-
McIlwaine, I.C.: Universal Bibliographic Control and the quest for a universally acceptable subject arrangement (2010)
0.08
0.08278787 = product of:
0.23180604 = sum of:
0.048010457 = weight(_text_:subject in 3567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048010457 = score(doc=3567,freq=4.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.4470745 = fieldWeight in 3567, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3567)
0.0380658 = weight(_text_:classification in 3567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0380658 = score(doc=3567,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.39808834 = fieldWeight in 3567, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3567)
0.03799808 = product of:
0.07599616 = sum of:
0.07599616 = weight(_text_:schemes in 3567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07599616 = score(doc=3567,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.4729882 = fieldWeight in 3567, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3567)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.06966591 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06966591 = score(doc=3567,freq=6.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.5959982 = fieldWeight in 3567, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3567)
0.0380658 = weight(_text_:classification in 3567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0380658 = score(doc=3567,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.39808834 = fieldWeight in 3567, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3567)
0.35714287 = coord(5/14)
- Abstract
- Achieving widespread agreement on subject organization is a complex task, and a challenge greater than that of creating a standard bibliographic description for international exchange-the goal of Universal Bibliographic Control (UBC). This article traces the history of the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), its relationship with other schemes, and opportunities for further collaboration.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 48(2010) no.1, S.36-47
-
Panigrahi, P.: Ranganathan and Dewey in hierarchical subject classification : some similarities (2015)
0.05
0.051693633 = product of:
0.18092771 = sum of:
0.033948522 = weight(_text_:subject in 2789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033948522 = score(doc=2789,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.31612942 = fieldWeight in 2789, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2789)
0.046620894 = weight(_text_:classification in 2789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046620894 = score(doc=2789,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.48755667 = fieldWeight in 2789, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2789)
0.053737402 = product of:
0.107474804 = sum of:
0.107474804 = weight(_text_:schemes in 2789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.107474804 = score(doc=2789,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.66890633 = fieldWeight in 2789, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2789)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.046620894 = weight(_text_:classification in 2789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046620894 = score(doc=2789,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.48755667 = fieldWeight in 2789, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2789)
0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
- Abstract
- S R Ranganathan and Melvil Dewey devised two types of classification schemes viz., faceted and enumerative. Ranganathan's faceted classification scheme is based on postulates, principles and canons. It has a strong theory. While working with the two schemes, similarities are observed. This paper tries to identify and present some relationships.
-
Svanberg, M.: Dewey in Sweden : leaving SAB after 87 years (2011)
0.05
0.045715474 = product of:
0.16000415 = sum of:
0.042435654 = weight(_text_:subject in 1804) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042435654 = score(doc=1804,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.39516178 = fieldWeight in 1804, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1804)
0.03364573 = weight(_text_:classification in 1804) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03364573 = score(doc=1804,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 1804, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1804)
0.05027704 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1804) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05027704 = score(doc=1804,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.43012467 = fieldWeight in 1804, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1804)
0.03364573 = weight(_text_:classification in 1804) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03364573 = score(doc=1804,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 1804, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1804)
0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
- Series
- IFLA series on bibliographic control; vol. 42
- Source
- Subject access: preparing for the future. Conference on August 20 - 21, 2009 in Florence, the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section sponsored an IFLA satellite conference entitled "Looking at the Past and Preparing for the Future". Eds.: P. Landry et al
-
Chatterjee, A.: Universal Decimal Classification and Colon Classification : their mutual impact (2015)
0.03
0.033937007 = product of:
0.1583727 = sum of:
0.060187314 = weight(_text_:classification in 1650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060187314 = score(doc=1650,freq=10.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.6294329 = fieldWeight in 1650, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1650)
0.03799808 = product of:
0.07599616 = sum of:
0.07599616 = weight(_text_:schemes in 1650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07599616 = score(doc=1650,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.4729882 = fieldWeight in 1650, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1650)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.060187314 = weight(_text_:classification in 1650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060187314 = score(doc=1650,freq=10.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.6294329 = fieldWeight in 1650, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1650)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), being a predecessor of Colon Classification (CC), had impacts on CC in various ways - directly as well as indirectly. But surprisingly CC too made an impact on UDC in various ways during its revision process. The paper discusses how these two classification schemes have influenced each other in different spheres.
-
Lund, B.D.; Agbaji, D.A.: What scheme do we prefer? : an examination of preference between Library of Congress and Dewey Decimal Classification among U.S.-based academic library employees (2018)
0.03
0.027558599 = product of:
0.1286068 = sum of:
0.04079328 = weight(_text_:classification in 4301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04079328 = score(doc=4301,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.42661208 = fieldWeight in 4301, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4301)
0.047020227 = product of:
0.09404045 = sum of:
0.09404045 = weight(_text_:schemes in 4301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09404045 = score(doc=4301,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.58529305 = fieldWeight in 4301, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4301)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04079328 = weight(_text_:classification in 4301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04079328 = score(doc=4301,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.42661208 = fieldWeight in 4301, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4301)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- Though several studies have been published on the topic of reclassification of academic library collections over the past eight decades since it first gained popularity, none have explored the preferences of academic library employees toward classification schemes beyond a merely superficial level. The preferences of library employees must serve some role in organizational decision-making. By distributing a mixed-methods survey to academic library employees across the United States, the researchers in the present study provide insight into employee preferences. The findings of the study may provide insight into library trends and the future of library classification schemes.
-
Piros, A.: ¬The thought behind the symbol : about the automatic interpretation and representation of UDC numbers (2017)
0.03
0.0268396 = product of:
0.0939386 = sum of:
0.021217827 = weight(_text_:subject in 3853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021217827 = score(doc=3853,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 3853, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3853)
0.023791125 = weight(_text_:classification in 3853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023791125 = score(doc=3853,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24880521 = fieldWeight in 3853, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3853)
0.02513852 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02513852 = score(doc=3853,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21506234 = fieldWeight in 3853, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3853)
0.023791125 = weight(_text_:classification in 3853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023791125 = score(doc=3853,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24880521 = fieldWeight in 3853, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3853)
0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
- Abstract
- Analytico-synthetic and faceted classifications, such as Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) provide facilities to express pre-coordinated subject statements using syntactic relations. In this case, the relevance, in the process of UDC-based information retrieval, can be determined by extracting the meaning of the classmarks as precisely as is possible. The central question here is how the identification mentioned above can be supported by automatic means and an analysis of the structure of complex classmarks appears to be an obvious requirement. Many bibliographic sources contain complex UDC classmarks which are stored as simple text strings and on which it is very difficult to perform any meaningful information discovery. The paper presents results from a phase of ongoing research focused on developing a new platform-independent, machine-processable data format capable of representing the whole syntactic structure of the composite UDC numbers to support their further automatic processing. An algorithm that can produce the representation of the numbers in such a format directly from their designations has also been developed and implemented. The research also includes implementing conversion methods to provide outputs that can be employed by other software directly and, as a service, make them available for other software. The paper provides an overview of the solutions developed and implemented since 2015 and outlines future research plans.
- Content
- Beitrag in einem Special Issue: Selected Papers from the International UDC Seminar 2017, Faceted Classification Today: Theory, Technology and End Users, 14-15 September, London UK.
-
Zins, C.; Santos, P.L.V.A.C.: Mapping the knowledge covered by library classification systems (2011)
0.02
0.024801936 = product of:
0.11574237 = sum of:
0.02546139 = weight(_text_:subject in 4449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02546139 = score(doc=4449,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.23709705 = fieldWeight in 4449, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4449)
0.045140486 = weight(_text_:classification in 4449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.045140486 = score(doc=4449,freq=10.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.4720747 = fieldWeight in 4449, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4449)
0.045140486 = weight(_text_:classification in 4449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.045140486 = score(doc=4449,freq=10.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.4720747 = fieldWeight in 4449, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4449)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- This study explores, in 3 steps, how the 3 main library classification systems, the Library of Congress Classification, the Dewey Decimal Classification, and the Universal Decimal Classification, cover human knowledge. First, we mapped the knowledge covered by the 3 systems. We used the "10 Pillars of Knowledge: Map of Human Knowledge," which comprises 10 pillars, as an evaluative model. We mapped all the subject-based classes and subclasses that are part of the first 2 levels of the 3 hierarchical structures. Then, we zoomed into each of the 10 pillars and analyzed how the three systems cover the 10 knowledge domains. Finally, we focused on the 3 library systems. Based on the way each one of them covers the 10 knowledge domains, it is evident that they failed to adequately and systematically present contemporary human knowledge. They are unsystematic and biased, and, at the top 2 levels of the hierarchical structures, they are incomplete.
-
Panzer, M.: Dewey: how to make it work for you (2013)
0.02
0.016598886 = product of:
0.077461466 = sum of:
0.03364573 = weight(_text_:classification in 5797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03364573 = score(doc=5797,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 5797, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5797)
0.03364573 = weight(_text_:classification in 5797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03364573 = score(doc=5797,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 5797, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5797)
0.010170003 = product of:
0.020340007 = sum of:
0.020340007 = weight(_text_:22 in 5797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020340007 = score(doc=5797,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5797, 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=5797)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- The article discusses various aspects of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system of classifying library books in 2013. Background is presented on some librarians' desire to stop using DDC and adopt a genre-based system of classification. It says librarians can use the DDC to deal with problems and issues related to library book classification. It highlights the benefits of using captions and relative index terms and semantic relationships in DDC.
- Content
- "As knowledge brokers, we are living in interesting times for libraries and librarians. We wonder sometimes if our traditional tools like the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system can cope with the onslaught of information. The categories provided don't always seem adequate for the knowledge-discovery habits of today's patrons. They have grown accustomed to new ways for their information needs to be met, from the fire-and-forget style of a hard-to-control classic Google search to the pervasive, always-on style of Google Now, anticipating users' information needs without their having even asked a verbal question. Contrariwise, I believe that we, as librarians, could be making better use of our tools. Many (like the DDC) are a reflection of the same social and epistemological forces that brought about modernity at the turn of the last century. We as librarians are in the unique position of providing services that are as ground-breaking as these tools. As we see the need to provide unique and cutting-edge knowledge discovery to our users, I argue in this article that the DDC can play a key role in fulfilling this purpose."
- Source
- Knowledge quest. 42(2013) no.2, S.22-29
-
Higgins, C.: Library of Congress Classification : Teddy Roosevelt's world in numbers? (2012)
0.02
0.015380906 = product of:
0.107666336 = sum of:
0.053833168 = weight(_text_:classification in 1905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.053833168 = score(doc=1905,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.5629819 = fieldWeight in 1905, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1905)
0.053833168 = weight(_text_:classification in 1905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.053833168 = score(doc=1905,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.5629819 = fieldWeight in 1905, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1905)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- This article identifies late nineteenth-century American preoccupations and prejudices within the Library of Congress classification scheme, suggesting that these ought to be of concern to the worldwide community of classifiers who now apply the scheme beyond its original context. The approach of the article is both historical and critical. It uses a number of examples to demonstrate how the ideological content of the classification scheme fails to adequately represent contemporary global realities, while recognizing, and applauding, its essential pragmatism.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 50(2012) no.4, S.249-262
-
Dewey, M.: Dewey Decimal Classification and relative index (2011)
0.01
0.013458293 = product of:
0.09420805 = sum of:
0.047104023 = weight(_text_:classification in 3079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047104023 = score(doc=3079,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.49260917 = fieldWeight in 3079, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3079)
0.047104023 = weight(_text_:classification in 3079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047104023 = score(doc=3079,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.49260917 = fieldWeight in 3079, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3079)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
-
Salah, A.A.; Gao, C.; Suchecki, K.; Scharnhorst, A.; Smiraglia, R.P.: ¬The evolution of classification systems : ontogeny of the UDC (2012)
0.01
0.011655224 = product of:
0.08158656 = sum of:
0.04079328 = weight(_text_:classification in 825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04079328 = score(doc=825,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.42661208 = fieldWeight in 825, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=825)
0.04079328 = weight(_text_:classification in 825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04079328 = score(doc=825,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.42661208 = fieldWeight in 825, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=825)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- To classify is to put things in meaningful groups, but the criteria for doing so can be problematic. Study of evolution of classification includes ontogenetic analysis of change in classification over time. We present an empirical analysis of the UDC over the entire period of its development. We demonstrate stability in main classes, with major change driven by 20th century scientific developments. But we also demonstrate a vast increase in the complexity of auxiliaries. This study illustrates an alternative to Tennis scheme-versioning method.
-
Lund, B.; Agbaji, D.: Use of Dewey Decimal Classification by academic libraries in the United States (2018)
0.01
0.011655224 = product of:
0.08158656 = sum of:
0.04079328 = weight(_text_:classification in 5181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04079328 = score(doc=5181,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.42661208 = fieldWeight in 5181, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5181)
0.04079328 = weight(_text_:classification in 5181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04079328 = score(doc=5181,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.42661208 = fieldWeight in 5181, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5181)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Nearly 25 years have elapsed since the last comprehensive measure of the percentage of academic libraries that employ the Dewey and Library of Congress systems of classification. To provide updated statistics, the researchers surveyed all 3793 academic libraries via their online catalogs. The findings indicate that the use of Dewey has declined over the past four decades. Teachers' Colleges and Community Colleges in particular have higher rates of Dewey use than large research or professional universities. This information may help support academic library reclassification decisions.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 56(2018) no.7, S.653-661
-
Slavic, A.; Davies, S.: Facet analysis in UDC : questions of structure, functionality and data formality (2017)
0.01
0.009613066 = product of:
0.06729146 = sum of:
0.03364573 = weight(_text_:classification in 3848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03364573 = score(doc=3848,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 3848, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3848)
0.03364573 = weight(_text_:classification in 3848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03364573 = score(doc=3848,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 3848, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3848)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- The paper will look into different patterns of facet analysis used in the UDC schedules and how these affect the scheme presentation, the underlying data structure and the management of the classification scheme. From the very beginning, UDC was designed to represent the universe of knowledge as an integral whole allowing for subjects/concepts from all fields of knowledge to be combined, linked and the nature of their relationships made explicit. In Otlet's original design, the emphasis for his new type of classification was on the coordination of classmarks at the point of searching, i.e., post-coordination, which he firmly rooted in an expressive notational system. While some UDC classes exhibit various patterns of facet analytical theory proper, others, although used in an analytico-synthetic fashion, follow less canonical structural patterns. The authors highlight the lack of connection made throughout the various stages of UDC restructuring between: a) theoretical requirements of an overarching facet analytical theory as a founding principle guiding the construction of schedules; and, b) practical requirements for an analytico-synthetic classification in terms of notational presentation and data structure that enables its use in indexing and retrieval, as well as its management online.
- Content
- Beitrag in einem Special Issue: Selected Papers from the International UDC Seminar 2017, Faceted Classification Today: Theory, Technology and End Users, 14-15 September, London UK.
-
Junger, U.: Basisinformationen zur Universellen Dezimalklassifikation (UDK) (2018)
0.00
0.0011622861 = product of:
0.016272005 = sum of:
0.016272005 = product of:
0.03254401 = sum of:
0.03254401 = weight(_text_:22 in 4337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03254401 = score(doc=4337,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4337, 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=4337)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Date
- 7. 7.2018 17:22:00
-
Satija, M.P.: Abridged Dewey-15 (2012) in historical perspectives (2012)
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 116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020340007 = score(doc=116,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 116, 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=116)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Date
- 3. 3.2016 18:59:22
