Search (9 results, page 1 of 1)

0.029661886 = product of:
  0.08898566 = sum of:
    0.08898566 = product of:
      0.17797132 = sum of:
        0.17797132 = weight(_text_:catalogue in 6742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17797132 = score(doc=6742,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.23806341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049257044 = queryNorm
            0.74757946 = fieldWeight in 6742, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6742)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Reports results of a study to examine the performance of online catalogue searches involving personal names and to recommend improvements to the basic system approach to soliciting user queries and searching for them. The research questions addressed in the study wre: how online systems can chose searching approaches on their own that are likely to produce useful retrieval; how online systems solicit queries from users; and how users respond to an experimental online catalogue that prompts them for the different elements of their personal name queries. Improvements include: the implementation of a new design for online catalogue searching that features search trees; new methods for soliciting user queries bearing personal names; and enlisting the participation of online catalogue users in the evaluation of system prompts, instructions, and messages that request input from them

0.020974122 = product of:
  0.062922366 = sum of:
    0.062922366 = product of:
      0.12584473 = sum of:
        0.12584473 = weight(_text_:catalogue in 6930) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12584473 = score(doc=6930,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.23806341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049257044 = queryNorm
            0.5286185 = fieldWeight in 6930, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6930)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Introducess a new approach to display retrieved subject headings in subject searching designed to encourage users to browse bibliographic information. Emphasizes the importance of the exact display approach by showing how many user queries could be candidates for this approach, demonstrates an implementation of the exact-display approach in an experimental online catalogue. End user experiences gives opportunities to make recommendations for enhancing the original design of the exact display approach so that future implementations of this approach in operational online catalogues are responsive to the needs of online catalogue users

0.014830943 = product of:
  0.04449283 = sum of:
    0.04449283 = product of:
      0.08898566 = sum of:
        0.08898566 = weight(_text_:catalogue in 4786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08898566 = score(doc=4786,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.23806341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049257044 = queryNorm
            0.37378973 = fieldWeight in 4786, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4786)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Traces the development of online catalogs in the USA that feature subject searching and browsing through the machine-readable text of library classifications. Covers the author's experiences from 1983-86 developing and testing subject searching and browsing capabilities in an experimental online catalogue using the machine-readable 19th edition of the DDC. Suggests improvements to the original subject searching and browsing capabilities in the experimental online that would enable users to search and browse the DDC tables

0.014830943 = product of:
  0.04449283 = sum of:
    0.04449283 = product of:
      0.08898566 = sum of:
        0.08898566 = weight(_text_:catalogue in 8486) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08898566 = score(doc=8486,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.23806341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049257044 = queryNorm
            0.37378973 = fieldWeight in 8486, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8486)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Reports an empirical study of online catalogues accessible over the Internet and discusses the problems revealed in subject searching them. Suggests 4 tools to improve subject searching: search trees, an online directory of collections strengths of Internet accessible library collections, aids to find this record or simular records, and common command language for every Internet accessible library catalogue or bibliographic database

0.014830943 = product of:
  0.04449283 = sum of:
    0.04449283 = product of:
      0.08898566 = sum of:
        0.08898566 = weight(_text_:catalogue in 7435) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08898566 = score(doc=7435,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.23806341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049257044 = queryNorm
            0.37378973 = fieldWeight in 7435, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7435)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Describes the comparative approach to system evaluation used in this research project which delegated the administartion of an online retrieval test to an experimental online catalogue to produce data for evaluating the effectiveness of a new subject access design. Describes the methods enlisted to sort out problem test administration, e.g. to identify out-of-scope queries, incomplete system administration, and suspect post-search questionnaire responses. Covers how w the researchers handled problem search administrations and what actions they would use to reduce or eliminate the occurrence of such administrations in future online retrieval tests that delegate control of retrieval tests to online systems

0.012712238 = product of:
  0.038136713 = sum of:
    0.038136713 = product of:
      0.07627343 = sum of:
        0.07627343 = weight(_text_:catalogue in 3679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07627343 = score(doc=3679,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.23806341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049257044 = queryNorm
            0.3203912 = fieldWeight in 3679, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3679)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Subject queries were extracted from 3 universities' online catalogues and analysed to determine the extend to which they matched subject headings in the LCSH. Computer analyses show that nearly 25% of the subject queries entered by online catalogue users are exact matches of LCSH. Yet, manual analyses show that, even though a user matches or closely matches LCSH-mr, the citations retrieved by this vocabulary are not necessarily satisfactory. Sometimes the closest LCSH-mr is not at all pertinent to a user's topic of interest. This study presents reasons why close matches of LCSH-mr are not always satisfactory and suggests approaches to finding the best matches of the catalogue's controlled vocabulary

0.010593532 = product of:
  0.031780593 = sum of:
    0.031780593 = product of:
      0.063561186 = sum of:
        0.063561186 = weight(_text_:catalogue in 5973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.063561186 = score(doc=5973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.23806341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049257044 = queryNorm
            0.2669927 = fieldWeight in 5973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5973)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Reports results of 2 separate but related projects to study the influence of spelling errors (misspellings), made by searchers, on the subject searching of online catalogues and to suggest ways of improving error detection systems to handle the errors that they detect. This involved the categorization of user queries for subjects that were extracted from the online catalogue transaction logs of 4 USA university libraries. The research questions considered: the prevalence of misspellings in user queries for subjects; and how users respond to online catalogues that detect possible spelling errors in their subject queries. Less than 6% of user queries that match the catalogue's controlled and free text terms were found to contain spelling errors. While the majority of users corrected misspelled query words, a sizable proportion made an action that was even more detrimental than the original misspelling. Concludes with 3 recommended improvements: online catalogues should be equipped with search trees to place the burden of selecting a subject the system instead of the user; systems should be equipped with automatic spelling checking routines that inform users of possibly misspelled words; and online catalogues should be enhanced with tools and techniques to distinguish between queries that fail due to misspellings and correction failures. Cautions that spelling is not a serious problem but can seriously hinder the most routine subject search

0.00667365 = product of:
  0.020020949 = sum of:
    0.020020949 = product of:
      0.040041897 = sum of:
        0.040041897 = weight(_text_:22 in 1333) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040041897 = score(doc=1333,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17248978 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049257044 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1333, 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=1333)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.0044491 = product of:
  0.013347299 = sum of:
    0.013347299 = product of:
      0.026694598 = sum of:
        0.026694598 = weight(_text_:22 in 1188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026694598 = score(doc=1188,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17248978 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049257044 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1188, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1188)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05