Search (22 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × author_ss:"Stock, W.G."
  1. Stock, W.G.: Wissenschaftsinformatik : Fundierung, Gegenstand und Methoden (1980) 0.02
    0.01803071 = product of:
      0.054092128 = sum of:
        0.054092128 = product of:
          0.108184256 = sum of:
            0.108184256 = weight(_text_:22 in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.108184256 = score(doc=2808,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1747608 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04990557 = queryNorm
                0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2808, 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=2808)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Ratio. 22(1980), S.155-164
  2. Stock, W.G.: Informationsmangel trotz Überfluß : Informationsgesellschaft verlangt neue Berufe und Berufsbilder (1995) 0.02
    0.01803071 = product of:
      0.054092128 = sum of:
        0.054092128 = product of:
          0.108184256 = sum of:
            0.108184256 = weight(_text_:22 in 2027) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.108184256 = score(doc=2027,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1747608 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04990557 = queryNorm
                0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2027, 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=2027)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Insider. 1995, Nr.4, Juli, S.19-22
  3. Stock, M.; Stock, W.G.: Recherchieren im Internet (2004) 0.02
    0.01803071 = product of:
      0.054092128 = sum of:
        0.054092128 = product of:
          0.108184256 = sum of:
            0.108184256 = weight(_text_:22 in 4686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.108184256 = score(doc=4686,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1747608 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04990557 = queryNorm
                0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4686, 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=4686)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    27.11.2005 18:04:22
  4. Stock, W.G.: Endnutzersystem für internationale Geschäftsinformationen (1998) 0.02
    0.01577687 = product of:
      0.04733061 = sum of:
        0.04733061 = product of:
          0.09466122 = sum of:
            0.09466122 = weight(_text_:22 in 2407) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09466122 = score(doc=2407,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1747608 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04990557 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2407, 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=2407)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Password. 1998, H.10, S.22-28
  5. Garfield, E.; Stock, W.G.: Citation Consciousness : Interview with Eugene Garfiels, chairman emeritus of ISI; Philadelphia (2002) 0.01
    0.011269193 = product of:
      0.03380758 = sum of:
        0.03380758 = product of:
          0.06761516 = sum of:
            0.06761516 = weight(_text_:22 in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06761516 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1747608 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04990557 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 613, 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=613)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Password. 2002, H.6, S.22-25
  6. Stock, W.G.: ¬Die Wichtigkeit wissenschaftlicher Dokumente relativ zu gegebenen Thematiken (1981) 0.01
    0.010779679 = product of:
      0.032339036 = sum of:
        0.032339036 = weight(_text_:on in 13) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032339036 = score(doc=13,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04990557 = queryNorm
            0.29462588 = fieldWeight in 13, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=13)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Scientific documents are more or less important in relation to give subjects and this importance can be measured. An empirical investigation into philosophical information was carried out using a weighting algorithm developed by N. Henrichs which results in a distribution by weighting of documents on an average philosophical subject. With the aid of statistical methods a threshold value can be obtained that separates the important and unimportant documents on a subject. The knowledge of theis threshold value is important for various practical and theoretic questions: providing new possibilities for research strategy in information retrieval; evaluation of the 'titleworthiness' of subjects by comparison of document titles and themes for which the document at hand is important; and making available data on thematic trends for scientific results
  7. Gremm, J.; Barth, J.; Stock, W.G.: Kuwait is the past, Dubai is the present, Doha is the future : Informational cities on the Arabian Gulf (2015) 0.01
    0.010669115 = product of:
      0.032007344 = sum of:
        0.032007344 = weight(_text_:on in 1874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032007344 = score(doc=1874,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04990557 = queryNorm
            0.29160398 = fieldWeight in 1874, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1874)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
  8. Stock, W.G.; Weber, S.: Facets of informetrics : Preface (2006) 0.01
    0.010058938 = product of:
      0.030176813 = sum of:
        0.030176813 = weight(_text_:on in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030176813 = score(doc=76,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04990557 = queryNorm
