Search (706 results, page 1 of 36)

0.13273229 = product of:
  0.19909842 = sum of:
    0.16516559 = weight(_text_:interest in 394) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16516559 = score(doc=394,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.6587042 = fieldWeight in 394, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=394)
    0.03393283 = product of:
      0.06786566 = sum of:
        0.06786566 = weight(_text_:classification in 394) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06786566 = score(doc=394,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 394, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=394)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Object

Reader interest classification

0.11889433 = product of:
  0.1783415 = sum of:
    0.15571961 = weight(_text_:interest in 1774) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15571961 = score(doc=1774,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.6210323 = fieldWeight in 1774, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1774)
    0.022621887 = product of:
      0.045243774 = sum of:
        0.045243774 = weight(_text_:classification in 1774) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045243774 = score(doc=1774,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 1774, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1774)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: ASTIN, J.: Cheshire: Alternative arrangement and beyond; READER, D.: User orientation in a Hertfordshire branch; CHANDLER, D.: Self-service-libraries: providing for the smaller community in Cambridgeshire; BETTS, D.: Reader interest categories in Surrey; DONBROSKI, L.: Categorisation at East Sussex County Library; McCARTHY, A.: Burning issues: stock appeal in Sunderland; MORSON, I. u. M. PERRY: Two-tier and total: stock arrangement in Brent

Object

Reader interest classification

0.09745094 = product of:
  0.14617641 = sum of:
    0.11678971 = weight(_text_:interest in 2532) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11678971 = score(doc=2532,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.46577424 = fieldWeight in 2532, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2532)
    0.029386694 = product of:
      0.058773387 = sum of:
        0.058773387 = weight(_text_:classification in 2532) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.058773387 = score(doc=2532,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.3656675 = fieldWeight in 2532, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2532)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The current trend of simplifying user access to documents in public libraries in France has led to strong criticism of the traditional use of decimal classification, and growing popularity for classifying by centres of interest. The notion of locating documents 'where the reader expects to find them' does not bear reasoned analysis: this approach depends on the subjective attitudes of the reader, whose preconceptions are unknown. Public libraries serve readers of all types, and therefore the classification used must be based on general objective criteria. Argues for the retension of traditional encyclopedic classifications (UDC or Dewey), which despite their drawbacks, are based on subject structures known to everyone, and allow for updating to accommodate new concepts. Classification can operate with visual labelling systems, to simplify access: this approach provides ready identification of centres of interest without discarding the real advantages of universality.

0.09164122 = product of:
  0.13746183 = sum of:
    0.110110395 = weight(_text_:interest in 336) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.110110395 = score(doc=336,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.43913615 = fieldWeight in 336, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=336)
    0.027351426 = product of:
      0.054702852 = sum of:
        0.054702852 = weight(_text_:22 in 336) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054702852 = score(doc=336,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 336, 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=336)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The growing interest in end user or direct patron access to on-line bibliographic databases is reviewed with references to online catalogues, databases, and CD-ROMs. The literature of end user searching is surveyed with notes on: user training, software search aids, end user services in libraries: characterisation of end user searches; the role of librarians; and CD-ROMs as end user media

Source

Annual review of information science and technology. 22(1987), S.227-263

0.08848819 = product of:
  0.13273229 = sum of:
    0.110110395 = weight(_text_:interest in 2474) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.110110395 = score(doc=2474,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.43913615 = fieldWeight in 2474, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2474)
    0.022621887 = product of:
      0.045243774 = sum of:
        0.045243774 = weight(_text_:classification in 2474) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045243774 = score(doc=2474,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 2474, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2474)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The article establishes the background for OCLC's international interests and then briefly surveys the varied collaborative activities being undertaken in Europe, the Far East and Canada. An enumeration of the benefits to be enjoyed by the parties at interest is followed by identification of the more troublesome problems that must be resolved. While problems are large, they are more than offset by the worldwide benefits to be derived.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 8(1988) nos.3/4, S.67-78

