Search (133 results, page 1 of 7)

  • × theme_ss:"Inhaltsanalyse"
  1. Pejtersen, A.M.: Implications of users' value perception for the design of knowledge based bibliographic retrieval systems (1985) 0.05
    0.050934047 = product of:
      0.15280214 = sum of:
        0.021999538 = weight(_text_:of in 2088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021999538 = score(doc=2088,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 2088, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2088)
        0.0490556 = weight(_text_:systems in 2088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0490556 = score(doc=2088,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.4074492 = fieldWeight in 2088, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2088)
        0.08174701 = weight(_text_:software in 2088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08174701 = score(doc=2088,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.525975 = fieldWeight in 2088, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2088)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Source
    2nd Symposium on Empirical Foundations of Information and Software Science, 3.-5.10.84, Atlanta
  2. Raieli, R.: ¬The semantic hole : enthusiasm and caution around multimedia information retrieval (2012) 0.02
    0.022723142 = product of:
      0.06816942 = sum of:
        0.02049686 = weight(_text_:of in 4888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02049686 = score(doc=4888,freq=30.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.33457235 = fieldWeight in 4888, product of:
              5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
                30.0 = termFreq=30.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4888)
        0.02890629 = weight(_text_:systems in 4888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02890629 = score(doc=4888,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.24009174 = fieldWeight in 4888, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4888)
        0.018766273 = product of:
          0.037532546 = sum of:
            0.037532546 = weight(_text_:22 in 4888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037532546 = score(doc=4888,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03917671 = queryNorm
                0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 4888, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4888)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    This paper centres on the tools for the management of new digital documents, which are not only textual, but also visual-video, audio or multimedia in the full sense. Among the aims is to demonstrate that operating within the terms of generic Information Retrieval through textual language only is limiting, and it is instead necessary to consider ampler criteria, such as those of MultiMedia Information Retrieval, according to which, every type of digital document can be analyzed and searched by the proper elements of language for its proper nature. MMIR is presented as the organic complex of the systems of Text Retrieval, Visual Retrieval, Video Retrieval, and Audio Retrieval, each of which has an approach to information management that handles the concrete textual, visual, audio, or video content of the documents directly, here defined as content-based. In conclusion, the limits of this content-based objective access to documents is underlined. The discrepancy known as the semantic gap is that which occurs between semantic-interpretive access and content-based access. Finally, the integration of these conceptions is explained, gathering and composing the merits and the advantages of each of the approaches and of the systems to access to information.
    Date
    22. 1.2012 13:02:10
    Footnote
    Bezugnahme auf: Enser, P.G.B.: Visual image retrieval. In: Annual review of information science and technology. 42(2008), S.3-42.
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 39(2012) no.1, S.13-22
  3. Taylor, S.L.: Integrating natural language understanding with document structure analysis (1994) 0.02
    0.017406443 = product of:
      0.078329 = sum of:
        0.05872617 = weight(_text_:applications in 1794) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05872617 = score(doc=1794,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.34048924 = fieldWeight in 1794, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1794)
        0.01960283 = weight(_text_:of in 1794) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01960283 = score(doc=1794,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 1794, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1794)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Document understanding, the interpretation of a document from its image form, is a technology area which benefits greatly from the integration of natural language processing with image processing. Develops a prototype of an Intelligent Document Understanding System (IDUS) which employs several technologies: image processing, optical character recognition, document structure analysis and text understanding in a cooperative fashion. Discusses those areas of research during development of IDUS where it is found that the most benefit from the integration of natural language processing and image processing occured: document structure analysis, OCR correction, and text analysis. Discusses 2 applications which are supported by IDUS: text retrieval and automatic generation of hypertext links
  4. Beghtol, C.: Stories : applications of narrative discourse analysis to issues in information storage and retrieval (1997) 0.02
    0.017406443 = product of:
      0.078329 = sum of:
        0.05872617 = weight(_text_:applications in 5844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05872617 = score(doc=5844,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.34048924 = fieldWeight in 5844, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5844)
