-
Madelung, H.-O.: Subject searching in the social sciences : a comparison of PRECIS and KWIC indexes indexes to newspaper articles (1982)
0.09
0.08737345 = product of:
0.13106017 = sum of:
0.03873757 = weight(_text_:science in 5517) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03873757 = score(doc=5517,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.2881068 = fieldWeight in 5517, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5517)
0.0923226 = product of:
0.1846452 = sum of:
0.1846452 = weight(_text_:index in 5517) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1846452 = score(doc=5517,freq=12.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.82782143 = fieldWeight in 5517, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5517)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- 89 articles from a small, Danish left-wing newspaper were indexed by PRECIS and KWIC. The articles cover a wide range of social science subjects. Controlled test searches in both indexes were carried out by 20 students of library science. The results obtained from this small-scale retrieval test were evaluated by a chi-square test. The PRECIS index led to more correct answers and fewer wrong answers than the KWIC index, i.e. it had both better recall and greater precision. Furthermore, the students were more confident in their judgement of the relevance of retrieved articles in the PRECIS index than in the KWIC index; and they generally favoured the PRECIS index in the subjective judgement they were asked to make
- Theme
- Preserved Context Index System (PRECIS)
-
Dalrymple, P.W.: Retrieval by reformulation in two library catalogs : toward a cognitive model of searching behavior (1990)
0.07
0.06879558 = product of:
0.10319336 = sum of:
0.054783195 = weight(_text_:science in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054783195 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.40744454 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
0.04841016 = product of:
0.09682032 = sum of:
0.09682032 = weight(_text_:22 in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09682032 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 18:43:54
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 41(1990) no.4, S.272-281
-
Prasher, R.G.: Evaluation of indexing system (1989)
0.05
0.049586397 = product of:
0.07437959 = sum of:
0.031304684 = weight(_text_:science in 4998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031304684 = score(doc=4998,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.23282544 = fieldWeight in 4998, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4998)
0.043074906 = product of:
0.08614981 = sum of:
0.08614981 = weight(_text_:index in 4998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08614981 = score(doc=4998,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.3862362 = fieldWeight in 4998, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4998)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Describes information system and its various components-index file construstion, query formulation and searching. Discusses an indexing system, and brings out the need for its evaluation. Explains the concept of the efficiency of indexing systems and discusses factors which control this efficiency. Gives criteria for evaluation. Discusses recall and precision ratios, as also noise ratio, novelty ratio, and exhaustivity and specificity and the impact of each on the efficiency of indexing system. Mention also various steps for evaluation.
- Source
- Herald of library science. 28(1989) no.3, S.157-65
-
Saracevic, T.: On a method for studying the structure and nature of requests in information retrieval (1983)
0.05
0.049139693 = product of:
0.07370954 = sum of:
0.039130855 = weight(_text_:science in 2417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039130855 = score(doc=2417,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.2910318 = fieldWeight in 2417, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2417)
0.034578685 = product of:
0.06915737 = sum of:
0.06915737 = weight(_text_:22 in 2417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06915737 = score(doc=2417,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2417, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2417)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Pages
- S.22-25
- Series
- Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science; vol. 20
-
Lancaster, F.W.: Evaluating the performance of a large computerized information system (1985)
0.04
0.043473773 = product of:
0.065210655 = sum of:
0.022135753 = weight(_text_:science in 3649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022135753 = score(doc=3649,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.16463245 = fieldWeight in 3649, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3649)
0.043074906 = product of:
0.08614981 = sum of:
0.08614981 = weight(_text_:index in 3649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08614981 = score(doc=3649,freq=8.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.3862362 = fieldWeight in 3649, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3649)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- F. W. Lancaster is known for his writing an the state of the art in librarylinformation science. His skill in identifying significant contributions and synthesizing literature in fields as diverse as online systems, vocabulary control, measurement and evaluation, and the paperless society have earned him esteem as a chronicler of information science. Equally deserving of repute is his own contribution to research in the discipline-his evaluation of the MEDLARS operating system. The MEDLARS study is notable for several reasons. It was the first large-scale application of retrieval experiment methodology to the evaluation of an actual operating system. As such, problems had to be faced that do not arise in laboratory-like conditions. One example is the problem of recall: how to determine, for a very large and dynamic database, the number of documents relevant to a given search request. By solving this problem and others attendant upon transferring an experimental methodology to the real world, Lancaster created a constructive procedure that could be used to improve the design and functioning of retrieval systems. The MEDLARS study is notable also for its contribution to our understanding of what constitutes a good index language and good indexing. The ideal retrieval system would be one that retrieves all and only relevant documents. The failures that occur in real operating systems, when a relevant document is not retrieved (a recall failure) or an irrelevant document is retrieved (a precision failure), can be analysed to assess the impact of various factors an the performance of the system. This is exactly what Lancaster did. He found both the MEDLARS indexing and the McSH index language to be significant factors affecting retrieval performance. The indexing, primarily because it was insufficiently exhaustive, explained a large number of recall failures. The index language, largely because of its insufficient specificity, accounted for a large number of precision failures. The purpose of identifying factors responsible for a system's failures is ultimately to improve the system. Unlike many user studies, the MEDLARS evaluation yielded recommendations that were eventually implemented.* Indexing exhaustivity was increased and the McSH index language was enriched with more specific terms and a larger entry vocabulary.