0.087087385 = product of:
  0.13063107 = sum of:
    0.0963466 = weight(_text_:interest in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0963466 = score(doc=2652,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.38424414 = fieldWeight in 2652, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2652)
    0.034284476 = product of:
      0.06856895 = sum of:
        0.06856895 = weight(_text_:classification in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06856895 = score(doc=2652,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.42661208 = fieldWeight in 2652, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2652)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The International Patent Classification (IPC) is widely regarded as an important search tool, both by patent offices and by outside users. To maintain its usefulness, the classification schemes of the IPC have to be adapted in order to provide for new techniques and to keep the size of the search files managerable. Such adaptation is done by amending the classification schemes, or by introducing hybrid systems. In the 5th edition of the IPC, both approaches have been followed: in comparison with the 4th edition, the number of hybrid systems introduced has sharply increased. The use of hybrid systems is strongly recommended: it is, however, non-obligatory, at least for the near future.

0.08328886 = product of:
  0.24986658 = sum of:
    0.24986658 = sum of:
      0.11310943 = weight(_text_:classification in 1630) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11310943 = score(doc=1630,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05046903 = queryNorm
          0.70372736 = fieldWeight in 1630, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=1630)
      0.13675714 = weight(_text_:22 in 1630) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.13675714 = score(doc=1630,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05046903 = queryNorm
          0.77380234 = fieldWeight in 1630, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=1630)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

International classification. 8(1981), S.16-22

0.07742717 = product of:
  0.11614075 = sum of:
    0.0963466 = weight(_text_:interest in 907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0963466 = score(doc=907,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.38424414 = fieldWeight in 907, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=907)
    0.019794151 = product of:
      0.039588302 = sum of:
        0.039588302 = weight(_text_:classification in 907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039588302 = score(doc=907,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 907, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=907)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

In the Netherlands dissatisfaction with the classification schedules and subject indexing headings assigned to records by the National Bibliographic Service has led librarians to re-arrange their collections in broad reader-interest categories. With the introduction of online public catalogues in libraries and their provision of multiple entry terms for each item, the problems of conflictions in shelf location are largely eliminated. The internal layout of each library may place constraints on such radical reorganisation. Howver, the merging of the children's and adults' sections can be useful in offering children a greater depth of knowledge. A further useful arrangement may be the combination of fiction and non-fiction collections in broad subject catalogues

0.07742717 = product of:
  0.11614075 = sum of:
    0.0963466 = weight(_text_:interest in 387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0963466 = score(doc=387,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.38424414 = fieldWeight in 387, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=387)
    0.019794151 = product of:
      0.039588302 = sum of:
        0.039588302 = weight(_text_:classification in 387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039588302 = score(doc=387,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 387, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=387)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This paper presents one approach to the teaching of both the basic and advanced courses in cataloging. In addressing the basic course, short-term and long-term objectives of the course are identified for four categories of students-Cataloging Specialists, General/Special Librarians, Non-Cataloging Specialists and Non-Library Information Specialists. The philosophy underlying this mode of instruction places emphasis upon group interaction and making the course enjoyable for the student, thus increasing interest while imparting more information and better preparing the four groups of students for work in organizing information. Stress is placed upon student participation and the use of realistic situations to instruct and evaluate student performance.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 7(1987) no.4, S.27-45

0.066631086 = product of:
  0.19989325 = sum of:
    0.19989325 = sum of:
      0.09048755 = weight(_text_:classification in 7684) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09048755 = score(doc=7684,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05046903 = queryNorm
          0.5629819 = fieldWeight in 7684, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7684)
      0.109405704 = weight(_text_:22 in 7684) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.109405704 = score(doc=7684,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05046903 = queryNorm
          0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 7684, 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=7684)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Journal of academic librarianship. 10(1984), S.17-22

