Search (39 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × author_ss:"Dahlberg, I."
  1. Dahlberg, I.: Knowledge organization : a new science? (2006) 0.04
    0.041681975 = product of:
      0.06252296 = sum of:
        0.031211555 = weight(_text_:of in 3375) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031211555 = score(doc=3375,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.08160993 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05218836 = queryNorm
            0.38244802 = fieldWeight in 3375, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3375)
        0.031311408 = product of:
          0.062622815 = sum of:
            0.062622815 = weight(_text_:science in 3375) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.062622815 = score(doc=3375,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.13747036 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05218836 = queryNorm
                0.45553684 = fieldWeight in 3375, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3375)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    In ISKO's name, the term "Knowledge Organization" (KO) denotes already the object and the activity area significant for the existence of any science. Both areas are outlined and their specific contents shown. Also a survey of its special subfields is given. The sciencetheoretical foundation of Knowledge Organization as a new scientific discipline is based on the propositional concept of science. Within a universal system of the sciences, KO has been regarded as a subfield of Science of Science. Concludingly it is proposed to find the necessary institution for work in concerted effort of scientists, knowledge organizers and terminologists on the collection, definition, and systematization of concepts of all subject fields, utilizing the Information Coding Classification (ICC) as the necessary categorizing structure.
  2. Dahlberg, I.: What is knowledge organization? (2014) 0.03
    0.032941967 = product of:
      0.04941295 = sum of:
        0.02960988 = weight(_text_:of in 1381) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02960988 = score(doc=1381,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.08160993 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05218836 = queryNorm
            0.36282203 = fieldWeight in 1381, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1381)
        0.019803073 = product of:
          0.039606147 = sum of:
            0.039606147 = weight(_text_:science in 1381) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.039606147 = score(doc=1381,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.13747036 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05218836 = queryNorm
                0.2881068 = fieldWeight in 1381, 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=1381)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    As an introduction, the circumstances leading to the foundation of the International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO) are outlined and the prerequisites for the formal and conceptual description of the scope of knowledge organization (KO) are laid out, followed by the explanation of the scheme as used in the bibliography of KO. An overview is provided of the tasks and activities of this discipline; thereafter and in conclusion an urgent appeal is made to ISKO and to all active scientific societies with a view to establishing KO as an autonomous scientific discipline within the science of science, as well as an indication is given of urgently required tasks.
  3. Dahlberg, I.: ¬The basis of a new universal classification system seen from a philosophy of science point of view (1992) 0.03
    0.032564957 = product of:
      0.048847433 = sum of:
        0.028058534 = weight(_text_:of in 2100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028058534 = score(doc=2100,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.08160993 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05218836 = queryNorm
            0.34381276 = fieldWeight in 2100, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2100)
        0.020788899 = product of:
          0.041577797 = sum of:
            0.041577797 = weight(_text_:science in 2100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.041577797 = score(doc=2100,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.13747036 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05218836 = queryNorm
                0.30244917 = fieldWeight in 2100, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2100)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    The implications of contributions from philosophy of science to classification theory and the construction of a new universal classification system are discussed. Starting from the purposes of universal systems and what has been considered so far to serve as main classes of the six existing major universal systems, the following theories have been treated: Theory of (1) knowledge, (2) knowledge elements and units, (3) systems, (4) the science concept, (5) knowledge fields including criteria for their identification, (6) a logical syntax, (7) an overall structure of object and aspect areas. Concludingly an evaluation was made with special regard to the representability (notation) of such a theory-based universal concept system by computer and in telecommunication. This, as well as the heuristics contained in such a theory-based system facilitate its general applicability
  4. De Luca, E.W.; Dahlberg, I.: Including knowledge domains from the ICC into the multilingual lexical linked data cloud (2014) 0.03
    0.027175516 = product of:
      0.040763274 = sum of:
        0.015764216 = weight(_text_:of in 1493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015764216 = score(doc=1493,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.08160993 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05218836 = queryNorm
            0.19316542 = fieldWeight in 1493, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1493)
        0.02499906 = product of:
          0.04999812 = sum of:
            0.04999812 = weight(_text_:22 in 1493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04999812 = score(doc=1493,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.18275474 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05218836 = queryNorm
                0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1493, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1493)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    A lot of information that is already available on the Web, or retrieved from local information systems and social networks is structured in data silos that are not semantically related. Semantic technologies make it emerge that the use of typed links that directly express their relations are an advantage for every application that can reuse the incorporated knowledge about the data. For this reason, data integration, through reengineering (e.g. triplify), or querying (e.g. D2R) is an important task in order to make information available for everyone. Thus, in order to build a semantic map of the data, we need knowledge about data items itself and the relation between heterogeneous data items. In this paper, we present our work of providing Lexical Linked Data (LLD) through a meta-model that contains all the resources and gives the possibility to retrieve and navigate them from different perspectives. We combine the existing work done on knowledge domains (based on the Information Coding Classification) within the Multilingual Lexical Linked Data Cloud (based on the RDF/OWL EurowordNet and the related integrated lexical resources (MultiWordNet, EuroWordNet, MEMODATA Lexicon, Hamburg Methaphor DB).
    Date
    22. 9.2014 19:01:18
    Source
    Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
  5. Dahlberg, I.: International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO) (2009) 0.03
    0.027015757 = product of:
      0.040523633 = sum of:
        0.02637858 = weight(_text_:of in 4693) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02637858 = score(doc=4693,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.08160993 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05218836 = queryNorm
            0.32322758 = fieldWeight in 4693, product of:
              5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
                28.0 = termFreq=28.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4693)
        0.014145052 = product of:
          0.028290104 = sum of:
            0.028290104 = weight(_text_:science in 4693) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028290104 = score(doc=4693,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.13747036 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05218836 = queryNorm
                0.20579056 = fieldWeight in 4693, 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=4693)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    The aims, tasks, activities, and achievements of the International Society for Knowledge Organization (1989-) are presented. ISKO is that group of scholars and practitioners who feel responsible for questions pertaining to the conceptual organization and processing of knowledge, the scientific bases of which lie in knowledge drawn from the fields of logic, organization science, psychology, science theory, informatics, semiotics, linguistics, and philosophy. It aims at giving advice in the construction, perfection, and application of such organizational tools as classification systems, taxonomies, thesauri, terminologies, as well as their use for indexing purposes and thereby for the retrieval of information. Events leading up to the founding of ISKO in 1989 are described. The aims and objectives of ISKO according to its statutes are mentioned, as well as its organization, its biennial international conferences with their proceedings volumes, and the establishment of a further conference series and a textbook series. The drive and success of coordinators in establishing chapters in many countries is reviewed as well. The activities of the chapters (mainly by their own meetings and conferences) and subsequently their publications during the past years are also included. The idea and structure of ISKO's official journal-Knowledge Organization-is explained, and ISKO's Web site is given. Finally, the need for the Society is discussed, and its possible future is considered.
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed. M.J. Bates
  6. Dahlberg, I.: Why a new universal classification system is needed (2017) 0.02
    0.024048528 = product of:
      0.03607279 = sum of:
        0.022069903 = weight(_text_:of in 3614) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022069903 = score(doc=3614,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.08160993 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05218836 = queryNorm
            0.2704316 = fieldWeight in 3614, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3614)
        0.0140028875 = product of:
          0.028005775 = sum of:
            0.028005775 = weight(_text_:science in 3614) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028005775 = score(doc=3614,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13747036 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05218836 = queryNorm
                0.20372227 = fieldWeight in 3614, 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=3614)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Research history of the last 70 years highlights various systems for contents assessment and retrieval of scientific literature, such as universal classifications, thesauri, ontologies etc., which have followed developments of their own, notwithstanding a general trend towards interoperability, i.e. either to become instruments for cooperation or to widen their scope to encompass neighbouring fields within their framework. In the case of thesauri and ontologies, the endeavour to upgrade them into a universal system was bound to miscarry. This paper purports to indicate ways to gain from past experience and possibly rally material achievements while updating and promoting the ontologically-based faceted Information Coding Classification as a progressive universal system fit for meeting whatever requirements in the fields of information and science at large.