-
Allen, B.: Logical reasoning and retrieval performance (1993)
0.04
0.043388095 = product of:
0.06508214 = sum of:
0.027391598 = weight(_text_:science in 5093) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027391598 = score(doc=5093,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.20372227 = fieldWeight in 5093, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5093)
0.037690543 = product of:
0.075381085 = sum of:
0.075381085 = weight(_text_:index in 5093) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.075381085 = score(doc=5093,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.33795667 = fieldWeight in 5093, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5093)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Tests the logical reasoning ability of end users of a CD-ROM index and assesses associations between different levels of this ability and aspects of retrieval performance. Users' selection of vocabulary and their selection of citations for further examination are both influenced by this ability. The designs of information systems should address the effects of logical reasoning on search behaviour. People with lower levels of logical reasoning ability may experience difficulty using systems in which user selectivity plays an important role. Other systems, such as those with ranked output, may decrease the need for users to make selections and would be easier to use for people with lower levels of logical reasoning ability
- Source
- Library and information science research. 15(1993) no.1, S.93-105
-
Cleverdon, C.W.; Mills, J.: ¬The testing of index language devices (1985)
0.04
0.0391515 = product of:
0.05872725 = sum of:
0.015652342 = weight(_text_:science in 3643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015652342 = score(doc=3643,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.11641272 = fieldWeight in 3643, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3643)
0.043074906 = product of:
0.08614981 = sum of:
0.08614981 = weight(_text_:index in 3643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08614981 = score(doc=3643,freq=8.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.3862362 = fieldWeight in 3643, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3643)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- A landmark event in the twentieth-century development of subject analysis theory was a retrieval experiment, begun in 1957, by Cyril Cleverdon, Librarian of the Cranfield Institute of Technology. For this work he received the Professional Award of the Special Libraries Association in 1962 and the Award of Merit of the American Society for Information Science in 1970. The objective of the experiment, called Cranfield I, was to test the ability of four indexing systems-UDC, Facet, Uniterm, and Alphabetic-Subject Headings-to retrieve material responsive to questions addressed to a collection of documents. The experiment was ambitious in scale, consisting of eighteen thousand documents and twelve hundred questions. Prior to Cranfield I, the question of what constitutes good indexing was approached subjectively and reference was made to assumptions in the form of principles that should be observed or user needs that should be met. Cranfield I was the first large-scale effort to use objective criteria for determining the parameters of good indexing. Its creative impetus was the definition of user satisfaction in terms of precision and recall. Out of the experiment emerged the definition of recall as the percentage of relevant documents retrieved and precision as the percentage of retrieved documents that were relevant. Operationalizing the concept of user satisfaction, that is, making it measurable, meant that it could be studied empirically and manipulated as a variable in mathematical equations. Much has been made of the fact that the experimental methodology of Cranfield I was seriously flawed. This is unfortunate as it tends to diminish Cleverdon's contribu tion, which was not methodological-such contributions can be left to benchmark researchers-but rather creative: the introduction of a new paradigm, one that proved to be eminently productive. The criticism leveled at the methodological shortcomings of Cranfield I underscored the need for more precise definitions of the variables involved in information retrieval. Particularly important was the need for a definition of the dependent variable index language. Like the definitions of precision and recall, that of index language provided a new way of looking at the indexing process. It was a re-visioning that stimulated research activity and led not only to a better understanding of indexing but also the design of better retrieval systems." Cranfield I was followed by Cranfield II. While Cranfield I was a wholesale comparison of four indexing "systems," Cranfield II aimed to single out various individual factors in index languages, called "indexing devices," and to measure how variations in these affected retrieval performance. The following selection represents the thinking at Cranfield midway between these two notable retrieval experiments.