        0.01960283 = weight(_text_:of in 5844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01960283 = score(doc=5844,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 5844, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5844)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    The arts, humanities, and social sciences commonly borrow concepts and methods from the sciences, but interdisciplinary borrowing seldom occurs in the opposite direction. Research on narrative discourse is relevant to problems of documentary storage and retrieval, for the arts and humanities in particular, but also for other broad areas of knowledge. This paper views the potential application of narrative discourse analysis to information storage and retrieval problems from 2 perspectives: 1) analysis and comparison of narrative documents in all disciplines may be simplified if fundamental categories that occur in narrative documents can be isolated; and 2) the possibility of subdividing the world of knowledge initially into narrative and non-narrative documents is explored with particular attention to Werlich's work on text types
  5. Krause, J.: Principles of content analysis for information retrieval systems : an overview (1996) 0.02
    0.016011083 = product of:
      0.07204988 = sum of:
        0.014818345 = weight(_text_:of in 5270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014818345 = score(doc=5270,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 5270, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5270)
        0.057231534 = weight(_text_:systems in 5270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057231534 = score(doc=5270,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.47535738 = fieldWeight in 5270, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5270)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
  6. Jörgensen, C.: ¬The applicability of selected classification systems to image attributes (1996) 0.02
    0.015370399 = product of:
      0.069166794 = sum of:
        0.01960283 = weight(_text_:of in 5175) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01960283 = score(doc=5175,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 5175, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5175)
        0.049563963 = weight(_text_:systems in 5175) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049563963 = score(doc=5175,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.41167158 = fieldWeight in 5175, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5175)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Recent research investigated image attributes as reported by participants in describing, sorting, and searching tasks with images and defined 46 specific image attributes which were then organized into 12 major classes. Attributes were also grouped as being 'perceptual' (directly stimulated by visual percepts), 'interpretive' (requiring inference from visual percepts), and 'reactive' (cognitive and affective responses to the images). This research describes the coverage of two image indexing and classification systems and one general classification system in relation to the previous findings and analyzes the extent to which components of these systems are capable of describing the range of image attributes as revealed by the previous research
    Source
    Knowledge organization and change: Proceedings of the Fourth International ISKO Conference, 15-18 July 1996, Library of Congress, Washington, DC. Ed.: R. Green
  7. Rorissa, A.; Iyer, H.: Theories of cognition and image categorization : what category labels reveal about basic level theory (2008) 0.01
    0.0143295415 = product of:
      0.064482935 = sum of:
        0.021999538 = weight(_text_:of in 1958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021999538 = score(doc=1958,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 1958, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1958)
        0.042483397 = weight(_text_:systems in 1958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042483397 = score(doc=1958,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.35286134 = fieldWeight in 1958, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1958)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Information search and retrieval interactions usually involve information content in the form of document collections, information retrieval systems and interfaces, and the user. To fully understand information search and retrieval interactions between users' cognitive space and the information space, researchers need to turn to cognitive models and theories. In this article, the authors use one of these theories, the basic level theory. Use of the basic level theory to understand human categorization is both appropriate and essential to user-centered design of taxonomies, ontologies, browsing interfaces, and other indexing tools and systems. Analyses of data from two studies involving free sorting by 105 participants of 100 images were conducted. The types of categories formed and category labels were examined. Results of the analyses indicate that image category labels generally belong to superordinate to the basic level, and are generic and interpretive. Implications for research on theories of cognition and categorization, and design of image indexing, retrieval and browsing systems are discussed.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.9, S.1383-1392
  8. Nahotko, M.: Genre groups in knowledge organization (2016) 0.01
    0.013349254 = product of:
      0.06007164 = sum of:
        0.01960283 = weight(_text_:of in 5139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01960283 = score(doc=5139,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 5139, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5139)
        0.04046881 = weight(_text_:systems in 5139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04046881 = score(doc=5139,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.33612844 = fieldWeight in 5139, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5139)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    The article is an introduction to the development of Andersen's concept of textual tools used in knowledge organization (KO) in light of the theory of genres and activity systems. In particular, the question is based on the concepts of genre connectivity and genre group, in addition to previously established concepts such as genre hierarchy, set, system, and repertoire. Five genre groups used in KO are described. The analysis of groups, systems, and selected genres used in KO is provided, based on the method proposed by Yates and Orlikowski. The aim is to show the genre system as a part of the activity system, and thus as a framework for KO.
  9. Beghtol, C.: ¬The classification of fiction : the development of a system based on theoretical principles (1994) 0.01
    0.013026112 = product of:
      0.058617502 = sum of:
        0.018148692 = weight(_text_:of in 3413) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018148692 = score(doc=3413,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 3413, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3413)
        0.04046881 = weight(_text_:systems in 3413) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04046881 = score(doc=3413,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.33612844 = fieldWeight in 3413, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3413)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    The work is an adaptation of the author's dissertation and has the following chapters: (1) background and introduction; (2) a problem in classification theory; (3) previous fiction analysis theories and systems and 'The left hand of darkness'; (4) fiction warrant and critical warrant; (5) experimental fiction analysis system (EFAS); (6) application and evaluation of EFAS. Appendix 1 gives references to fiction analysis systems and appendix 2 lists EFAS coding sheets
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Knowledge organization 21(1994) no.3, S.165-167 (W. Bies); JASIS 46(1995) no.5, S.389-390 (E.G. Bierbaum); Canadian journal of information and library science 20(1995) nos.3/4, S.52-53 (L. Rees-Potter)
  10. Pejtersen, A.M.: ¬A new approach to the classification of fiction (1982) 0.01
    0.012410768 = product of:
      0.055848457 = sum of:
        0.014968789 = weight(_text_:of in 7240) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014968789 = score(doc=7240,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 7240, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=7240)
        0.040879667 = weight(_text_:systems in 7240) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040879667 = score(doc=7240,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.339541 = fieldWeight in 7240, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=7240)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Source
    Universal classification I: subject analysis and ordering systems. Proc. of the 4th Int. Study Conf. on Classification Research, Augsburg, 28.6.-2.7.1982. Ed. I. Dahlberg
  11. Yoon, J.W.: Utilizing quantitative users' reactions to represent affective meanings of an image (2010) 0.01
    0.012410768 = product of:
      0.055848457 = sum of:
        0.014968789 = weight(_text_:of in 3584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014968789 = score(doc=3584,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 3584, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3584)
        0.040879667 = weight(_text_:systems in 3584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040879667 = score(doc=3584,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.339541 = fieldWeight in 3584, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3584)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Emotional meaning is critical for users to retrieve relevant images. However, because emotional meanings are subject to the individual viewer's interpretation, they are considered difficult to implement when designing image retrieval systems. With the intent of making an image's emotional messages more readily accessible, this study aims to test a new approach designed to enhance the accessibility of emotional meanings during the image search process. This approach utilizes image searchers' emotional reactions, which are quantitatively measured. Broadly used quantitative measurements for emotional reactions, Semantic Differential (SD) and Self-Assessment Manikin (SAM), were selected as tools for gathering users' reactions. Emotional representations obtained from these two tools were compared with three image perception tasks: searching, describing, and sorting. A survey questionnaire with a set of 12 images was administered to 58 participants, which were tagged with basic emotions. Results demonstrated that the SAM represents basic emotions on 2-dimensional plots (pleasure and arousal dimensions), and this representation consistently corresponded to the three image perception tasks. This study provided experimental evidence that quantitative users' reactions can be a useful complementary element of current image retrieval/indexing systems. Integrating users' reactions obtained from the SAM into image browsing systems would reduce the efforts of human indexers as well as improve the effectiveness of image retrieval systems.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.7, S.1345-1359
  12. Saif, H.; He, Y.; Fernandez, M.; Alani, H.: Contextual semantics for sentiment analysis of Twitter (2016) 0.01
    0.012202359 = product of:
      0.054910615 = sum of:
        0.041947264 = weight(_text_:applications in 2667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041947264 = score(doc=2667,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2432066 = fieldWeight in 2667, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2667)
        0.012963352 = weight(_text_:of in 2667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012963352 = score(doc=2667,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.21160212 = fieldWeight in 2667, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2667)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Sentiment analysis on Twitter has attracted much attention recently due to its wide applications in both, commercial and public sectors. In this paper we present SentiCircles, a lexicon-based approach for sentiment analysis on Twitter. Different from typical lexicon-based approaches, which offer a fixed and static prior sentiment polarities of words regardless of their context, SentiCircles takes into account the co-occurrence patterns of words in different contexts in tweets to capture their semantics and update their pre-assigned strength and polarity in sentiment lexicons accordingly. Our approach allows for the detection of sentiment at both entity-level and tweet-level. We evaluate our proposed approach on three Twitter datasets using three different sentiment lexicons to derive word prior sentiments. Results show that our approach significantly outperforms the baselines in accuracy and F-measure for entity-level subjectivity (neutral vs. polar) and polarity (positive vs. negative) detections. For tweet-level sentiment detection, our approach performs better than the state-of-the-art SentiStrength by 4-5% in accuracy in two datasets, but falls marginally behind by 1% in F-measure in the third dataset.
  13. Bland, R.N.: ¬The concept of intellectual level in cataloging and classification (1983) 0.01
    0.011876687 = product of:
      0.053445093 = sum of:
        0.020741362 = weight(_text_:of in 321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020741362 = score(doc=321,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.33856338 = fieldWeight in 321, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=321)
        0.03270373 = weight(_text_:systems in 321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03270373 = score(doc=321,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2716328 = fieldWeight in 321, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=321)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    This paper traces the history of the concept of intellectual level in cataloging and classification in the United States. Past cataloging codes, subject-heading practice, and classification systems have provided library users with little systematic information concerning the intellectual level or intended audience of works. Reasons for this omission are discussed, and arguments are developed to show that this kind of information would be a useful addition to the catalog record of the present and the future.
  14. Hutchins, W.J.: ¬The concept of 'aboutness' in subject indexing (1978) 0.01
    0.0118198255 = product of:
      0.053189214 = sum of:
        0.024573447 = weight(_text_:of in 1961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024573447 = score(doc=1961,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.40111488 = fieldWeight in 1961, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1961)
        0.028615767 = weight(_text_:systems in 1961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028615767 = score(doc=1961,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 1961, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1961)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    The common view of the 'aboutness' of documents is that the index entries (or classifications) assigned to documents represent or indicate in some way the total contents of documents; indexing and classifying are seen as processes involving the 'summerization' of the texts of documents. In this paper an alternative concept of 'aboutness' is proposed based on an analysis of the linguistic organization of texts, which is felt to be more appropriate in many indexing environments (particularly in non-specialized libraries and information services) and which has implications for the evaluation of the effectiveness of indexing systems
  15. Pejtersen, A.M.: Design of a classification scheme for fiction based on an analysis of actual user-librarian communication, and use of the scheme for control of librarians' search strategies (1980) 0.01
    0.01165916 = product of:
      0.05246622 = sum of:
        0.025926704 = weight(_text_:of in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025926704 = score(doc=5835,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.42320424 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
        0.026539518 = product of:
          0.053079035 = sum of:
            0.053079035 = weight(_text_:22 in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.053079035 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03917671 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5835, 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=5835)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Date
    5. 8.2006 13:22:44
    Source
    Theory and application of information research. Proc. of the 2nd Int. Research Forum on Information Science, 3.-6.8.1977, Copenhagen. Ed.: O. Harbo u, L. Kajberg
  16. Buckland, M.K.: Obsolescence in subject description (2012) 0.01
    0.010339408 = product of:
      0.046527337 = sum of:
        0.021999538 = weight(_text_:of in 299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021999538 = score(doc=299,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 299, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=299)
        0.0245278 = weight(_text_:systems in 299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0245278 = score(doc=299,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 299, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=299)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The paper aims to explain the character and causes of obsolescence in assigned subject descriptors. Design/methodology/approach - The paper takes the form of a conceptual analysis with examples and reference to existing literature. Findings - Subject description comes in two forms: assigning the name or code of a subject to a document and assigning a document to a named subject category. Each method associates a document with the name of a subject. This naming activity is the site of tensions between the procedural need of information systems for stable records and the inherent multiplicity and instability of linguistic expressions. As languages change, previously assigned subject descriptions become obsolescent. The issues, tensions, and compromises involved are introduced. Originality/value - Drawing on the work of Robert Fairthorne and others, an explanation of the unavoidable obsolescence of assigned subject headings is presented. The discussion relates to libraries, but the same issues arise in any context in which subject description is expected to remain useful for an extended period of time.