0.06636614 = product of:
  0.09954921 = sum of:
    0.082582794 = weight(_text_:interest in 589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.082582794 = score(doc=589,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.3293521 = fieldWeight in 589, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=589)
    0.016966416 = product of:
      0.03393283 = sum of:
        0.03393283 = weight(_text_:classification in 589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03393283 = score(doc=589,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 589, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=589)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Q-analysis is a methodology for investigating a wide range of structural phenomena. Strutures are defined in terms of relations between members of sets and their salient features are revealed using techniques of algebraic topology. However, the basic method can be mastered by non-mathematicians. Q-analysis has been applied to problems as diverse as discovering the rules for the diagnosis of a rare disease and the study of tactics in a football match. Other applications include some of interest to librarians and information scientists. In bibliometrics, Q-analysis has proved capable of emulating techniques such as bibliographic coupling, co-citation analysis and co-word analysis. It has also been used to produce a classification scheme for television programmes based on different principles from most bibliographic classifications. This paper introduces the basic ideas of Q-analysis. Applications relevant to librarianship and information science are reviewed and present limitations of the approach described. New theoretical advances including some in other fields such as planning and design theory and artificial intelligence may lead to a still more powerful method of investigating structure

0.064917915 = product of:
  0.09737687 = sum of:
    0.055055197 = weight(_text_:interest in 3628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055055197 = score(doc=3628,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.21956807 = fieldWeight in 3628, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3628)
    0.042321675 = product of:
      0.08464335 = sum of:
        0.08464335 = weight(_text_:classification in 3628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08464335 = score(doc=3628,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.52662134 = fieldWeight in 3628, product of:
              5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
                28.0 = termFreq=28.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3628)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

To those outside the field of library science, the name Melvil Dewey (1851-1931) is virtually synonymous with library classification. To those in the field, Dewey has been recognized as the premier classification maker. His enormously successful system (i.e., successful in terms of the wide adoption of the system around the world for over one hundred years) has now undergone nineteen editions. The Dewey Decimal Classification has been translated into more than twenty languages and is the most widely adopted classification scheme in the world. Even in its earliest manifestations, the Dewey Decimal Classification contained features that anticipated modern classification theory. Among these are the use of mnemonics and the commonly applied standard subdivisions, later called "common isolates" by S. R. Ranganathan (q.v.), which are the mainstays of facet analysis and synthesis. The device of standard subdivisions is an indication of the recognition of common aspects that pervade all subjects. The use of mnemonics, whereby recurring concepts in the scheme are represented by the same notation, for example, geographic concepts and language concepts, eased the transition of the Dewey Decimal Classification from a largely enumerative system to an increasingly faceted one. Another significant feature of the Dewey Decimal Classification is the use of the hierarchical notation based an the arabic numeral system. To a large extent, this feature accounts for the wide use and success of the system in the world across language barriers. With the prospect of increasing online information retrieval, the hierarchical notation will have a significant impact an the effectiveness of the Dewey Decimal Classification as an online retrieval tool. Because the notation is hierarchical, for example, with increasing digits in a number representing narrower subjects and decreasing digits indicating broader subjects, the Dewey Decimal Classification is particularly useful in generic searches for broadening or narrowing search results. In the preface to the second edition of his Decimal Classification Dewey explained the features of his "new" system. The excerpt below presents his ideas and theory concerning the rational basis of his classification, the standard subdivisions, the hierarchical notation based an decimal numbers, the use of mnemonics, the relative index, and relative location. It also reflects Dewey's lifelong interest in simplified spelling.