-
Blair, D.C.: STAIRS Redux : thoughts on the STAIRS evaluation, ten years after (1996)
0.03
0.03439779 = product of:
0.05159668 = sum of:
0.027391598 = weight(_text_:science in 3002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027391598 = score(doc=3002,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.20372227 = fieldWeight in 3002, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3002)
0.02420508 = product of:
0.04841016 = sum of:
0.04841016 = weight(_text_:22 in 3002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04841016 = score(doc=3002,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3002, 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=3002)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 47(1996) no.1, S.4-22
-
Hodges, P.R.: Keyword in title indexes : effectiveness of retrieval in computer searches (1983)
0.03
0.03439779 = product of:
0.05159668 = sum of:
0.027391598 = weight(_text_:science in 5001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027391598 = score(doc=5001,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.20372227 = fieldWeight in 5001, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5001)
0.02420508 = product of:
0.04841016 = sum of:
0.04841016 = weight(_text_:22 in 5001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04841016 = score(doc=5001,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5001, 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=5001)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- A study was done to test the effectiveness of retrieval using title word searching. It was based on actual search profiles used in the Mechanized Information Center at Ohio State University, in order ro replicate as closely as possible actual searching conditions. Fewer than 50% of the relevant titles were retrieved by keywords in titles. The low rate of retrieval can be attributes to three sources: titles themselves, user and information specialist ignorance of the subject vocabulary in use, and to general language problems. Across fields it was found that the social sciences had the best retrieval rate, with science having the next best, and arts and humanities the lowest. Ways to enhance and supplement keyword in title searching on the computer and in printed indexes are discussed.
- Date
- 14. 3.1996 13:22:21
-
Brown, M.E.: By any other name : accounting for failure in the naming of subject categories (1995)
0.03
0.03439779 = product of:
0.05159668 = sum of:
0.027391598 = weight(_text_:science in 5598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027391598 = score(doc=5598,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.20372227 = fieldWeight in 5598, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5598)
0.02420508 = product of:
0.04841016 = sum of:
0.04841016 = weight(_text_:22 in 5598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04841016 = score(doc=5598,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5598, 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=5598)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Date
- 2.11.1996 13:08:22
- Source
- Library and information science research. 17(1995) no.4, S.347-385
-
Hirsh, S.G.: Children's relevance criteria and information seeking on electronic resources (1999)
0.03
0.030991498 = product of:
0.046487246 = sum of:
0.019565428 = weight(_text_:science in 4297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019565428 = score(doc=4297,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 4297, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4297)
0.026921818 = product of:
0.053843636 = sum of:
0.053843636 = weight(_text_:index in 4297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.053843636 = score(doc=4297,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.24139762 = fieldWeight in 4297, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4297)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- This study explores the relevance criteria and search strategies elementary school children applied when searching for information related to a class assignment in a school library setting. Students were interviewed on 2 occasions at different stages of the research process; field observations involved students thinking aloud to explain their search proceses and shadowing as students moved around the school library. Students performed searches on an online catalog, an electronic encyclopedia, an electronic magazine index, and the WWW. Results are presented for children selecting the topic, conducting the search, examining the results, and extracting relevant results. A total of 254 mentions of relevance criteria were identified, including 197 references to textual relevance criteria that were coded into 9 categories and 57 references to graphical relevance criteria that were coded into 5 categories. Students exhibited little concern for the authority of the textual and graphical information they found, based the majority of their relevance decisions for textual material on topicality, and identified information they found interesting. Students devoted a large portion of their research time to find pictures. Understanding the ways that children use electronic resources and the relevance criteria they apply has implications for information literacy training and for systems design
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 50(1999) no.14, S.1265-1283
-
Belkin, N.J.: ¬An overview of results from Rutgers' investigations of interactive information retrieval (1998)
0.03
0.029972691 = product of:
0.044959035 = sum of:
0.027669692 = weight(_text_:science in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027669692 = score(doc=2339,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.20579056 = fieldWeight in 2339, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2339)
0.017289342 = product of:
0.034578685 = sum of:
0.034578685 = weight(_text_:22 in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034578685 = score(doc=2339,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2339, 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=2339)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Date
- 22. 9.1997 19:16:05
- Imprint
- Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science
- Source
- Visualizing subject access for 21st century information resources: Papers presented at the 1997 Clinic on Library Applications of Data Processing, 2-4 Mar 1997, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Ed.: P.A. Cochrane et al