            0.27492687 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    According to Jean M. Tague-Sutcliffe "informetrics" is "the study of the quantitative aspects of information in any form, not just records or bibliographies, and in any social group, not just scientists" (Tague-Sutcliffe, 1992, 1). Leo Egghe also defines "informetrics" in a very broad sense. "(W)e will use the term' informetrics' as the broad term comprising all-metrics studies related to information science, including bibliometrics (bibliographies, libraries,...), scientometrics (science policy, citation analysis, research evaluation,...), webometrics (metrics of the web, the Internet or other social networks such as citation or collaboration networks), ..." (Egghe, 2005b,1311). According to Concepcion S. Wilson "informetrics" is "the quantitative study of collections of moderatesized units of potentially informative text, directed to the scientific understanding of information processes at the social level" (Wilson, 1999, 211). We should add to Wilson's units of text also digital collections of images, videos, spoken documents and music. Dietmar Wolfram divides "informetrics" into two aspects, "system-based characteristics that arise from the documentary content of IR systems and how they are indexed, and usage-based characteristics that arise how users interact with system content and the system interfaces that provide access to the content" (Wolfram, 2003, 6). We would like to follow Tague-Sutcliffe, Egghe, Wilson and Wolfram (and others, for example Björneborn & Ingwersen, 2004) and call this broad research of empirical information science "informetrics". Informetrics includes therefore all quantitative studies in information science. If a scientist performs scientific investigations empirically, e.g. on information users' behavior, on scientific impact of academic journals, on the development of the patent application activity of a company, on links of Web pages, on the temporal distribution of blog postings discussing a given topic, on availability, recall and precision of retrieval systems, on usability of Web sites, and so on, he or she contributes to informetrics. We see three subject areas in information science in which such quantitative research takes place, - information users and information usage, - evaluation of information systems, - information itself, Following Wolfram's article, we divide his system-based characteristics into the "information itself "-category and the "information system"-category. Figure 1 is a simplistic graph of subjects and research areas of informetrics as an empirical information science.
  9. Linde, F.; Stock, W.G.: Informationsmarkt : Informationen im I-Commerce anbieten und nachfragen (2011) 0.01
    0.009015355 = product of:
      0.027046064 = sum of:
        0.027046064 = product of:
          0.054092128 = sum of:
            0.054092128 = weight(_text_:22 in 291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054092128 = score(doc=291,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1747608 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04990557 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 291, 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=291)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    23. 9.2010 11:15:22
  10. Stock, W.G.: ¬Ein allgemeiner Bibliotheksindex (1998) 0.01
    0.008890929 = product of:
      0.026672786 = sum of:
        0.026672786 = weight(_text_:on in 1736) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026672786 = score(doc=1736,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04990557 = queryNorm
            0.24300331 = fieldWeight in 1736, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1736)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    A general library index, produced as a series over years, would describe performance in the whole national system, showing increases and decreases compared with previous years. The index should cover input, processing and output and be modelled on the consumer price index. This will reflect service quality and quantity and users' reactions
  11. Schumann, L.; Stock, W.G.: ¬Ein umfassendes ganzheitliches Modell für Evaluation und Akzeptanzanalysen von Informationsdiensten : Das Information Service Evaluation (ISE) Modell (2014) 0.01
    0.007888435 = product of:
      0.023665305 = sum of:
        0.023665305 = product of:
          0.04733061 = sum of:
            0.04733061 = weight(_text_:22 in 1492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04733061 = score(doc=1492,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1747608 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04990557 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1492, 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=1492)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 9.2014 18:56:46
  12. Stock, W.G.: On relevance distributions (2006) 0.01
    0.007112743 = product of:
      0.021338228 = sum of:
        0.021338228 = weight(_text_:on in 5116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021338228 = score(doc=5116,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04990557 = queryNorm
            0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 5116, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5116)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
  13. Stock, W.G.: ¬Die Bedeutung der Theorie der Vorstellungsproduktion der Grazer Schule für die kognitive Wissenschaft (1989) 0.01
    0.00622365 = product of:
      0.01867095 = sum of:
        0.01867095 = weight(_text_:on in 1806) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01867095 = score(doc=1806,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04990557 = queryNorm
            0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 1806, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1806)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The author stresses the need for a general, overall theory of cognitive psychological processes for cognitive science. The relevance of the Graz-school theorie on the 'production of ideas' is then examined as an attempt to provide such a framework. In Graz-school, at the beginning of 20th century, representation ('Vorstellung') was the foundational aspect of all the cognitive processes. As an example of an analysis of the origin of representation Stephan Witasek's theory of sensation is surveyed. The explanation of the origin of representations is also theoretically and practically important for cognitive science