  7. Dahlberg, I.: Normung und Klassifikation (1978) 0.02
    0.023569342 = product of:
      0.07070802 = sum of:
        0.07070802 = product of:
          0.14141604 = sum of:
            0.14141604 = weight(_text_:22 in 1612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.14141604 = score(doc=1612,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18275474 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05218836 = queryNorm
                0.77380234 = fieldWeight in 1612, 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=1612)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    DK-Mitteilungen. 22(1978) Nr.5/6, S.13-18
  8. Dahlberg, I.: Kolloquium Einheitsklassifikation (1975) 0.02
    0.023569342 = product of:
      0.07070802 = sum of:
        0.07070802 = product of:
          0.14141604 = sum of:
            0.14141604 = weight(_text_:22 in 1625) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.14141604 = score(doc=1625,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18275474 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05218836 = queryNorm
                0.77380234 = fieldWeight in 1625, 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=1625)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Nachrichten für Dokumentation. 26(1975), S.22-25
  9. Dahlberg, I.: Conceptual definitions for INTERCONCEPT (1981) 0.02
    0.023569342 = product of:
      0.07070802 = sum of:
        0.07070802 = product of:
          0.14141604 = sum of:
            0.14141604 = weight(_text_:22 in 1630) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.14141604 = score(doc=1630,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18275474 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05218836 = 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)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    International classification. 8(1981), S.16-22
  10. Dahlberg, I.: How to improve ISKO's standing : ten desiderata for knowledge organization (2011) 0.02
    0.019874636 = product of:
      0.029811952 = sum of:
        0.021149913 = weight(_text_:of in 4300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021149913 = score(doc=4300,freq=72.0), product of:
            0.08160993 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05218836 = queryNorm
            0.25915858 = fieldWeight in 4300, product of:
              8.485281 = tf(freq=72.0), with freq of:
                72.0 = termFreq=72.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4300)
        0.00866204 = product of:
          0.01732408 = sum of:
            0.01732408 = weight(_text_:science in 4300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.01732408 = score(doc=4300,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.13747036 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05218836 = queryNorm
                0.12602048 = fieldWeight in 4300, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4300)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    In 2009 ISKO had its 20th anniversary, a time for review and reflection on what might be envisaged to further Knowledge Organization in the forthcoming years. In addition to some proposals set forth at the end of this contribution, ten desiderata appear urgent. A preliminary condition to any other consideration is the recognition of the fundamental difference in the organization of knowledge between the concept (i.e., the unit of knowledge)-the conceptual level-and the word, term or code-the verbal level-and the need for implementing this distinction in theory and practice (Desideratum 1). On this basis, some further proposals are enunciated. The 2nd proposition concerns the surveying of extant classification systems, thesauri, and other means of organizing, ordering, and indexing knowledge; the 3rd proposition envisages the improvement of expert training in Knowledge Organization (KO), also with regard to curricula and professional acknowledgment. Nr.4) refers to the professionalization of the hitherto rather neglected national ISKO secretariats, as well as the international ISKO secretariat. Nr.5) urges a systematic survey of KO-relevant concepts to serve as a model or standard for other subject fields, Nr.6) claims the establishment of KO Institutes, Nr.7) views consultancy to the effect that anybody interested in KO may approach ISKO for help, Nr 8) urges ISKO's promotion of membership and chapters in as many countries as possible, Nr.9) presses for intensification of ISKO's publication activities, and Nr.10) pleads for KO as a scientific discipline on its own.