-
Sievert, M.E.; McKinin, E.J.: Why full-text misses some relevant documents : an analysis of documents not retrieved by CCML or MEDIS (1989)
0.03
0.029483816 = product of:
0.044225723 = sum of:
0.023478512 = weight(_text_:science in 3564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023478512 = score(doc=3564,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 3564, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3564)
0.02074721 = product of:
0.04149442 = sum of:
0.04149442 = weight(_text_:22 in 3564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04149442 = score(doc=3564,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3564, 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=3564)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Date
- 9. 1.1996 10:22:31
- Source
- ASIS'89. Managing information and technology. Proceedings of the 52nd annual meeting of the American Society for Information Science, Washington D.C., 30.10.-2.11.1989. Vol.26. Ed.by J. Katzer and G.B. Newby
-
Wood, F.; Ford, N.; Miller, D.; Sobczyk, G.; Duffin, R.: Information skills, searching behaviour and cognitive styles for student-centred learning : a computer-assisted learning approach (1996)
0.03
0.029483816 = product of:
0.044225723 = sum of:
0.023478512 = weight(_text_:science in 4341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023478512 = score(doc=4341,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 4341, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4341)
0.02074721 = product of:
0.04149442 = sum of:
0.04149442 = weight(_text_:22 in 4341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04149442 = score(doc=4341,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4341, 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=4341)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.2, S.79-92
-
Leininger, K.: Interindexer consistency in PsychINFO (2000)
0.03
0.029483816 = product of:
0.044225723 = sum of:
0.023478512 = weight(_text_:science in 2552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023478512 = score(doc=2552,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 2552, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2552)
0.02074721 = product of:
0.04149442 = sum of:
0.04149442 = weight(_text_:22 in 2552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04149442 = score(doc=2552,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2552, 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=2552)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Date
- 9. 2.1997 18:44:22
- Source
- Journal of librarianship and information science. 32(2000) no.1, S.4-8
-
Aitchison, T.M.: Comparative evaluation of index languages : Part I, Design. Part II, Results (1969)
0.03
0.025127029 = product of:
0.075381085 = sum of:
0.075381085 = product of:
0.15076217 = sum of:
0.15076217 = weight(_text_:index in 561) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.15076217 = score(doc=561,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.67591333 = fieldWeight in 561, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=561)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
-
King, D.W.: Blazing new trails : in celebration of an audacious career (2000)
0.02
0.024569847 = product of:
0.03685477 = sum of:
0.019565428 = weight(_text_:science in 1184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019565428 = score(doc=1184,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 1184, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1184)
0.017289342 = product of:
0.034578685 = sum of:
0.034578685 = weight(_text_:22 in 1184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034578685 = score(doc=1184,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1184, 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=1184)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Date
- 22. 9.1997 19:16:05
- Imprint
- Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science
-
Pal, S.; Mitra, M.; Kamps, J.: Evaluation effort, reliability and reusability in XML retrieval (2011)
0.02
0.024569847 = product of:
0.03685477 = sum of:
0.019565428 = weight(_text_:science in 4197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019565428 = score(doc=4197,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 4197, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4197)
0.017289342 = product of:
0.034578685 = sum of:
0.034578685 = weight(_text_:22 in 4197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034578685 = score(doc=4197,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4197, 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=4197)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 14:20:56
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.2, S.375-394
-
Cleverdon, C.W.; Mills, J.: ¬The testing of index language devices (1963)
0.02
0.021537453 = product of:
0.06461236 = sum of:
0.06461236 = product of:
0.12922472 = sum of:
0.12922472 = weight(_text_:index in 577) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12922472 = score(doc=577,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.5793543 = fieldWeight in 577, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=577)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
-
Feng, S.: ¬A comparative study of indexing languages in single and multidatabase searching (1989)
0.02
0.02086979 = product of:
0.06260937 = sum of:
0.06260937 = weight(_text_:science in 2494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06260937 = score(doc=2494,freq=8.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 2494, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2494)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- An experiment was conducted using 3 data bases in library and information science - Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA), Information Science Abstracts and ERIC - to investigate some of the main factors affecting on-line searching: effectiveness of search vocabularies, combinations of fields searched, and overlaps among databases. Natural language, controlled vocabulary and a mixture of natural language and controlled terms were tested using different fields of bibliographic records. Also discusses a comparative evaluation of single and multi-data base searching, measuring the overlap among data bases and their influence upon on-line searching.
- Source
- Canadian Journal of Information Science. 14(1989) no.2, S.26-46
