organization - theories of knowledge (2013) 0.02 
    0.02477492 = product of:
  0.07432476 = sum of:
    0.07432476 = weight(_text_:objects in 789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07432476 = score(doc=789,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25313336 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047625583 = queryNorm
        0.29361898 = fieldWeight in 789, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=789)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Any ontological theory commits us to accept and classify a number of phenomena in a more or less specific way-and vice versa: a classification tends to reveal the theoretical outlook of its creator. Objects and their descriptions and relations are not just "given," but determined by theories. Knowledge is fallible, and consensus is rare. By implication, knowledge organization has to consider different theories/views and their foundations. Bibliographical classifications depend on subject knowledge and on the same theories as corresponding scientific and scholarly classifications. Some classifications are based on logical distinctions, others on empirical examinations, and some on mappings of common ancestors or on establishing functional criteria. To evaluate a classification is to involve oneself in the research which has produced the given classification. Because research is always based more or less on specific epistemological ideals (e.g., empiricism, rationalism, historicism, or pragmatism), the evaluation of classification includes the evaluation of the epistemological foundations of the research on which given classifications have been based. The field of knowledge organization itself is based on different approaches and traditions such as user-based and cognitive views, facet-analytical views, numeric taxonomic approaches, bibliometrics, and domain-analytic approaches. These approaches and traditions are again connected to epistemological views, which have to be considered. Only the domain-analytic view is fully committed to exploring knowledge organization in the light of subject knowledge and substantial scholarly theories.
  8. Frické, M.: Logic and the organization of information (2012) 0.02 
    0.017342443 = product of:
  0.052027326 = sum of:
    0.052027326 = weight(_text_:objects in 1782) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052027326 = score(doc=1782,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25313336 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047625583 = queryNorm
        0.20553327 = fieldWeight in 1782, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1782)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Logic and the Organization of Information closely examines the historical and contemporary methodologies used to catalogue information objects-books, ebooks, journals, articles, web pages, images, emails, podcasts and more-in the digital era. This book provides an in-depth technical background for digital librarianship, and covers a broad range of theoretical and practical topics including: classification theory, topic annotation, automatic clustering, generalized synonymy and concept indexing, distributed libraries, semantic web ontologies and Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS). It also analyzes the challenges facing today's information architects, and outlines a series of techniques for overcoming them. Logic and the Organization of Information is intended for practitioners and professionals working at a design level as a reference book for digital librarianship. Advanced-level students, researchers and academics studying information science, library science, digital libraries and computer science will also find this book invaluable.
  9. Maniez, J.: ¬Des classifications aux thesaurus : du bon usage des facettes (1999) 0.01 
    0.012905218 = product of:
  0.038715653 = sum of:
    0.038715653 = product of:
      0.077431306 = sum of:
        0.077431306 = weight(_text_:22 in 6404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.077431306 = score(doc=6404,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16677667 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047625583 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6404, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6404)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
  10. Maniez, J.: ¬Du bon usage des facettes : des classifications aux thésaurus (1999) 0.01 
    0.012905218 = product of:
  0.038715653 = sum of:
    0.038715653 = product of:
      0.077431306 = sum of:
        0.077431306 = weight(_text_:22 in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.077431306 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16677667 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047625583 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3773, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3773)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
  11. Foskett, D.J.: Systems theory and its relevance to documentary classification (2017) 0.01 
    0.012905218 = product of:
  0.038715653 = sum of:
    0.038715653 = product of:
      0.077431306 = sum of:
        0.077431306 = weight(_text_:22 in 3176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.077431306 = score(doc=3176,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16677667 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047625583 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3176, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3176)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    6. 5.2017 18:46:22
  12. Connaway, L.S.; Sievert, M.C.: Comparison of three classification systems for information on health insurance (1996) 0.01 
    0.008603479 = product of:
  0.025810435 = sum of:
    0.025810435 = product of:
      0.05162087 = sum of:
        0.05162087 = weight(_text_:22 in 7242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05162087 = score(doc=7242,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16677667 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047625583 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7242, 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=7242)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    22. 4.1997 21:10:19
  13. Belayche, C.: ¬A propos de la classification de Dewey (1997) 0.01 
    0.008603479 = product of:
  0.025810435 = sum of:
    0.025810435 = product of:
      0.05162087 = sum of:
        0.05162087 = weight(_text_:22 in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05162087 = score(doc=1171,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16677667 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047625583 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1171, 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=1171)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Bulletin d'informations de l'Association des Bibliothecaires Francais. 1997, no.175, S.22-23
  14. Lin, W.-Y.C.: ¬The concept and applications of faceted classifications (2006) 0.01 
    0.008603479 = product of:
  0.025810435 = sum of:
    0.025810435 = product of:
      0.05162087 = sum of:
        0.05162087 = weight(_text_:22 in 5083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05162087 = score(doc=5083,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16677667 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047625583 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5083, 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=5083)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    27. 5.2007 22:19:35
  15. Lorenz, B.: Zur Theorie und Terminologie der bibliothekarischen Klassifikation (2018) 0.01 
    0.008603479 = product of:
  0.025810435 = sum of:
    0.025810435 = product of:
      0.05162087 = sum of:
        0.05162087 = weight(_text_:22 in 4339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05162087 = score(doc=4339,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16677667 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047625583 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4339, 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=4339)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Pages
    S.1-22
  16. Winske, E.: ¬The development and structure of an urban, regional, and local documents classification scheme (1996) 0.01 
    0.007528044 = product of:
  0.022584131 = sum of:
    0.022584131 = product of:
      0.045168262 = sum of:
        0.045168262 = weight(_text_:22 in 7241) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045168262 = score(doc=7241,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16677667 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047625583 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7241, 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=7241)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Footnote
    Paper presented at conference on 'Local documents, a new classification scheme' at the Research Caucus of the Florida Library Association Annual Conference, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 22 Apr 95
  17. Olson, H.A.: Sameness and difference : a cultural foundation of classification (2001) 0.01 
    0.007528044 = product of:
  0.022584131 = sum of:
    0.022584131 = product of:
      0.045168262 = sum of:
        0.045168262 = weight(_text_:22 in 166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045168262 = score(doc=166,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16677667 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047625583 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 166, 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=166)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  18. Hjoerland, B.: Theories of knowledge organization - theories of knowledge (2017) 0.01 
    0.007528044 = product of:
  0.022584131 = sum of:
    0.022584131 = product of:
      0.045168262 = sum of:
        0.045168262 = weight(_text_:22 in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045168262 = score(doc=3494,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16677667 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047625583 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3494, 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=3494)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Pages
    S.22-36
  19. Kwasnik, B.H.: ¬The role of classification in knowledge representation (1999) 0.01 
    0.006452609 = product of:
  0.019357827 = sum of:
    0.019357827 = product of:
      0.038715653 = sum of:
        0.038715653 = weight(_text_:22 in 2464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038715653 = score(doc=2464,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16677667 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047625583 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2464, 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=2464)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Library trends. 48(1999) no.1, S.22-47
  20. Slavic, A.: On the nature and typology of documentary classifications and their use in a networked environment (2007) 0.01 
    0.006452609 = product of:
  0.019357827 = sum of:
    0.019357827 = product of:
      0.038715653 = sum of:
        0.038715653 = weight(_text_:22 in 780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038715653 = score(doc=780,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16677667 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047625583 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 780, 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=780)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    22.12.2007 17:22:31

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 27
  • f 3
  • chi 1
  • d 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 31
  • m 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects