-
Melton, J.S.: ¬A use for the techniques of structural linguistics in documentation research (1965)
0.04
0.03679902 = product of:
0.19626145 = sum of:
0.088983946 = weight(_text_:descriptive in 834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.088983946 = score(doc=834,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17974061 = queryWeight, product of:
5.601063 = idf(docFreq=443, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.49506867 = fieldWeight in 834, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.601063 = idf(docFreq=443, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=834)
0.08934415 = weight(_text_:2nd in 834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08934415 = score(doc=834,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18010403 = queryWeight, product of:
5.6123877 = idf(docFreq=438, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.49606967 = fieldWeight in 834, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.6123877 = idf(docFreq=438, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=834)
0.017933354 = product of:
0.035866708 = sum of:
0.035866708 = weight(_text_:ed in 834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035866708 = score(doc=834,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11411327 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.31430796 = fieldWeight in 834, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=834)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.1875 = coord(3/16)
- Abstract
- Index language (the system of symbols for representing subject content after analysis) is considered as a separate component and a variable in an information retrieval system. It is suggested that for purposes of testing, comparing and evaluating index language, the techniques of structural linguistics may provide a descriptive methodology by which all such languages (hierarchical and faceted classification, analytico-synthetic indexing, traditional subject indexing, indexes and classifications based on automatic text analysis, etc.) could be described in term of a linguistic model, and compared on a common basis
- Source
- Classification research. Proc. 2nd Int. Study Conf. ... Elsinore, 14.-18.8.1964. Ed.: P. Atherton
-
Mikacic, M.: Statistical system for subject designation (SSSD) for libraries in Croatia (1996)
0.02
0.024845872 = product of:
0.13251132 = sum of:
0.035972122 = product of:
0.071944244 = sum of:
0.071944244 = weight(_text_:rules in 2943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.071944244 = score(doc=2943,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16161752 = queryWeight, product of:
5.036312 = idf(docFreq=780, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.4451513 = fieldWeight in 2943, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.036312 = idf(docFreq=780, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2943)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.071944244 = weight(_text_:rules in 2943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.071944244 = score(doc=2943,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16161752 = queryWeight, product of:
5.036312 = idf(docFreq=780, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.4451513 = fieldWeight in 2943, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.036312 = idf(docFreq=780, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2943)
0.024594944 = product of:
0.049189888 = sum of:
0.049189888 = weight(_text_:22 in 2943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049189888 = score(doc=2943,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11237528 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2943, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2943)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.1875 = coord(3/16)
- Abstract
- Describes the developments of the Statistical System for Subject Designation (SSSD): a syntactical system for subject designation for libraries in Croatia, based on the construction of subject headings in agreement with the theory of the sentence nature of subject headings. The discussion is preceded by a brief summary of theories underlying basic principles and fundamental rules of the alphabetical subject catalogue
- Date
- 31. 7.2006 14:22:21
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) no.1, S.77-93
-
Tartaglia, S.: Authority control and subject indexing languages (2004)
0.01
0.014868774 = product of:
0.118950196 = sum of:
0.059475098 = weight(_text_:cataloguing in 5683) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.059475098 = score(doc=5683,freq=4.0), product of:
0.14268221 = queryWeight, product of:
4.446252 = idf(docFreq=1408, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.4168361 = fieldWeight in 5683, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.446252 = idf(docFreq=1408, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5683)
0.059475098 = weight(_text_:cataloguing in 5683) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.059475098 = score(doc=5683,freq=4.0), product of:
0.14268221 = queryWeight, product of:
4.446252 = idf(docFreq=1408, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.4168361 = fieldWeight in 5683, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.446252 = idf(docFreq=1408, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5683)
0.125 = coord(2/16)
- Abstract
- The existence of subject indexing languages does not call for or imply a particular authority control system exclusively dedicated to subject entries. To be really effective and efficient, authority control must be concerned with all the categories of entities, and must regard not just the form but also the meaning and the semantic relations of the expressions used to identify the single entities. Thus, it satisfies the lexical needs of all cataloguing languages, including subject indexing languages. It is not correct nor opportune to extend authority control to the syntactic constructions of subject indexing languages, because this reduces the rigor and efficiency of the control process, weighing it down until it becomes unfeasible, and impeding its function as a unifying element between the different cataloguing languages.