    Content
    1. Recognize the units in an order system (classification system, thesaurus, ontology, etc.) as concepts/knowledge units, analyse their essential characteristics, and use these characteristics when creating a Knowledge Order System. 2. Recognize the units in an order system (classification system, thesaurus, ontology, etc.) as concepts/knowledge units, analyse their essential characteristics, and use these characteristics when creating a Knowledge Order System. 3. An ISKO group should elaborate a curriculum for the various KO activities to be published after approval by the ISKO Executive Board (EB). Together with this, the qualifying titles of different professionals (teacher, professor, system designer etc.) should also be discussed by the ISKO EB, adopted and proposed for acknowledgement by official institutions; and, 2) It may be possible for ISKO to establish its own Academy and also take care of teaching with the elaborated curricula. 4. Every national ISKO Chapter and the General Secretariat should make efforts to employ a paid expert for the necessary secretarial work, and seek financial support therefore from national or international organizations, in order to become more professionalised. 5. The ISKO Executive Board should decide to elaborate and publish an order system of all KO-relevant concepts to serve as a model and perhaps sometimes as a standard for similar work in other scientific disciplines and knowledge fields.
    6. Establishment of national Knowledge Organization Institutes should be scheduled by national chapters, planned energetically and submitted to corresponding administrative authorities for support. They could be attached to research institutions, e.g., the Max-Planck or Fraunhofer Institutes in Germany or to universities. Their scope and research areas relate to the elaboration of knowledge systems of subject related concepts, according to Desideratum 1, and may be connected to training activities and KOsubject-related research work. 7. ISKO experts should not accept to be impressed by Internet and Computer Science, but should demonstrate their expertise more actively on the public plane. They should tend to take a leading part in the ISKO Secretariats and the KO Institutes, and act as consultants and informants, as well as editors of statistics and other publications. 8. All colleagues trained in the field of classification/indexing and thesauri construction and active in different countries should be identified and approached for membership in ISKO. This would have to be accomplished by the General Secretariat with the collaboration of the experts in the different secretariats of the countries, as soon as they start to work. The more members ISKO will have, the greater will be its reputation and influence. But it will also prove its professionalism by the quality of its products, especially its innovating conceptual order systems to come. 9. ISKO should-especially in view of global expansion-intensify the promotion of knowledge about its own subject area through the publications mentioned here and in further publications as deemed necessary. It should be made clear that, especially in ISKO's own publications, professional subject indexes are a sine qua non. 10. 1) Knowledge Organization, having arisen from librarianship and documentation, the contents of which has many points of contact with numerous application fields, should-although still linked up with its areas of descent-be recognized in the long run as an independent autonomous discipline to be located under the science of science, since only thereby can it fully play its role as an equal partner in all application fields; and, 2) An "at-a-first-glance knowledge order" could be implemented through the Information Coding Classification (ICC), as this system is based on an entirely new approach, namely based on general object areas, thus deviating from discipline-oriented main classes of the current main universal classification systems. It can therefore recoup by simple display on screen the hitherto lost overview of all knowledge areas and fields. On "one look", one perceives 9 object areas subdivided into 9 aspects which break down into 81 subject areas with their 729 subject fields, including further special fields. The synthesis and place of order of all knowledge becomes thus evident at a glance to everybody. Nobody would any longer be irritated by the abundance of singular apparently unrelated knowledge fields or become hesitant in his/her understanding of the world.
    Footnote
    Slightly revised translation into English of a contribution given at the 11th German ISKO Conference, Bonn, 19-21 Oct.2009. Vgl.: http://www.ergon-verlag.de/isko_ko/downloads/ko_38_2011_1g.pdf.