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 68(2012) no.2, S.154-161
  17. Campbell, G.: Queer theory and the creation of contextual subject access tools for gay and lesbian communities (2000) 0.01
    0.010142646 = product of:
      0.045641907 = sum of:
        0.016735615 = weight(_text_:of in 6054) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016735615 = score(doc=6054,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.27317715 = fieldWeight in 6054, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6054)
        0.02890629 = weight(_text_:systems in 6054) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02890629 = score(doc=6054,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.24009174 = fieldWeight in 6054, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6054)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Knowledge organization research has come to question the theoretical distinction between "aboutness" (a document's innate content) and "meaning" (the use to which a document is put). This distinction has relevance beyond Information Studies, particularly in relation to homosexual concerns. Literary criticism, in particular, frequently addresses the question: when is a work "about" homosexuality? This paper explores this literary debate and its implications for the design of subject access systems for gay and lesbian communities. By examining the literary criticism of Herman Melville's Billy Budd, particularly in relation to the theories of Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick in The Epistemology of the Closet (1990), this paper exposes three tensions that designers of gay and lesbian classifications and vocabularies can expect to face. First is a tension between essentialist and constructivist views of homosexuality, which will affect the choice of terms, categories, and references. Second is a tension between minoritizing and universalizing perspectives on homosexuality. Third is a redefined distinction between aboutness and meaning, in which aboutness refers not to stable document content, but to the system designer's inescapable social and ideological perspectives. Designers of subject access systems can therefore expect to work in a context of intense scrutiny and persistent controversy
  18. Langridge, D.W.: Subject analysis : principles and procedures (1989) 0.01
    0.010040707 = product of:
      0.04518318 = sum of:
        0.016567415 = weight(_text_:of in 2021) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016567415 = score(doc=2021,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2704316 = fieldWeight in 2021, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2021)
        0.028615767 = weight(_text_:systems in 2021) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028615767 = score(doc=2021,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 2021, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2021)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Subject analysis is the basis of all classifying and indexing techniques and is equally applicable to automatic and manual indexing systems. This book discusses subject analysis as an activity in its own right, independent of any indexing language. It examines the theoretical basis of subject analysis using the concepts of forms of knowledge as applicable to classification schemes.
  19. Caldera-Serrano, J.: Thematic description of audio-visual information on television (2010) 0.01
    0.009913453 = product of:
      0.044610538 = sum of:
        0.020082738 = weight(_text_:of in 3953) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020082738 = score(doc=3953,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 3953, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3953)
        0.0245278 = weight(_text_:systems in 3953) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0245278 = score(doc=3953,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 3953, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3953)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - This paper endeavours to show the possibilities for thematic description of audio-visual documents for television with the aim of promoting and facilitating information retrieval. Design/methodology/approach - To achieve these goals different database fields are shown, as well as the way in which they are organised for indexing and thematic element description, analysed and used as an example. Some of the database fields are extracted from an analytical study of the documentary system of television in Spain. Others are being tested in university television on which indexing experiments are carried out. Findings - Not all thematic descriptions are used on television information systems; nevertheless, some television channels do use thematic descriptions of both image and sound, applying thesauri. Moreover, it is possible to access sequences using full text retrieval as well. Originality/value - The development of the documentary task, applying the described techniques, promotes thematic indexing and hence thematic retrieval. Given the fact that this is without doubt one of the aspects most demanded by television journalists (along with people's names). This conceptualisation translates into the adaptation of databases to new indexing methods.
  20. Bednarek, M.: Intellectual access to pictorial information (1993) 0.01
    0.009684435 = product of:
      0.04357996 = sum of:
        0.019052157 = weight(_text_:of in 5631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019052157 = score(doc=5631,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.3109903 = fieldWeight in 5631, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5631)
        0.0245278 = weight(_text_:systems in 5631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0245278 = score(doc=5631,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 5631, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5631)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Visual materials represent a significantly different type of communication to textual materials and therefore present distinct challenges for the process of retrieval, especially if by retireval we mean intellectual access to the content of images. This paper outlines the special characteristics of visual materials, focusing on their pontential complexity and subjectivity, and the methods used and explored for gaining access to visual materials as reported in the literature. It concludes that methods of access to visual materials are dominated by the relative mature systems developed for textual materials and that access methods based on visual communication are still largely in the developmental or prototype stage. Although reported research on user requirements in the retrieval of visual information is noticeably lacking, the results of at least one study indicate that the visually-based retrieval methods of structured and unstructered browsing seem to be preferred for visula materials and that effective retrieval methods are ultimately related to characteristics of the enquirer and the visual information sought

Authors

Languages

  • e 126
  • d 6
  • f 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 125
  • m 5
  • el 2
  • d 1
  • s 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Classifications