Search (19 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Stock, W.G."
  1. Stock, W.G.: Informetrische Untersuchungsmethoden auf der Grundlage der Textwortmethode (1984) 0.04
    0.036684543 = product of:
      0.17119452 = sum of:
        0.057098698 = weight(_text_:classification in 721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057098698 = score(doc=721,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.5971325 = fieldWeight in 721, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=721)
        0.05699712 = product of:
          0.11399424 = sum of:
            0.11399424 = weight(_text_:schemes in 721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11399424 = score(doc=721,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03002521 = queryNorm
                0.7094823 = fieldWeight in 721, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=721)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.057098698 = weight(_text_:classification in 721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057098698 = score(doc=721,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.5971325 = fieldWeight in 721, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=721)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    Discusses the mathematical basis of scientometrics involving text keywords independent of thesauri and classification schemes
    Source
    International classification. 11(1984) no.3, S.151-157
  2. Stock, W.G.: Textwortmethode : Norbert Henrichs zum 65. (3) (2000) 0.01
    0.007690453 = product of:
      0.053833168 = sum of:
        0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 4891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026916584 = score(doc=4891,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 4891, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4891)
        0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 4891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026916584 = score(doc=4891,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 4891, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4891)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Nur wenige Dokumentationsmethoden werden mit dem Namen ihrer Entwickler assoziiert. Ausnahmen sind Melvil Dewey (DDC), S.R. Ranganathan (Colon Classification) - und Norbert Henrichs. Seine Textwortmethode ermöglicht die Indexierung und das Retrieval von Literatur aus Fachgebieten, die keine allseits akzeptierte Fachterminologie vorweisen, also viele Sozial- und Geisteswissenschaften, vorneweg die Philosophie. Für den Einsatz in der elektronischen Philosophie-Dokumentation hat Henrichs in den späten sechziger Jahren die Textwortmethode entworfen. Er ist damit nicht nur einer der Pioniere der Anwendung der elektronischen Datenverarbeitung in der Informationspraxis, sondern auch der Pionier bei der Dokumentation terminologisch nicht starrer Fachsprachen
  3. Stock, W.G.: Concepts and semantic relations in information science (2010) 0.00
    0.004806533 = product of:
      0.03364573 = sum of:
        0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 4008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016822865 = score(doc=4008,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 4008, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4008)
        0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 4008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016822865 = score(doc=4008,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 4008, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4008)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    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.
  4. Peters, I.; Stock, W.G.: Power tags in information retrieval (2010) 0.00
    0.004806533 = product of:
      0.03364573 = sum of:
        0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016822865 = score(doc=865,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 865, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=865)
        0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016822865 = score(doc=865,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 865, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=865)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - Many Web 2.0 services (including Library 2.0 catalogs) make use of folksonomies. The purpose of this paper is to cut off all tags in the long tail of a document-specific tag distribution. The remaining tags at the beginning of a tag distribution are considered power tags and form a new, additional search option in information retrieval systems. Design/methodology/approach - In a theoretical approach the paper discusses document-specific tag distributions (power law and inverse-logistic shape), the development of such distributions (Yule-Simon process and shuffling theory) and introduces search tags (besides the well-known index tags) as a possibility for generating tag distributions. Findings - Search tags are compatible with broad and narrow folksonomies and with all knowledge organization systems (e.g. classification systems and thesauri), while index tags are only applicable in broad folksonomies. Based on these findings, the paper presents a sketch of an algorithm for mining and processing power tags in information retrieval systems. Research limitations/implications - This conceptual approach is in need of empirical evaluation in a concrete retrieval system. Practical implications - Power tags are a new search option for retrieval systems to limit the amount of hits. Originality/value - The paper introduces power tags as a means for enhancing the precision of search results in information retrieval systems that apply folksonomies, e.g. catalogs in Library 2.0environments.
  5. Stock, W.G.; Stock, M.: Handbook of information science : a comprehensive handbook (2013) 0.00
    0.004806533 = product of:
      0.03364573 = sum of:
        0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 2784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016822865 = score(doc=2784,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 2784, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2784)
        0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 2784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016822865 = score(doc=2784,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 2784, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2784)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Dealing with information is one of the vital skills in the 21st century. It takes a fair degree of information savvy to create, represent and supply information as well as to search for and retrieve relevant knowledge. How does information (documents, pieces of knowledge) have to be organized in order to be retrievable? What role does metadata play? What are search engines on the Web, or in corporate intranets, and how do they work? How must one deal with natural language processing and tools of knowledge organization, such as thesauri, classification systems, and ontologies? How useful is social tagging? How valuable are intellectually created abstracts and automatically prepared extracts? Which empirical methods allow for user research and which for the evaluation of information systems? This Handbook is a basic work of information science, providing a comprehensive overview of the current state of information retrieval and knowledge representation. It addresses readers from all professions and scientific disciplines, but particularly scholars, practitioners and students of Information Science, Library Science, Computer Science, Information Management, and Knowledge Management. This Handbook is a suitable reference work for Public and Academic Libraries.
  6. Stock, W.G.: ¬Die Wichtigkeit wissenschaftlicher Dokumente relativ zu gegebenen Thematiken (1981) 0.00
    0.0030006538 = product of:
      0.042009152 = sum of:
        0.042009152 = weight(_text_:subject in 13) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042009152 = score(doc=13,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.3911902 = fieldWeight in 13, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=13)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    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. Garfield, E.; Paris, S.W.; Stock, W.G.: HistCite(TM) : a software tool for informetric analysis of citation linkage (2006) 0.00
    0.002513852 = product of:
      0.035193928 = sum of:
        0.035193928 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 79) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035193928 = score(doc=79,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 79, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=79)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Abstract
    HistCite(TM) is a software tool for analyzing and visualizing direct citation linkages between scientific papers. Its inputs are bibliographic records (with cited references) from "Web of Knowledge" or other sources. Its outputs are various tables and graphs with informetric indicators about the knowledge domain under study. As an example we analyze informetrically the literature about Alexius Meinong, an Austrian philosopher and psychologist. The article shortly discusses the informetric functionality of "Web of Knowledge" and shows broadly the possibilities that HistCite offers to its users (e.g. scientists, scientometricans and science journalists).
  8. Stock, W.G.: Wissenschaftsinformatik : Fundierung, Gegenstand und Methoden (1980) 0.00
    0.0023245723 = product of:
      0.03254401 = sum of:
        0.03254401 = product of:
          0.06508802 = sum of:
            0.06508802 = weight(_text_:22 in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06508802 = score(doc=2808,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03002521 = 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)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Source
    Ratio. 22(1980), S.155-164
  9. Stock, W.G.: Informationsmangel trotz Überfluß : Informationsgesellschaft verlangt neue Berufe und Berufsbilder (1995) 0.00
    0.0023245723 = product of:
      0.03254401 = sum of:
        0.03254401 = product of:
          0.06508802 = sum of:
            0.06508802 = weight(_text_:22 in 2027) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06508802 = score(doc=2027,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03002521 = 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)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Source
    Insider. 1995, Nr.4, Juli, S.19-22
  10. Stock, M.; Stock, W.G.: Recherchieren im Internet (2004) 0.00
    0.0023245723 = product of:
      0.03254401 = sum of:
        0.03254401 = product of:
          0.06508802 = sum of:
            0.06508802 = weight(_text_:22 in 4686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06508802 = score(doc=4686,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03002521 = 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)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Date
    27.11.2005 18:04:22
  11. Stock, M.; Stock, W.G.: Intellectual property information : A comparative analysis of main information providers (2006) 0.00
    0.0021547303 = product of:
      0.030166224 = sum of:
        0.030166224 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030166224 = score(doc=210,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 210, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=210)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Abstract
    After modeling expert user needs with regard to intellectual property information, we analyze and compare the main providers in this specific information area (Thomson DIALOG, Esp@cenet by the European Patent Office, Questel-Orbit, and STN International) in terms of system content and system functionality. The key question is whether the main providers are able to satisfy these expert user needs. For patent information, some special retrieval features such as chemical structure search (including Markush search), patent family references and citations search, biosequence search, and basic informetric functionality such as ranking, mapping, and visualization of information flows are realized. Considering the results of information science research, the practice of patent information shows unexhausted improvement opportunities (e.g., the application of bibliographic patent coupling and co-patent-citation for mapping patents, patent assignees, and technology specialties). For trademark search, users need multiple truncated search (realized) as well as phonetic search and image retrieval (not realized yet).
  12. Stock, W.G.: Endnutzersystem für internationale Geschäftsinformationen (1998) 0.00
    0.0020340008 = product of:
      0.02847601 = sum of:
        0.02847601 = product of:
          0.05695202 = sum of:
            0.05695202 = weight(_text_:22 in 2407) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05695202 = score(doc=2407,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03002521 = 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)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Source
    Password. 1998, H.10, S.22-28
  13. Garfield, E.; Stock, W.G.: Citation Consciousness : Interview with Eugene Garfiels, chairman emeritus of ISI; Philadelphia (2002) 0.00
    0.0014528577 = product of:
      0.020340007 = sum of:
        0.020340007 = product of:
          0.040680014 = sum of:
            0.040680014 = weight(_text_:22 in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.040680014 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03002521 = 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)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Source
    Password. 2002, H.6, S.22-25
  14. Stock, W.G.; Weber, S.: Facets of informetrics : Preface (2006) 0.00
    0.0012124473 = product of:
      0.016974261 = sum of:
        0.016974261 = weight(_text_:subject in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016974261 = score(doc=76,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.15806471 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    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.
  15. Linde, F.; Stock, W.G.: Informationsmarkt : Informationen im I-Commerce anbieten und nachfragen (2011) 0.00
    0.0011622861 = product of:
      0.016272005 = sum of:
        0.016272005 = product of:
          0.03254401 = sum of:
            0.03254401 = weight(_text_:22 in 291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03254401 = score(doc=291,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03002521 = 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)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Date
    23. 9.2010 11:15:22
  16. Schumann, L.; Stock, W.G.: ¬Ein umfassendes ganzheitliches Modell für Evaluation und Akzeptanzanalysen von Informationsdiensten : Das Information Service Evaluation (ISE) Modell (2014) 0.00
    0.0010170004 = product of:
      0.014238005 = sum of:
        0.014238005 = product of:
          0.02847601 = sum of:
            0.02847601 = weight(_text_:22 in 1492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02847601 = score(doc=1492,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03002521 = 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)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Date
    22. 9.2014 18:56:46
  17. Stock, W.G.: Qualitätskriterien von Suchmaschinen : Checkliste für Retrievalsysteme (2000) 0.00
    7.264289E-4 = product of:
      0.010170003 = sum of:
        0.010170003 = product of:
          0.020340007 = sum of:
            0.020340007 = weight(_text_:22 in 5773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020340007 = score(doc=5773,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03002521 = 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)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Source
    Password. 2000, H.5, S.22-31
  18. Stock, W.G.: Hochschulmanagement, Information Appliances, Fairness als Grundsatz : Information und Mobilität (2002) 0.00
    7.264289E-4 = product of:
      0.010170003 = sum of:
        0.010170003 = product of:
          0.020340007 = sum of:
            0.020340007 = weight(_text_:22 in 1364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020340007 = score(doc=1364,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03002521 = 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)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Date
    22. 2.2003 19:39:36
  19. Stock, W.G.: Informational cities : analysis and construction of cities in the knowledge society (2011) 0.00
    7.264289E-4 = product of:
      0.010170003 = sum of:
        0.010170003 = product of:
          0.020340007 = sum of:
            0.020340007 = weight(_text_:22 in 4452) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020340007 = score(doc=4452,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03002521 = 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)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Date
    3. 7.2011 19:22:49