  14. Stock, W.G.: Qualitätskriterien von Suchmaschinen : Checkliste für Retrievalsysteme (2000) 0.01
    0.0056345966 = product of:
      0.01690379 = sum of:
        0.01690379 = product of:
          0.03380758 = sum of:
            0.03380758 = weight(_text_:22 in 5773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03380758 = score(doc=5773,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1747608 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04990557 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5773, 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=5773)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Password. 2000, H.5, S.22-31
  15. Stock, W.G.: Hochschulmanagement, Information Appliances, Fairness als Grundsatz : Information und Mobilität (2002) 0.01
    0.0056345966 = product of:
      0.01690379 = sum of:
        0.01690379 = product of:
          0.03380758 = sum of:
            0.03380758 = weight(_text_:22 in 1364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03380758 = score(doc=1364,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1747608 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04990557 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1364, 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=1364)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 2.2003 19:39:36
  16. Stock, W.G.: Informational cities : analysis and construction of cities in the knowledge society (2011) 0.01
    0.0056345966 = product of:
      0.01690379 = sum of:
        0.01690379 = product of:
          0.03380758 = sum of:
            0.03380758 = weight(_text_:22 in 4452) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03380758 = score(doc=4452,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1747608 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04990557 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4452, 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=4452)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    3. 7.2011 19:22:49
  17. Linde, F.; Stock, W.G.: Information markets : a strategic guideline for the i-commerce (2011) 0.01
    0.0053345575 = product of:
      0.016003672 = sum of:
        0.016003672 = weight(_text_:on in 3283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016003672 = score(doc=3283,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04990557 = queryNorm
            0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 3283, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3283)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Information Markets is a compendium of the i-commerce, the commerce with digital information, content as well as software. Information Markets is a comprehensive overview of the state of the art of economic and information science endeavors on the markets of digital information. It provides a strategic guideline for information providers how to analyse their market environment and how to develop possible strategic actions. It is a book for information professionals, both for students of LIS (Library and Information Science), CIS (Computer and Information Science) or Information Management curricula and for practitioners as well as managers in these fields.
  18. Stock, W.G.; Schlögl, C.: Practitioners and academics as authors and readers : the case of LIS journals (2008) 0.01
    0.005029469 = product of:
      0.015088406 = sum of:
        0.015088406 = weight(_text_:on in 2343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015088406 = score(doc=2343,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04990557 = queryNorm
            0.13746344 = fieldWeight in 2343, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2343)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The aim of this paper is to explore the relationship between practitioners and academics in scholarly communication in library and information science (LIS) journals. Design/methodology/approach - The research is based on a reader survey, a citation analysis and an editor survey. The reader survey identifies both differences in journal rankings between practitioners and academics and the contribution of practitioners to LIS journals. The editor survey provides the proportions of practitioners and academics for the journals. The citation analysis shows the disparities in information exchange between the journals mainly preferred by practitioners and those more favoured by academics. Furthermore, it is possible to explore if practitioner journals differ from academic journals in the citation indicators and in other data collected in the editor survey. Findings - It is found that: practitioners play an active role both as readers and as authors of articles in LIS journals; there is only a low level of information exchange between practitioner and academic journals; the placement of advertisements, the size of the editorial board, requirements concerning an extensive bibliography, the number and the half-life of the references show a clear distinction between practitioner and academic journals. Interestingly, the impact factor did not turn out to be a good indicator to differentiate a practitioner from an academic journal. Research limitations/implications - This research is only exploratory because it is based on separate studies previously conducted. Further research is also needed to explore the relationship between practitioners and academics more deeply. Originality/value - The value of this paper lies in bringing together the findings from complementary studies (reader survey, editor survey and citation analysis) and identifying hypotheses for future research, especially with regards to the roles of and interactions between LIS practitioners and academics in scholarly communication.
  19. Schmidt, S.; Stock, W.G.: Collective indexing of emotions in images : a study in emotional information retrieval (2009) 0.00
    0.0044454644 = product of:
      0.013336393 = sum of:
        0.013336393 = weight(_text_:on in 2792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013336393 = score(doc=2792,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04990557 = queryNorm
            0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 2792, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2792)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Some documents provoke emotions in people viewing them. Will it be possible to describe emotions consistently and use this information in retrieval systems? We tested collective (statistically aggregated) emotion indexing using images as examples. Considering psychological results, basic emotions are anger, disgust, fear, happiness, and sadness. This study follows an approach developed by Lee and Neal (2007) for music emotion retrieval and applies scroll bars for tagging basic emotions and their intensities. A sample comprising 763 persons tagged emotions caused by images (retrieved from www.Flickr.com) applying scroll bars and (linguistic) tags. Using SPSS, we performed descriptive statistics and correlation analysis. For more than half of the images, the test persons have clear emotion favorites. There are prototypical images for given emotions. The document-specific consistency of tagging using a scroll bar is, for some images, very high. Most of the (most commonly used) linguistic tags are on the basic level (in the sense of Rosch's basic level theory). The distributions of the linguistic tags in our examples follow an inverse power-law. Hence, it seems possible to apply collective image emotion tagging to image information systems and to present a new search option for basic emotions. This article is one of the first steps in the research area of emotional information retrieval (EmIR).
  20. Stock, W.G.: Concepts and semantic relations in information science (2010) 0.00
    0.0044454644 = product of:
      0.013336393 = sum of:
        0.013336393 = weight(_text_:on in 4008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013336393 = score(doc=4008,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04990557 = queryNorm
            0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 4008, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4008)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Concept-based information retrieval and knowledge representation are in need of a theory of concepts and semantic relations. Guidelines for the construction and maintenance of knowledge organization systems (KOS) (such as ANSI/NISO Z39.19-2005 in the U.S.A. or DIN 2331:1980 in Germany) do not consider results of concept theory and theory of relations to the full extent. They are not able to unify the currently different worlds of traditional controlled vocabularies, of the social web (tagging and folksonomies) and of the semantic web (ontologies). Concept definitions as well as semantic relations are based on epistemological theories (empiricism, rationalism, hermeneutics, pragmatism, and critical theory). A concept is determined via its intension and extension as well as by definition. We will meet the problem of vagueness by introducing prototypes. Some important definitions are concept explanations (after Aristotle) and the definition of family resemblances (in the sense of Wittgenstein). We will model concepts as frames (according to Barsalou). The most important paradigmatic relation in KOS is hierarchy, which must be arranged into different classes: Hyponymy consists of taxonomy and simple hyponymy, meronymy consists of many different part-whole-relations. For practical application purposes, the transitivity of the given relation is very important. Unspecific associative relations are of little help to our focused applications and should be replaced by generalizable and domain-specific relations. We will discuss the reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity of paradigmatic relations as well as the appearance of specific semantic relations in the different kinds of KOS (folksonomies, nomenclatures, classification systems, thesauri, and ontologies). Finally, we will pick out KOS as a central theme of the Semantic Web.