-
Principles underlying subject heading languages (SHLs) (1999)
0.01
0.014307825 = product of:
0.1144626 = sum of:
0.0381542 = product of:
0.0763084 = sum of:
0.0763084 = weight(_text_:rules in 1659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0763084 = score(doc=1659,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16161752 = queryWeight, product of:
5.036312 = idf(docFreq=780, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.47215426 = fieldWeight in 1659, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.036312 = idf(docFreq=780, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1659)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.0763084 = weight(_text_:rules in 1659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0763084 = score(doc=1659,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16161752 = queryWeight, product of:
5.036312 = idf(docFreq=780, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.47215426 = fieldWeight in 1659, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.036312 = idf(docFreq=780, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1659)
0.125 = coord(2/16)
- LCSH
- Subject cataloging / Rules
- Subject
- Subject cataloging / Rules
-
Lopes, M.I.: Principles underlying subject heading languages : an international approach (1996)
0.01
0.012266113 = product of:
0.09812891 = sum of:
0.049064454 = weight(_text_:cataloguing in 5608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049064454 = score(doc=5608,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14268221 = queryWeight, product of:
4.446252 = idf(docFreq=1408, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.34387225 = fieldWeight in 5608, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.446252 = idf(docFreq=1408, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5608)
0.049064454 = weight(_text_:cataloguing in 5608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049064454 = score(doc=5608,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14268221 = queryWeight, product of:
4.446252 = idf(docFreq=1408, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.34387225 = fieldWeight in 5608, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.446252 = idf(docFreq=1408, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5608)
0.125 = coord(2/16)
- Source
- International cataloguing and bibliographic control. 25(1995) no.1, S.10-12
-
Coates, E.J.: Significance and term relationship in compound headings (1985)
0.01
0.011798412 = product of:
0.06292486 = sum of:
0.017986061 = product of:
0.035972122 = sum of:
0.035972122 = weight(_text_:rules in 3634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035972122 = score(doc=3634,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16161752 = queryWeight, product of:
5.036312 = idf(docFreq=780, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.22257565 = fieldWeight in 3634, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.036312 = idf(docFreq=780, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3634)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.035972122 = weight(_text_:rules in 3634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035972122 = score(doc=3634,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16161752 = queryWeight, product of:
5.036312 = idf(docFreq=780, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.22257565 = fieldWeight in 3634, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.036312 = idf(docFreq=780, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3634)
0.008966677 = product of:
0.017933354 = sum of:
0.017933354 = weight(_text_:ed in 3634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017933354 = score(doc=3634,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11411327 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.15715398 = fieldWeight in 3634, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3634)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.1875 = coord(3/16)
- Abstract
- In the continuing search for criteria for determining the form of compound headings (i.e., headings containing more than one word), many authors have attempted to deal with the problem of entry element and citation order. Among the proposed criteria are Cutter's concept of "significance," Kaiser's formula of "concrete/process," Prevost's "noun rule," and Farradane's categories of relationships*' (q.v.). One of the problems in applying the criteria has been the difficulty in determining what is "significant," particularly when two or more words in the heading all refer to concrete objects. In the following excerpt from Subject Catalogues: Headings and Structure, a widely cited book an the alphabetical subject catalog, E. J. Coates proposes the concept of "term significance," that is, "the word which evokes the clearest mental image," as the criterion for determining the entry element in a compound heading. Since a concrete object generally evokes a clearer mental image than an action or process, Coates' theory is in line with Kaiser's theory of "concrete/process" (q.v.) which Coates renamed "thing/action." For determining the citation order of component elements in a compound heading where the elements are equally "significant" (i.e., both or all evoking clear mental images), Coates proposes the use of "term relationship" as the determining factor. He has identified twenty different kinds of relationships among terms and set down the citation order for each. Another frequently encountered problem related to citation order is the determination of the entry element for a compound heading which contains a topic and a locality. Entering such headings uniformly under either the topic or the locality has proven to be infeasible in practice. Many headings of this type have the topic as the main heading, subdivided by the locality; others are entered under the locality as the main heading with the topic as the subdivision. No criteria or rules have been proposed that ensure consistency or predictability. In the following selection, Coates attempts to deal with this problem by ranking the "main areas of knowledge according to the extent to which they appear to be significantly conditioned by locality." The theory Coates expounded in his book was put into practice in compiling the British Technology Index for which Coates served as the editor from 1961 to 1977.
- Source
- Theory of subject analysis: a sourcebook. Ed.: L.M. Chan, et al
-
Relationships in the organization of knowledge (2001)
0.01
0.008430966 = product of:
0.06744773 = sum of:
0.022482576 = product of:
0.04496515 = sum of:
0.04496515 = weight(_text_:rules in 1139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04496515 = score(doc=1139,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16161752 = queryWeight, product of:
5.036312 = idf(docFreq=780, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.27821955 = fieldWeight in 1139, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.036312 = idf(docFreq=780, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1139)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04496515 = weight(_text_:rules in 1139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04496515 = score(doc=1139,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16161752 = queryWeight, product of:
5.036312 = idf(docFreq=780, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.27821955 = fieldWeight in 1139, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.036312 = idf(docFreq=780, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1139)
0.125 = coord(2/16)
- Content
- Enthält u.a. die Beiträge: GREEN, R.: Relationships in the organization of knowledge: an overview; TILLETT, B.: Bibliographic relationships; CLARKE, S.G.D.: Thesaural relationships; MILSTEAD, J.L.: Standards for relationships between subject indexing terms; HUDON, M.: Relationships in multilingual thesauri; BODENREIDER, O. u. C.A. BEAN: Relationships among knowledge structures: vocabulary integration within a subject domain; BEGHTOL, C.: Relationships in classificatory structure and meaning; BEAN, C.A. u. R. GREEN: Relevance relationships; EL-HOSHY, L.M.: Relationships in Library of Congress Subject Headings; MOLHOLT, P.: The Art and Architecture Thesaurus: controlling relationships through rules and structure; NELSON, S.J. u.a.: Relationships in Medical Subject Headings (MeSH); NEELAMEGHAN, A.: Lateral relationships in multicultural, mulrilingual databases in the spiritual and religous domains: the OM information service; SATIJA, M.P.: Relationships in Ranganathan's Colon classification; MITCHELL, J.S.: Relationships in the Dewey Decimal Classification System
-
Broughton, V.: Language related problems in the construction of faceted terminologies and their automatic management (2008)
0.01
0.008381055 = product of:
0.06704844 = sum of:
0.055840094 = weight(_text_:2nd in 2497) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055840094 = score(doc=2497,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18010403 = queryWeight, product of:
5.6123877 = idf(docFreq=438, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.31004354 = fieldWeight in 2497, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.6123877 = idf(docFreq=438, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2497)
0.011208346 = product of:
0.022416692 = sum of:
0.022416692 = weight(_text_:ed in 2497) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022416692 = score(doc=2497,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11411327 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.19644247 = fieldWeight in 2497, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2497)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.125 = coord(2/16)
- Content
- The paper describes current work on the generation of a thesaurus format from the schedules of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification 2nd edition (BC2). The practical problems that occur in moving from a concept based approach to a terminological approach cluster around issues of vocabulary control that are not fully addressed in a systematic structure. These difficulties can be exacerbated within domains in the humanities because large numbers of culture specific terms may need to be accommodated in any thesaurus. The ways in which these problems can be resolved within the context of a semi-automated approach to the thesaurus generation have consequences for the management of classification data in the source vocabulary. The way in which the vocabulary is marked up for the purpose of machine manipulation is described, and some of the implications for editorial policy are discussed and examples given. The value of the classification notation as a language independent representation and mapping tool should not be sacrificed in such an exercise.
- Source
- Culture and identity in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Tenth International ISKO Conference 5-8 August 2008, Montreal, Canada. Ed. by Clément Arsenault and Joseph T. Tennis
-
Hutchins, W.J.: Languages of indexing and classification : a linguistic study of structures and functions (1978)
0.01
0.0083760135 = product of:
0.13401622 = sum of:
0.13401622 = weight(_text_:2nd in 2968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.13401622 = score(doc=2968,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18010403 = queryWeight, product of:
5.6123877 = idf(docFreq=438, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.7441045 = fieldWeight in 2968, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.6123877 = idf(docFreq=438, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2968)
0.0625 = coord(1/16)
- Issue
- 2nd impr.
-
Schmitz-Esser, W.: Language of general communication and concept compatibility (1996)
0.01
0.008244708 = product of:
0.065957665 = sum of:
0.044218604 = weight(_text_:26 in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044218604 = score(doc=6089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.113328174 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.3901819 = fieldWeight in 6089, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6089)
0.021739064 = product of:
0.043478128 = sum of:
0.043478128 = weight(_text_:22 in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043478128 = score(doc=6089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11237528 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 6089, 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=6089)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.125 = coord(2/16)
- Date
- 7. 1.1997 17:39:26
- Pages
- S.11-22
-
Fugmann, R.: ¬The complementarity of natural and indexing languages (1985)
0.01
0.005247527 = product of:
0.041980214 = sum of:
0.033013538 = weight(_text_:author in 3641) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033013538 = score(doc=3641,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15482868 = queryWeight, product of:
4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.21322623 = fieldWeight in 3641, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3641)
0.008966677 = product of:
0.017933354 = sum of:
0.017933354 = weight(_text_:ed in 3641) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017933354 = score(doc=3641,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11411327 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.15715398 = fieldWeight in 3641, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3641)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.125 = coord(2/16)
- Abstract
- The second Cranfield experiment (Cranfield II) in the mid-1960s challenged assumptions held by librarians for nearly a century, namely, that the objective of providing subject access was to bring together all materials an a given topic and that the achieving of this objective required vocabulary control in the form of an index language. The results of Cranfield II were replicated by other retrieval experiments quick to follow its lead and increasing support was given to the opinion that natural language information systems could perform at least as effectively, and certainly more economically, than those employing index languages. When the results of empirical research dramatically counter conventional wisdom, an obvious course is to question the validity of the research and, in the case of retrieval experiments, this eventually happened. Retrieval experiments were criticized for their artificiality, their unrepresentative sampies, and their problematic definitions-particularly the definition of relevance. In the minds of some, at least, the relative merits of natural languages vs. indexing languages continued to be an unresolved issue. As with many eitherlor options, a seemingly safe course to follow is to opt for "both," and indeed there seems to be an increasing amount of counsel advising a combination of natural language and index language search capabilities. One strong voice offering such counsel is that of Robert Fugmann, a chemist by training, a theoretician by predilection, and, currently, a practicing information scientist at Hoechst AG, Frankfurt/Main. This selection from his writings sheds light an the capabilities and limitations of both kinds of indexing. Its special significance lies in the fact that its arguments are based not an empirical but an rational grounds. Fugmann's major argument starts from the observation that in natural language there are essentially two different kinds of concepts: 1) individual concepts, repre sented by names of individual things (e.g., the name of the town Augsburg), and 2) general concepts represented by names of classes of things (e.g., pesticides). Individual concepts can be represented in language simply and succinctly, often by a single string of alphanumeric characters; general concepts, an the other hand, can be expressed in a multiplicity of ways. The word pesticides refers to the concept of pesticides, but also referring to this concept are numerous circumlocutions, such as "Substance X was effective against pests." Because natural language is capable of infinite variety, we cannot predict a priori the manifold ways a general concept, like pesticides, will be represented by any given author. It is this lack of predictability that limits natural language retrieval and causes poor precision and recall. Thus, the essential and defining characteristic of an index language ls that it is a tool for representational predictability.
