Search (9 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Referieren"
  1. Ward, M.L.: ¬The future of the human indexer (1996) 0.05
    0.05363507 = product of:
      0.13408767 = sum of:
        0.092213005 = weight(_text_:index in 7244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.092213005 = score(doc=7244,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.40966535 = fieldWeight in 7244, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7244)
        0.04187466 = weight(_text_:22 in 7244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04187466 = score(doc=7244,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 7244, 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=7244)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Considers the principles of indexing and the intellectual skills involved in order to determine what automatic indexing systems would be required in order to supplant or complement the human indexer. Good indexing requires: considerable prior knowledge of the literature; judgement as to what to index and what depth to index; reading skills; abstracting skills; and classification skills, Illustrates these features with a detailed description of abstracting and indexing processes involved in generating entries for the mechanical engineering database POWERLINK. Briefly assesses the possibility of replacing human indexers with specialist indexing software, with particular reference to the Object Analyzer from the InTEXT automatic indexing system and using the criteria described for human indexers. At present, it is unlikely that the automatic indexer will replace the human indexer, but when more primary texts are available in electronic form, it may be a useful productivity tool for dealing with large quantities of low grade texts (should they be wanted in the database)
    Date
    9. 2.1997 18:44:22
  2. Fidel, R.: Writing abstracts for free-text searching (1986) 0.02
    0.01738785 = product of:
      0.08693925 = sum of:
        0.08693925 = weight(_text_:index in 684) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08693925 = score(doc=684,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.3862362 = fieldWeight in 684, 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=684)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    A survey of abstracting policies by producers of bibliographical databases examined abstracting guidelines which aim to enhance free- text retrieval. Of the 123 database policies examined, fifty-seven (46 per cent) included such instructions. Editors consider contents of abstracts and their language as a primary factor in retrieval enhancement. Most recommend that once abstractors decide which concepts to include in abstracts and in which form to represent them, these terms should be co-ordinated with index terms assigned from a controlled vocabulary. Guidelines about the type of abstracts, i.e., informative or indicative, and about their length are not affected by the capability of free-text retrieval
  3. Farrow, J.: All in the mind : concept analysis in indexing (1995) 0.02
    0.01738785 = product of:
      0.08693925 = sum of:
        0.08693925 = weight(_text_:index in 2926) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08693925 = score(doc=2926,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.3862362 = fieldWeight in 2926, 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=2926)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    The indexing process consists of the comprehension of the document to be indexed, followed by the production of a set of index terms. Differences between academic indexing and back-of-the-book indexing are discussed. Text comprehension is a branch of human information processing, and it is argued that the model of text comprehension and production debeloped by van Dijk and Kintsch can form the basis for a cognitive process model of indexing. Strategies for testing such a model are suggested
  4. Armstrong, C.J.; Wheatley, A.: Writing abstracts for online databases : results of database producers' guidelines (1998) 0.02
    0.015214371 = product of:
      0.07607185 = sum of:
        0.07607185 = weight(_text_:index in 3295) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07607185 = score(doc=3295,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.33795667 = fieldWeight in 3295, 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=3295)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    Reports on one area of research in an Electronic Libraries Programme (eLib) MODELS (MOving to Distributed Environments for Library Services) supporting study in 3 investigative areas: examination of current database producers' guidelines for their abstract writers; a brief survey of abstracts in some traditional online databases; and a detailed survey of abstracts from 3 types of electronic database (print sourced online databases, Internet subject trees or directories, and Internet gateways). Examination of database producers' guidelines, reported here, gave a clear view of the intentions behind professionally produced traditional (printed index based) database abstracts and provided a benchmark against which to judge the conclusions of the larger investigations into abstract style, readability and content
  5. Koltay, T.: ¬A hypertext tutorial on abstracting for library science students (1995) 0.01
    0.01395822 = product of:
      0.0697911 = sum of:
        0.0697911 = weight(_text_:22 in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0697911 = score(doc=3061,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3061, 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=3061)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    27. 1.1996 18:22:06
  6. Palais, E.S.: Abstracting for reference librarians (1988) 0.01
    0.011166576 = product of:
      0.05583288 = sum of:
        0.05583288 = weight(_text_:22 in 2832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05583288 = score(doc=2832,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2832, 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=2832)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Source
    Reference librarian. 1988, no.22, S.297-308
  7. Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.: Which layout do you prefer? : an analysis of readers' preferences for different typographic layouts of structured abstracts (1996) 0.01
    0.008374932 = product of:
      0.04187466 = sum of:
        0.04187466 = weight(_text_:22 in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04187466 = score(doc=4411,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4411, 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=4411)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Source
    Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.1, S.27-37
  8. Wan, X.; Yang, J.; Xiao, J.: Incorporating cross-document relationships between sentences for single document summarizations (2006) 0.01
    0.008374932 = product of:
      0.04187466 = sum of:
        0.04187466 = weight(_text_:22 in 2421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04187466 = score(doc=2421,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2421, 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=2421)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Source
    Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006
  9. Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.; Blurton, A.: Obtaining information accurately and quickly : are structured abstracts more efficient? (1996) 0.01
    0.00697911 = product of:
      0.03489555 = sum of:
        0.03489555 = weight(_text_:22 in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03489555 = score(doc=7673,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 7673, 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=7673)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Source
    Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.5, S.349-356