Search (665 results, page 34 of 34)

0.0035563714 = product of:
  0.010669114 = sum of:
    0.010669114 = weight(_text_:on in 3636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010669114 = score(doc=3636,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.097201325 = fieldWeight in 3636, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3636)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Brian C. Vickery, Director and Professor, School of Library, Archive and Information Studies, University College, London, is a prolific writer on classification and information retrieval. This paper was one of the earliest to present initial efforts by the Classification Research Group (q.v.). In it he clearly outlined the need for classification in subject indexing, which, at the time he wrote, was not a commonplace understanding. In fact, some indexing systems were made in the first place specifically to avoid general classification systems which were out of date in all fast-moving disciplines, especially in the "hard" sciences. Vickery picked up Julia Pettee's work (q.v.) an the concealed classification in subject headings (1947) and added to it, mainly adopting concepts from the work of S. R. Ranganathan (q.v.). He had already published a paper an notation in classification, pointing out connections between notation, words, and the concepts which they represent. He was especially concerned about the structure of notational symbols as such symbols represented relationships among subjects. Vickery also emphasized that index terms cover all aspects of a subject so that, in addition to having a basis in classification, the ideal index system should also have standardized nomenclature, as weIl as show evidence of a systematic classing of elementary terms. The necessary linkage between system and terms should be one of a number of methods, notably:

0.0035563714 = product of:
  0.010669114 = sum of:
    0.010669114 = weight(_text_:on in 3650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010669114 = score(doc=3650,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.097201325 = fieldWeight in 3650, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3650)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The attempt to computerize a process, such as indexing, abstracting, classifying, or retrieving information, begins with an analysis of the process into its intellectual and nonintellectual components. That part of the process which is amenable to computerization is mechanical or algorithmic. What is not is intellectual or creative and requires human intervention. Gerard Salton has been an innovator, experimenter, and promoter in the area of mechanized information systems since the early 1960s. He has been particularly ingenious at analyzing the process of information retrieval into its algorithmic components. He received a doctorate in applied mathematics from Harvard University before moving to the computer science department at Cornell, where he developed a prototype automatic retrieval system called SMART. Working with this system he and his students contributed for over a decade to our theoretical understanding of the retrieval process. On a more practical level, they have contributed design criteria for operating retrieval systems. The following selection presents one of the early descriptions of the SMART system; it is valuable as it shows the direction automatic retrieval methods were to take beyond simple word-matching techniques. These include various word normalization techniques to improve recall, for instance, the separation of words into stems and affixes; the correlation and clustering, using statistical association measures, of related terms; and the identification, using a concept thesaurus, of synonymous, broader, narrower, and sibling terms. They include, as weIl, techniques, both linguistic and statistical, to deal with the thorny problem of how to automatically extract from texts index terms that consist of more than one word. They include weighting techniques and various documentrequest matching algorithms. Significant among the latter are those which produce a retrieval output of citations ranked in relevante order. During the 1970s, Salton and his students went an to further refine these various techniques, particularly the weighting and statistical association measures. Many of their early innovations seem commonplace today. Some of their later techniques are still ahead of their time and await technological developments for implementation. The particular focus of the selection that follows is an the evaluation of a particular component of the SMART system, a multilingual thesaurus. By mapping English language expressions and their German equivalents to a common concept number, the thesaurus permitted the automatic processing of German language documents against English language queries and vice versa. The results of the evaluation, as it turned out, were somewhat inconclusive. However, this SMART experiment suggested in a bold and optimistic way how one might proceed to answer such complex questions as What is meant by retrieval language compatability? How it is to be achieved, and how evaluated?

0.0035563714 = product of:
  0.010669114 = sum of:
    0.010669114 = weight(_text_:on in 333) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010669114 = score(doc=333,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.097201325 = fieldWeight in 333, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=333)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: ARNHEIM, R.: Stillstand in der Tätigkeit; MOTTE-HABER, H. de la: "Sie bildet regelnd jegliche Gestalt / und selbst im Großen ist es nicht Gewalt": Regelmaß und Einmaligkeit als ästhetische Prinzipien; PEITGEN. H.-O.: Symmetrie im Chaos: Selbstähnlichkeit in komplexen Systemen; HAKEN, H.: Die Rolle der Symmetrie in der Synergetik: spontane Entstehung von Strukturen in der Natur; THOM, R.: On the origin and stability of symmetries; GAZZANIGA, M.S.: Aspects of brain asymmetry; GOMBRICH, E.H.: Symmetrie, Wahrnehmung und künstlerische Gestaltung; OTTO, F.: Symmetrie zwischen Biologie und Architektur; HARGITTAI, I.: Real turned ideal through symmetry; VOGT, A.M.: Rotunde und Panorama: Steigerung der Symmetrie-Ansprüche seit Palladio; MICHEL, L.: Symmetry in physics; HOLENSTEIN, E.: Symmetrie und Symmetriebruch in der Sprache;

0.003111825 = product of:
  0.009335475 = sum of:
    0.009335475 = weight(_text_:on in 3648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009335475 = score(doc=3648,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.08505116 = fieldWeight in 3648, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3648)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Original in: Wilson, P.: Two kinds of power: an essay on bibliograpical control. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press 1968. S.69-92.

0.0026672787 = product of:
  0.008001836 = sum of:
    0.008001836 = weight(_text_:on in 3651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008001836 = score(doc=3651,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.072900996 = fieldWeight in 3651, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3651)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Original in: Ottawa Conference on the Conceptual Basis of the Classification of Knowledge, Ottawa, 1971. Ed.: Jerzy A Wojceichowski. Pullach: Verlag Dokumentation 1974. S.404-412.