- Source
- Theory of subject analysis: a sourcebook. Ed.: L.M. Chan, et al
-
Schmitz-Esser, W.: Formalizing terminology-based knowledge for an ontology independently of a particular language (2008)
0.00
0.0049976474 = product of:
0.03998118 = sum of:
0.026531162 = weight(_text_:26 in 1680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026531162 = score(doc=1680,freq=2.0), product of:
0.113328174 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.23410915 = fieldWeight in 1680, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1680)
0.013450016 = product of:
0.026900033 = sum of:
0.026900033 = weight(_text_:ed in 1680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026900033 = score(doc=1680,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11411327 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.23573098 = fieldWeight in 1680, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1680)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.125 = coord(2/16)
- Date
- 16. 3.2008 18:49:26
- Source
- Kompatibilität, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation - Compatibility, Media and Ethics in Knowledge Organization: Proceedings der 10. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation Wien, 3.-5. Juli 2006 - Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the German Section of the International Society of Knowledge Organization Vienna, 3-5 July 2006. Ed.: H.P. Ohly, S. Netscher u. K. Mitgutsch
-
Fugmann, R.: ¬Die Grenzen des Thesaurus-Verfahrens bei der Wiedergabe von Begriffsrelationen (1975)
0.00
0.0044218604 = product of:
0.07074977 = sum of:
0.07074977 = weight(_text_:26 in 4765) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07074977 = score(doc=4765,freq=2.0), product of:
0.113328174 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.62429106 = fieldWeight in 4765, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4765)
0.0625 = coord(1/16)
- Source
- Nachrichten für Dokumentation. 26(1975), S.2-7
-
Panzer, M.: Semantische Integration heterogener und unterschiedlichsprachiger Wissensorganisationssysteme : CrissCross und jenseits (2008)
0.00
0.004164706 = product of:
0.033317648 = sum of:
0.022109302 = weight(_text_:26 in 4335) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022109302 = score(doc=4335,freq=2.0), product of:
0.113328174 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.19509095 = fieldWeight in 4335, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4335)
0.011208346 = product of:
0.022416692 = sum of:
0.022416692 = weight(_text_:ed in 4335) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022416692 = score(doc=4335,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11411327 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.19644247 = fieldWeight in 4335, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4335)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.125 = coord(2/16)
- Date
- 13. 2.2011 17:31:26
- Source
- Kompatibilität, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation - Compatibility, Media and Ethics in Knowledge Organization: Proceedings der 10. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation Wien, 3.-5. Juli 2006 - Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the German Section of the International Society of Knowledge Organization Vienna, 3-5 July 2006. Ed.: H.P. Ohly, S. Netscher u. K. Mitgutsch
-
Kobrin, R.Y.: On the principles of terminological work in the creation of thesauri for information retrieval systems (1979)
0.00
0.003869128 = product of:
0.061906047 = sum of:
0.061906047 = weight(_text_:26 in 2954) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.061906047 = score(doc=2954,freq=2.0), product of:
0.113328174 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.5462547 = fieldWeight in 2954, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2954)
0.0625 = coord(1/16)
- Source
- Automatic documentation and mathematical linguistics. 13(1979) no.3, S.26-42
-
Vickery, B.C.: Structure and function in retrieval languages (1971)
0.00
0.003869128 = product of:
0.061906047 = sum of:
0.061906047 = weight(_text_:26 in 4971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.061906047 = score(doc=4971,freq=2.0), product of:
0.113328174 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.5462547 = fieldWeight in 4971, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4971)
0.0625 = coord(1/16)
- Date
- 18. 9.2018 18:36:26
-
Mai, J.-E.: Actors, domains, and constraints in the design and construction of controlled vocabularies (2008)
0.00
0.0034759352 = product of:
0.055614963 = sum of:
0.055614963 = weight(_text_:descriptive in 1921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055614963 = score(doc=1921,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17974061 = queryWeight, product of:
5.601063 = idf(docFreq=443, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.3094179 = fieldWeight in 1921, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.601063 = idf(docFreq=443, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1921)
0.0625 = coord(1/16)
- Abstract
- Classification schemes, thesauri, taxonomies, and other controlled vocabularies play important roles in the organization and retrieval of information in many different environments. While the design and construction of controlled vocabularies have been prescribed at the technical level in great detail over the past decades, the methodological level has been somewhat neglected. However, classification research has in recent years focused on developing approaches to the analysis of users, domains, and activities that could produce requirements for the design of controlled vocabularies. Researchers have often argued that the design, construction, and use of controlled vocabularies need to be based on analyses and understandings of the contexts in which these controlled vocabularies function. While one would assume that the growing body of research on human information behavior might help guide the development of controlled vocabularies shed light on these contexts, unfortunately, much of the research in this area is descriptive in nature and of little use for systems design. This paper discusses these trends and outlines a holistic approach that demonstrates how the design of controlled vocabularies can be informed by investigations of people's interactions with information. This approach is based on the Cognitive Work Analysis framework and outlines several dimensions of human-information interactions. Application of this approach will result is a comprehensive understanding of the contexts in which the controlled vocabulary will function and which can be used for the development of for the development of controlled vocabularies.