Footnote

Original in: Decimal Classification and Relativ Index for Arranging, Cataloging, and Indexing Public and Private Libraries and for Pamflets, Clippings, Notes, Scrap Books, Index rerums, etc. 2nd, rev. and greatly enlarged ed. Boston: Library Bureau 1885

0.055905145 = product of:
  0.083857715 = sum of:
    0.0481733 = weight(_text_:interest in 3647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0481733 = score(doc=3647,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.19212207 = fieldWeight in 3647, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3647)
    0.035684414 = product of:
      0.07136883 = sum of:
        0.07136883 = weight(_text_:classification in 3647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07136883 = score(doc=3647,freq=26.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.44403192 = fieldWeight in 3647, product of:
              5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
                26.0 = termFreq=26.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3647)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The selection in this reader by R. M. Needham and K. Sparck Jones reports an early approach to automatic classification that was taken in England. The following selection reviews various approaches that were being pursued in the United States at about the same time. It then discusses a particular approach initiated in the early 1960s by Harold Borko, at that time Head of the Language Processing and Retrieval Research Staff at the System Development Corporation, Santa Monica, California and, since 1966, a member of the faculty at the Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of California, Los Angeles. As was described earlier, there are two steps in automatic classification, the first being to identify pairs of terms that are similar by virtue of co-occurring as index terms in the same documents, and the second being to form equivalence classes of intersubstitutable terms. To compute similarities, Borko and his associates used a standard correlation formula; to derive classification categories, where Needham and Sparck Jones used clumping, the Borko team used the statistical technique of factor analysis. The fact that documents can be classified automatically, and in any number of ways, is worthy of passing notice. Worthy of serious attention would be a demonstra tion that a computer-based classification system was effective in the organization and retrieval of documents. One reason for the inclusion of the following selection in the reader is that it addresses the question of evaluation. To evaluate the effectiveness of their automatically derived classification, Borko and his team asked three questions. The first was Is the classification reliable? in other words, could the categories derived from one sample of texts be used to classify other texts? Reliability was assessed by a case-study comparison of the classes derived from three different samples of abstracts. The notso-surprising conclusion reached was that automatically derived classes were reliable only to the extent that the sample from which they were derived was representative of the total document collection. The second evaluation question asked whether the classification was reasonable, in the sense of adequately describing the content of the document collection. The answer was sought by comparing the automatically derived categories with categories in a related classification system that was manually constructed. Here the conclusion was that the automatic method yielded categories that fairly accurately reflected the major area of interest in the sample collection of texts; however, since there were only eleven such categories and they were quite broad, they could not be regarded as suitable for use in a university or any large general library. The third evaluation question asked whether automatic classification was accurate, in the sense of producing results similar to those obtainabie by human cIassifiers. When using human classification as a criterion, automatic classification was found to be 50 percent accurate.

Footnote

Original in: Classification research: Proceedings of the Second International Study Conference held at Hotel Prins Hamlet, Elsinore, Denmark, 14th-18th Sept. 1964. Ed.: Pauline Atherton. Copenhagen: Munksgaard 1965. S.220-238.

0.055305116 = product of:
  0.08295767 = sum of:
    0.068818994 = weight(_text_:interest in 2478) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.068818994 = score(doc=2478,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.27446008 = fieldWeight in 2478, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2478)
    0.014138679 = product of:
      0.028277358 = sum of:
        0.028277358 = weight(_text_:classification in 2478) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028277358 = score(doc=2478,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 2478, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2478)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Three pre-web articles about using hypertext for knowledge representation. Duncan discusses how to use graphical, hypertext displays (she used Xerox PARC's NoteCards on a Xerox 1186 workstation) along with concept maps and facet analysis, a combination that would now be done with topic maps. The screen shots of her graphical displays are quite interesting. Her interest in facets is in how to use them to show things to different people in different ways, for example, so that experts can enter knowledge into a system in one way while novices can see it in another. Duncan found that facet labels (e.g. Process and Product) prompted the expert to think of related concepts when inputting data, and made navigation easier for users. Facets can be joined together, e.g. "Agents (causing) Process," leading to a "reasoning system." She is especially interested in how to show relstionships between two things: e.g., A causes B, A uses B, A occurs in B. This is an important question in facet theory, but probably not worth worrying about in a small online classification where the relations are fixed and obvious. These articles may be difficult to find, in which case the reader can find a nice sumary in the next article, by Ellis and Vasconcelos (2000). Anyone interested in tracing the history of facets and hypertext will, however, want to see the originals.

