Search (20 results, page 1 of 1)

0.04283164 = product of:
  0.1070791 = sum of:
    0.06520444 = weight(_text_:index in 3685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06520444 = score(doc=3685,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.28967714 = fieldWeight in 3685, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3685)
    0.04187466 = weight(_text_:22 in 3685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04187466 = score(doc=3685,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3685, 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=3685)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Presents the findings of the South Ayrshire Libraries OPen Learning and the Internet project, Sep 1997 to Oct 1998. The objective was to demonstrate how open learning materials available on the Internet could be integrated with the provision of local open learning resources to provide an enhanced learning environment in public libraries. The main areas of concentration within the project were information skills support to public library users and the provision of WWW based independent materials to learners. The organisation and retrieval of Web based resources for local use was a major issue throughout the project. Recommends the adoption of Dublin Core metadata standards, the connection of databases of resources with searchable wen pages, and the development of thesauri of terms used to index the Web based resources locally. Sstaff training, and the new skills which will need to be developed, were identified as issues. Cost was also identified as a related issue, extending to issues such as access to open learning material and the Internet

Date

22. 5.1999 18:55:19

0.042591367 = product of:
  0.21295683 = sum of:
    0.21295683 = weight(_text_:index in 3727) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21295683 = score(doc=3727,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.94608164 = fieldWeight in 3727, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3727)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Aims to provide an accurate and comprehensive bibliographic description of Canadian science fiction and fantasy literature in english language pulp magazines published between 1896 and 1955, a fragile and increasingly elusive periodical genre which contains a virtually unknown selection of popular fiction and art by Canadians. The arrangement is alphabetical under the following headings: author index; title index; artist index; magazine index; and series index

0.030428741 = product of:
  0.1521437 = sum of:
    0.1521437 = weight(_text_:index in 383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1521437 = score(doc=383,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.67591333 = fieldWeight in 383, 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=383)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Theme

Preserved Context Index System (PRECIS)

0.030428741 = product of:
  0.1521437 = sum of:
    0.1521437 = weight(_text_:index in 561) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1521437 = score(doc=561,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.021734815 = product of:
  0.10867407 = sum of:
    0.10867407 = weight(_text_:index in 3472) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10867407 = score(doc=3472,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.48279524 = fieldWeight in 3472, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3472)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.019541508 = product of:
  0.09770754 = sum of:
    0.09770754 = weight(_text_:22 in 3473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09770754 = score(doc=3473,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3473, 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=3473)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Pages

22 S

0.019541508 = product of:
  0.09770754 = sum of:
    0.09770754 = weight(_text_:22 in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09770754 = score(doc=2656,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2656, 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=2656)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

30.11.1995 20:53:22

0.018442601 = product of:
  0.092213005 = sum of:
    0.092213005 = weight(_text_:index in 1084) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.092213005 = score(doc=1084,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.40966535 = fieldWeight in 1084, 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=1084)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

An important stage in the process of retrieval of objects from a hypertext database is the creation of a set of internodal links that are intended to represent the relationships existing between objetcs; an operation that is usually undertaken manually such as the allocation of subject index terms to documents. Reports results of a study in which several different sets of hypertext links were inserted, each by a different person, between the paragraphs of each of a number of full text documents. The similarity between the members of each pair of link sets was then evaluated. Results indicated that little similarity existed among the link sets, a finding comparable with those of studies of inter indexer consistency, which suggests that there is generally only a low level of agreemenet between the sets of index terms assigned to a document by indexers. Concludes with that part of the study designed to test the validity of making these kinds of assumptions in the context of hypertext link sets

0.018442601 = product of:
  0.092213005 = sum of:
    0.092213005 = weight(_text_:index in 3807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.092213005 = score(doc=3807,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.40966535 = fieldWeight in 3807, 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=3807)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This technical report provides guidelines for the content, organization, and presentation of indexes used for the retrieval of documents and parts of documents. It deals with the principles of indexing, regardless of the type of material indexed, the indexing method used (intellectual analysis, machine algorithm, or both), the medium of the index, or the method of presentation for searching. It emphasizes 4 processes essential for all indexes: comprehensive design, vocabulary management, and the provision of systax. It includes definitions of indexes and of their parts, attributes, and aspects; a uniform vocabulary; treatment of the nature and variety of indexes; and recommendations regarding the design, organization, and presentation of indexes. It does not suggest guidelines for every detail or technique of indexing. These can be determined for each index on the basis of factors covered in the technical report

0.01738785 = product of:
  0.08693925 = sum of:
    0.08693925 = weight(_text_:index in 2418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08693925 = score(doc=2418,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.3862362 = fieldWeight in 2418, 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=2418)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Reviews the basic techniques involving genetic algorithms and their application to 2 problems in information retrieval: the generation of equifrequent groups of index terms; and the identification of optimal query and term weights. The algorithm developed for the generation of equifrequent groupings proved to be effective in operation, achieving results comparable with those obtained using a good deterministic algorithm. The algorithm developed for the identification of optimal query and term weighting involves fitness function that is based on full relevance information

0.016749864 = product of:
  0.08374932 = sum of:
    0.08374932 = weight(_text_:22 in 2538) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08374932 = score(doc=2538,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2538, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2538)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Footnote

Rez. in: Journal of academic librarianship 22(1996) no.2, S.147 (A. Schultis)

0.016749864 = product of:
  0.08374932 = sum of:
    0.08374932 = weight(_text_:22 in 6158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08374932 = score(doc=6158,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6158, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6158)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Footnote

Rez. in: College and research libraries 22(1961) no.3, S.228 (G. Jahoda)

0.016749864 = product of:
  0.08374932 = sum of:
    0.08374932 = weight(_text_:22 in 1715) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08374932 = score(doc=1715,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1715, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1715)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Footnote

Rez. in: Select newsletter 1998, no.22, S.8 (P. Robinson)

0.016749864 = product of:
  0.08374932 = sum of:
    0.08374932 = weight(_text_:22 in 234) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08374932 = score(doc=234,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 234, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=234)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Pages

22 S

0.01395822 = product of:
  0.0697911 = sum of:
    0.0697911 = weight(_text_:22 in 7306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0697911 = score(doc=7306,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 7306, 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=7306)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 7.1996 19:53:48

0.013040888 = product of:
  0.06520444 = sum of:
    0.06520444 = weight(_text_:index in 2417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06520444 = score(doc=2417,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.28967714 = fieldWeight in 2417, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2417)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Using citation data to assess research ultimately means using citation-based statistics to rank things.journals, papers, people, programs, and disciplines. The statistical tools used to rank these things are often misunderstood and misused. - For journals, the impact factor is most often used for ranking. This is a simple average derived from the distribution of citations for a collection of articles in the journal. The average captures only a small amount of information about that distribution, and it is a rather crude statistic. In addition, there are many confounding factors when judging journals by citations, and any comparison of journals requires caution when using impact factors. Using the impact factor alone to judge a journal is like using weight alone to judge a person's health. - For papers, instead of relying on the actual count of citations to compare individual papers, people frequently substitute the impact factor of the journals in which the papers appear. They believe that higher impact factors must mean higher citation counts. But this is often not the case! This is a pervasive misuse of statistics that needs to be challenged whenever and wherever it occurs. -For individual scientists, complete citation records can be difficult to compare. As a consequence, there have been attempts to find simple statistics that capture the full complexity of a scientist's citation record with a single number. The most notable of these is the h-index, which seems to be gaining in popularity. But even a casual inspection of the h-index and its variants shows that these are naive attempts to understand complicated citation records. While they capture a small amount of information about the distribution of a scientist's citations, they lose crucial information that is essential for the assessment of research.
The validity of statistics such as the impact factor and h-index is neither well understood nor well studied. The connection of these statistics with research quality is sometimes established on the basis of "experience." The justification for relying on them is that they are "readily available." The few studies of these statistics that were done focused narrowly on showing a correlation with some other measure of quality rather than on determining how one can best derive useful information from citation data. We do not dismiss citation statistics as a tool for assessing the quality of research.citation data and statistics can provide some valuable information. We recognize that assessment must be practical, and for this reason easily-derived citation statistics almost surely will be part of the process. But citation data provide only a limited and incomplete view of research quality, and the statistics derived from citation data are sometimes poorly understood and misused. Research is too important to measure its value with only a single coarse tool. We hope those involved in assessment will read both the commentary and the details of this report in order to understand not only the limitations of citation statistics but also how better to use them. If we set high standards for the conduct of science, surely we should set equally high standards for assessing its quality.