-
Dextre Clarke, S.G.; Gilchrist, A.; Will, L.: Revision and extension of thesaurus standards (2004)
0.00
0.0031814466 = product of:
0.025451573 = sum of:
0.016484896 = weight(_text_:american in 2615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016484896 = score(doc=2615,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10940785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4093587 = idf(docFreq=3973, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.15067379 = fieldWeight in 2615, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.4093587 = idf(docFreq=3973, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2615)
0.008966677 = product of:
0.017933354 = sum of:
0.017933354 = weight(_text_:ed in 2615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017933354 = score(doc=2615,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11411327 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.15715398 = fieldWeight in 2615, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2615)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.125 = coord(2/16)
- Abstract
- The current standards for monolingual and multilingual thesauri are long overdue for an update. This applies to the international standards ISO 2788 and ISO 5964, as well as the corresponding national standards in several countries and the American standard ANSI/NISO Z39.19. Work is now under way in the UK and in the USA to revise and extend the standards, with particular emphasis on interoperability needs in our world of vast electronic networks. Work in the UK is starting with the British Standards, in the hope of leading on to one international standard to serve all. Some of the issues still under discussion include the treatment of facet analysis, coverage of additional types of controlled vocabulary such as classification schemes, taxonomies and ontologies, and mapping from one vocabulary to another. 1. Are thesaurus standards still needed? Since the 1960s, even before the renowned Cranfield experiments (Cleverdon et al., 1966; Cleverdon, 1967) arguments have raged over the usefulness or otherwise of controlled vocabularies. The case has never been proved definitively one way or the other. At the same time, a recognition has become widespread that no one search method can answer all retrieval requirements. In today's environment of very large networks of resources, the skilled information professional uses a range of techniques. Among these, controlled vocabularies are valued alongside others. The first international standard for monolingual thesauri was issued in 1974. In those days, the main application was for postcoordinate indexing and retrieval from document collections or bibliographic databases. For many information professionals the only practicable alternative to a thesaurus was a classification scheme. And so the thesaurus developed a strong following. After computer systems with full text search capability became widely available, however, the arguments against controlled vocabularies gained more followers. The cost of building and maintaining a thesaurus or a classification scheme was a strong disincentive. Today's databases are typically immense compared with those three decades ago. Full text searching is taken for granted, not just in discrete databases but across all the resources in an intranet or even the Internet. But intranets have brought particular frustration as users discover that despite all the computer power, they cannot find items which they know to be present an the network. So the trend against controlled vocabularies is now being reversed, as many information professionals are turning to them for help. Standards to guide them are still in demand.
- Source
- Knowledge organization and the global information society: Proceedings of the 8th International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004, London, UK. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
-
Mooers, C.N.: ¬The indexing language of an information retrieval system (1985)
0.00
0.0023380462 = product of:
0.03740874 = sum of:
0.03740874 = sum of:
0.022191396 = weight(_text_:ed in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022191396 = score(doc=3644,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11411327 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.19446814 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
0.015217344 = weight(_text_:22 in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015217344 = score(doc=3644,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11237528 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
0.0625 = coord(1/16)
- Footnote
- Original in: Information retrieval today: papers presented at an Institute conducted by the Library School and the Center for Continuation Study, University of Minnesota, Sept. 19-22, 1962. Ed. by Wesley Simonton. Minneapolis, Minn.: The Center, 1963. S.21-36.
- Source
- Theory of subject analysis: a sourcebook. Ed.: L.M. Chan, et al
-
Svenonius, E.: Unanswered questions in the design of controlled vocabularies (1986)
0.00
0.002060612 = product of:
0.03296979 = sum of:
0.03296979 = weight(_text_:american in 584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03296979 = score(doc=584,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10940785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4093587 = idf(docFreq=3973, maxDocs=44218)
0.032090448 = queryNorm
0.30134758 = fieldWeight in 584, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.4093587 = idf(docFreq=3973, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=584)
0.0625 = coord(1/16)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 37(1986) no.5, S.331-340