0.055305116 = product of:
  0.08295767 = sum of:
    0.068818994 = weight(_text_:interest in 2480) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.068818994 = score(doc=2480,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.27446008 = fieldWeight in 2480, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2480)
    0.014138679 = product of:
      0.028277358 = sum of:
        0.028277358 = weight(_text_:classification in 2480) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028277358 = score(doc=2480,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 2480, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2480)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Three pre-web articles about using hypertext for knowledge representation. Duncan discusses how to use graphical, hypertext displays (she used Xerox PARC's NoteCards on a Xerox 1186 workstation) along with concept maps and facet analysis, a combination that would now be done with topic maps. The screen shots of her graphical displays are quite interesting. Her interest in facets is in how to use them to show things to different people in different ways, for example, so that experts can enter knowledge into a system in one way while novices can see it in another. Duncan found that facet labels (e.g. Process and Product) prompted the expert to think of related concepts when inputting data, and made navigation easier for users. Facets can be joined together, e.g. "Agents (causing) Process," leading to a "reasoning system." She is especially interested in how to show relstionships between two things: e.g., A causes B, A uses B, A occurs in B. This is an important question in facet theory, but probably not worth worrying about in a small online classification where the relations are fixed and obvious. These articles may be difficult to find, in which case the reader can find a nice sumary in the next article, by Ellis and Vasconcelos (2000). Anyone interested in tracing the history of facets and hypertext will, however, want to see the originals.

0.051906537 = product of:
  0.15571961 = sum of:
    0.15571961 = weight(_text_:interest in 2496) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15571961 = score(doc=2496,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.6210323 = fieldWeight in 2496, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2496)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Contribution to a special section on library automation and software. Discusses trends in enquiries received at the Aslib Information Recources Centre since it was set up in Jan 86 and the underlying issues which have affected them, including: the move away from microcomputers to the IBM-PC and the present dominance of the MS-DOS operating system; a growing interest in larger, multi-user computers; and more interest in software for integrated library sytems which include on-line public access catalogues.

0.049973316 = product of:
  0.14991994 = sum of:
    0.14991994 = sum of:
      0.06786566 = weight(_text_:classification in 825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06786566 = score(doc=825,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05046903 = queryNorm
          0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 825, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=825)
      0.08205428 = weight(_text_:22 in 825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08205428 = score(doc=825,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05046903 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 825, 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=825)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

International classification. 14(1987), S.19-22

0.049973316 = product of:
  0.14991994 = sum of:
    0.14991994 = sum of:
      0.06786566 = weight(_text_:classification in 6774) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06786566 = score(doc=6774,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05046903 = queryNorm
          0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 6774, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6774)
      0.08205428 = weight(_text_:22 in 6774) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08205428 = score(doc=6774,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05046903 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6774, 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=6774)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

25. 3.2019 18:15:22

0.049973316 = product of:
  0.14991994 = sum of:
    0.14991994 = sum of:
      0.06786566 = weight(_text_:classification in 1738) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06786566 = score(doc=1738,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05046903 = queryNorm
          0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 1738, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1738)
      0.08205428 = weight(_text_:22 in 1738) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08205428 = score(doc=1738,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05046903 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1738, 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=1738)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

30. 6.2004 21:22:16

Footnote

Rez. in: International classification 19(1992) no.3, S.166-168

0.049973316 = product of:
  0.14991994 = sum of:
    0.14991994 = sum of:
      0.06786566 = weight(_text_:classification in 290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06786566 = score(doc=290,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05046903 = queryNorm
          0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 290, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=290)
      0.08205428 = weight(_text_:22 in 290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08205428 = score(doc=290,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05046903 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 290, 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=290)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

6. 1.2007 14:49:22

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 2(1982) nos.1/2, S.121-125