Object

h-index

0.009770754 = product of:
  0.04885377 = sum of:
    0.04885377 = weight(_text_:22 in 2092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04885377 = score(doc=2092,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2092, 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=2092)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 6.2015 16:13:38

0.008693925 = product of:
  0.043469626 = sum of:
    0.043469626 = weight(_text_:index in 721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043469626 = score(doc=721,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.1931181 = fieldWeight in 721, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=721)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

In 2000, Factiva published "The Value of Indexing," a white paper emphasizing the strategic importance of accurate categorization, based on a robust taxonomy for later retrieval of documents stored in commercial or in-house content repositories. Since that time, there has been resounding agreement between persons who use Web-based systems and those who design these systems that search engines alone are not the answer for effective information retrieval. High-quality categorization is crucial if users are to be able to find the right answers in repositories of articles and documents that are expanding at phenomenal rates. Companies continue to invest in technologies that will help them organize and integrate their content. A March 2002 article in EContent suggests a typical taxonomy implementation usually costs around $100,000. The article also cites a Merrill Lynch study that predicts the market for search and categorization products, now at about $600 million, will more than double by 2005. Classification activities are not new. In the third century B.C., Callimachus of Cyrene managed the ancient Library of Alexandria. To help scholars find items in the collection, he created an index of all the scrolls organized according to a subject taxonomy. Factiva's parent companies, Dow Jones and Reuters, each have more than 20 years of experience with developing taxonomies and painstaking manual categorization processes and also have a solid history with automated categorization techniques. This experience and expertise put Factiva at the leading edge of developing and applying categorization technology today. This paper will update readers about enhancements made to the Factiva Intelligent IndexingT taxonomy. It examines the value these enhancements bring to Factiva's news and business information service, and the value brought to clients who license the Factiva taxonomy as a fundamental component of their own Enterprise Knowledge Architecture. There is a behind-the-scenes-look at how Factiva classifies a huge stream of incoming articles published in a variety of formats and languages. The paper concludes with an overview of new Factiva services and solutions that are designed specifically to help clients improve productivity and make solid business decisions by precisely finding information in their own everexpanding content repositories.

0.008374932 = product of:
  0.04187466 = sum of:
    0.04187466 = weight(_text_:22 in 1404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04187466 = score(doc=1404,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1404, 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=1404)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Series

British Library Research and Innovation Centre (BLRIC) report; 22

0.0076071853 = product of:
  0.038035925 = sum of:
    0.038035925 = weight(_text_:index in 6067) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038035925 = score(doc=6067,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051511593 = queryNorm
        0.16897833 = fieldWeight in 6067, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=6067)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

Backgrund to the study: The question of multilingual access to bibliographic databases affects not only searchers in countries in which several languages are spoken such as Switzerland, but also all those who search material in databases containing material in more than one language, which is the case in the majority of scientific or research databases. he growth of networks means that we can easily access catalogues outside our own immediate circle - in another town, another country, another continent. In doing so we encounter problems concerning not only search interfaces, but also concerning subject access or even author access in another language. In France for example, each document, independently of the language in which it has been written, is indexed using a French-language subject heading language. Thus, in order to search by subject headings for documents written in English or German, held in the Bibliothèque nationale de France, the researcher from abroad has to master the French language. In theory, the indexer should be able to analyse a document and assign headings in his/her native language, while the user should be able to search in his/her native language. The language of the document itself should have no influence on the language of the subject heading language used for indexing nor on the language used for searching. (Practically speaking of course, there are restrictions, since there is a limit to the number of languages in which subject headings languages could be maintained and thus in which the user may search.) In the example below, we are concerned with three languages: German, French and English. If we can imagine a system in which there are equivalents among subject headings in these three languages, the following scenario may be envisaged: a German-speaking indexer will use German-language subject headings to index all the documents received, regardless of the language in which they are written. The user may search for these documents by entering subject headings in German, but also in French or in English, thanks to the equivalents that have been established, in French or in English without the necessity to know the other languages or the structure of the other SHLs. Ideally, this approach should not be confined to one database, but would allow the different databases to be brought together in virtual system: an English-speaking user in London should be able to search the database of the Deutsche Bibliothek in Frankfurt using English-language headings, and retrieving documents which have been indexed using the German subject headings' list.