  11. Dahlberg, I.: Was ist Wissensorganisation? (2017) 0.02
    0.018640747 = product of:
      0.02796112 = sum of:
        0.0139582325 = weight(_text_:of in 3473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0139582325 = score(doc=3473,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08160993 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05218836 = queryNorm
            0.17103596 = fieldWeight in 3473, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3473)
        0.0140028875 = product of:
          0.028005775 = sum of:
            0.028005775 = weight(_text_:science in 3473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028005775 = score(doc=3473,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13747036 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05218836 = queryNorm
                0.20372227 = fieldWeight in 3473, 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=3473)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Source
    Theorie, Semantik und Organisation von Wissen: Proceedings der 13. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und dem 13. Internationalen Symposium der Informationswissenschaft der Higher Education Association for Information Science (HI) Potsdam (19.-20.03.2013): 'Theory, Information and Organization of Knowledge' / Proceedings der 14. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und Natural Language & Information Systems (NLDB) Passau (16.06.2015): 'Lexical Resources for Knowledge Organization' / Proceedings des Workshops der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) auf der SEMANTICS Leipzig (1.09.2014): 'Knowledge Organization and Semantic Web' / Proceedings des Workshops der Polnischen und Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) Cottbus (29.-30.09.2011): 'Economics of Knowledge Production and Organization'. Hrsg. von W. Babik, H.P. Ohly u. K. Weber
  12. Dahlberg, I.: ¬Die gegenstandsbezogene, analytische Begriffstheorie und ihre Definitionsarten (1987) 0.02
    0.01649854 = product of:
      0.049495615 = sum of:
        0.049495615 = product of:
          0.09899123 = sum of:
            0.09899123 = weight(_text_:22 in 880) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09899123 = score(doc=880,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18275474 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05218836 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 880, 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=880)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Pages
    S.9-22
  13. Dahlberg, I.: Principles for the construction of a universal classification system : a proposal (1978) 0.01
    0.0131599475 = product of:
      0.03947984 = sum of:
        0.03947984 = weight(_text_:of in 67) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03947984 = score(doc=67,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.08160993 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05218836 = queryNorm
            0.48376274 = fieldWeight in 67, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=67)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Conceptual basis of the classification of knowledge. Proc. of the Ottawa Conf. ... 1.5.10.1971. Ed. by J.A. Wojciechowski
  14. Dahlberg, I.: Grundlagen universaler Wissensordnung : Probleme und Möglichkeiten eines universalen Klassifikationssystems des Wissens (1974) 0.01
    0.011784671 = product of:
      0.03535401 = sum of:
        0.03535401 = product of:
          0.07070802 = sum of:
            0.07070802 = weight(_text_:22 in 127) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07070802 = score(doc=127,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18275474 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05218836 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 127, 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=127)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Footnote
    Zugleich Dissertation Univ. Düsseldorf. - Rez. in: ZfBB. 22(1975) S.53-57 (H.-A. Koch)
  15. Dahlberg, I.: Classification structure principles : Investigations, experiences, conclusions (1998) 0.01
    0.011279955 = product of:
      0.033839863 = sum of:
        0.033839863 = weight(_text_:of in 47) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033839863 = score(doc=47,freq=32.0), product of:
            0.08160993 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05218836 = queryNorm
            0.41465378 = fieldWeight in 47, product of:
              5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
                32.0 = termFreq=32.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=47)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    For the purpose of establishing compatibility between the major universal classification systems in use, their structure principles were investigated and crucial points of difficulty for this undertaking were looked for, in order to relate the guiding classes, e.g. of the DDC, UDC, LCC, BC, and CC, to the subject groups of the ICC. With the help of a matrix into whose fields all subject groups of the ICC were inserted, it was not difficult at all to enter the notations of the universal classification systems mentioned. However, differences in terms of level of subdivision were found, as well as differences of occurrences. Most, though not all, of the fields of the ICC matrix could be completely filled with the corresponding notations of the other systems. Through this matrix, a first table of some 81 equivalences was established on which further work regarding the next levels of subject fields can be based
    Source
    Structures and relations in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the 5th International ISKO-Conference, Lille, 25.-29.8.1998. Ed.: W. Mustafa el Hadi et al
  16. Dahlberg, I.: Ontical structure and universal classification (1977) 0.01
    0.010668866 = product of:
      0.0320066 = sum of:
        0.0320066 = product of:
          0.0640132 = sum of:
            0.0640132 = weight(_text_:science in 3342) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0640132 = score(doc=3342,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13747036 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05218836 = queryNorm
                0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 3342, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3342)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Imprint
    Bangalore : Sarada Ranganathan Endowment for Library Science
  17. Dahlberg, I.: ¬The terminology of subject-fields (1975) 0.01
    0.010167614 = product of:
      0.03050284 = sum of:
        0.03050284 = weight(_text_:of in 2103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03050284 = score(doc=2103,freq=26.0), product of:
            0.08160993 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05218836 = queryNorm
            0.37376386 = fieldWeight in 2103, product of:
              5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
                26.0 = termFreq=26.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2103)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    So far terminological work has been mainly directed towards defining very special concepts. The more general ones, e.g. those denoting subject-fields have been neglected with the result that communication on this level has been seriously hampered. There exists a great number of such terms and also a growing trend for the formation of new ones. In the FRG an R&D project was started in 1972 with the collection of names of subject fields, it is intended to assemble their definitions in a dictionary and to build a general concept system by computercomparison of their characteristics as provided by their definitions. The nature of subject-fields is explained, details on the German collection are given as well as some results from a formal analysis of their concepts. It is proposed to initiate similar projects in other linguistic regions as well; this could be done under the auspices of Infoterm. Some application-possibilities for a general concept-system (e. g. a broad system of ordering) are given. The annex displays a scheme of 9 subject areas and about 90 subareas for the sorting of names of subject fields
  18. Dahlberg, I.: Classification theory, yesterday and today (1976) 0.01
    0.009947985 = product of:
      0.029843956 = sum of:
        0.029843956 = weight(_text_:of in 1618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029843956 = score(doc=1618,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.08160993 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05218836 = queryNorm
            0.36569026 = fieldWeight in 1618, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1618)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Until very recently, classification theory was held to be nothing but an expressed or unconscious knowledge framed in intuitively given reasons for the subdivision and arrangement of any universe. Today, after clarification of the elements of classification systems as well as the basis of concept relationshios it is possible to apply a number of principles in the evaluation of existing systems as well as in the construction of new ones and by this achieving relatively predictable and repeatable results
  19. Dahlberg, I.: Knowledge organization : its scope and possibilities (1993) 0.01
    0.009947985 = product of:
      0.029843956 = sum of:
        0.029843956 = weight(_text_:of in 6315) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029843956 = score(doc=6315,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.08160993 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05218836 = queryNorm
            0.36569026 = fieldWeight in 6315, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6315)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Sketch of historical development of knowledge organization and presentation of its scope as shown by the contents of the literature service, now called 'Knowledge Organization Literature'. The scheme is explained and shown on its three levels as well as its correlation to a universal classification system of knowledge fields, the 'Information Coding Classification'. The possibilities of Knowledge Organization as a help for everybody, especially also students and above all students of education, and a help for political, industrial and social leaders are discussed. 10 measures for consideration and activation are listed
  20. Dahlberg, I.: ICC - Information Coding Classification : principles, structure and application possibilities (1982) 0.01
    0.009768728 = product of:
      0.029306183 = sum of:
        0.029306183 = weight(_text_:of in 1238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029306183 = score(doc=1238,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.08160993 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05218836 = queryNorm
            0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 1238, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1238)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Presentation of the design, characteristics and application possibilities of a new universal classification system called ICC which is based on the premises that whenever information is to be generated or to be presented (in coded form) at least two items are necessary one of which plays the part of a subject and the other one that of the predicate of a sentence, with both these items being framed into a third one. The first basic division is by the categorial concepts denoting general entities and general aspects/determinations of being, framed into an evolutionary pattern of levels creating the 81 subject groups of ICC. Each of these subject groups is structured by a socalled systematifier, applying a recurring series of facets. The overall structure is explained and some of its application fields are outlined