Search (86 results, page 1 of 5)

  • × theme_ss:"Theorie verbaler Dokumentationssprachen"
  1. Farradane, J.: Concept organization for information retrieval (1967) 0.01 
    0.013793981 = product of:
  0.08276388 = sum of:
    0.020851666 = weight(_text_:information in 35) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020851666 = score(doc=35,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.054299686 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.3840108 = fieldWeight in 35, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=35)
    0.061912216 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 35) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.061912216 = score(doc=35,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09356537 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.6617001 = fieldWeight in 35, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=35)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)
    Source
    Information storage and retrieval. 3(1967) S.297-314
  2. Panzer, M.: Semantische Integration heterogener und unterschiedlichsprachiger Wissensorganisationssysteme : CrissCross und jenseits (2008) 0.01 
    0.012980193 = product of:
  0.07788116 = sum of:
    0.022111505 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4335) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022111505 = score(doc=4335,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09356537 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 4335, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4335)
    0.05576965 = weight(_text_:wien in 4335) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05576965 = score(doc=4335,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17671053 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7129507 = idf(docFreq=396, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.3155989 = fieldWeight in 4335, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7129507 = idf(docFreq=396, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4335)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)
    Abstract
    Klassische bibliothekarische Indexierungswerkzeuge werden bis heute nur selten fürs Retrieval nutzbar gemacht; die Wichtigkeit, verschiedene dieser Vokabularien zu harmonisieren und integriert zu verwenden, ist noch immer keine Selbstverständlichkeit. Im Rahmen des DFG-Projektes "CrissCross" wird, ausgehend von der deutschen Ausgabe der Dewey-Dezimalklassifikation, eine Verknüpfung zwischen der DDC und der Schlagwortnormdatei (SWD) aufgebaut, um eine verbale Suche über klassifikatorisch erschlossene Bestände zu ermöglichen. Als Verbreiterung der Basis des verbalen Zugriffs wird außerdem das Mapping der amerikanischen LCSH und des französischen RAMEAU angestrebt. Nach einer kurzen Vorstellung von CrissCross und der Abgrenzung gegenüber ähnlichen Unterfangen werden Rückwirkungen semantischer Integration auf die verknüpften Vokabulare diskutiert. Wie müssen und können sich z.B. Thesauri verändern, wenn sie mit anderen (strukturheterologen) Systemen verknüpft sind? Dabei liegt ein Schwerpunkt der Analyse auf dem semantischen Verhältnis üblicher Mappingrelationen zu den verknüpften Begriffen (besonders im Hinblick auf Polysemie). Außerdem wird der Mehrwert fürs Retrieval auf der Basis solcher Wissensorganisationssysteme, z.B. durch automatisierten Zugriff über Ontologien, diskutiert.
    Source
    Kompatibilität, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation - Compatibility, Media and Ethics in Knowledge Organization: Proceedings der 10. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation Wien, 3.-5. Juli 2006 - Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the German Section of the International Society of Knowledge Organization Vienna, 3-5 July 2006. Ed.: H.P. Ohly, S. Netscher u. K. Mitgutsch
  3. Fox, E.A.: Lexical relations : enhancing effectiveness of information retrieval systems (1980) 0.01 
    0.01114722 = product of:
  0.06688332 = sum of:
    0.016850691 = weight(_text_:information in 5310) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016850691 = score(doc=5310,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.054299686 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 5310, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5310)
    0.050032627 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5310) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050032627 = score(doc=5310,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09356537 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.5347345 = fieldWeight in 5310, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5310)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)
  4. Fugmann, R.: ¬The analytico-synthetic foundation for large indexing & information retrieval systems : dedicated to Prof. Dr. Werner Schultheis, the vigorous initiator of modern chem. documentation in Germany on the occasion of his 85th birthday (1983) 0.01 
    0.010361529 = product of:
  0.062169172 = sum of:
    0.018839644 = weight(_text_:information in 215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018839644 = score(doc=215,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.054299686 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.3469568 = fieldWeight in 215, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=215)
    0.04332953 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04332953 = score(doc=215,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09356537 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.46309367 = fieldWeight in 215, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=215)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)
    LCSH
    Information retrieval
    RSWK
    Information und Dokumentation / Systemgrundlage (BVB)
    Subject
    Information und Dokumentation / Systemgrundlage (BVB)
    Information retrieval
  5. Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Thesaural relationships (2001) 0.01 
    0.009759996 = product of:
  0.039039984 = sum of:
    0.007372177 = weight(_text_:information in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007372177 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.054299686 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1149, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1149)
    0.021889275 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021889275 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09356537 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 1149, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1149)
    0.009778535 = product of:
      0.029335603 = sum of:
        0.029335603 = weight(_text_:22 in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029335603 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.108317085 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03093157 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1149, 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=1149)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(3/12)
    Abstract
    A thesaurus in the controlled vocabulary environment is a tool designed to support effective infonnation retrieval (IR) by guiding indexers and searchers consistently to choose the same terms for expressing a given concept or combination of concepts. Terms in the thesaurus are linked by relationships of three well-known types: equivalence, hierarchical, and associative. The functions and properties of these three basic types and some subcategories are described, as well as some additional relationship types conunonly found in thesauri. Progressive automation of IR processes and the capability for simultaneous searching of vast networked resources are creating some pressures for change in the categorization and consistency of relationships.
    Date
    22. 9.2007 15:45:57
    Series
    Information science and knowledge management; vol.2
  6. Boteram, F.: Semantische Relationen in Dokumentationssprachen : vom Thesaurus zum semantischen Netz (2010) 0.01 
    0.009759996 = product of:
  0.039039984 = sum of:
    0.007372177 = weight(_text_:information in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007372177 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.054299686 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 4792, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4792)
    0.021889275 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021889275 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09356537 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 4792, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4792)
    0.009778535 = product of:
      0.029335603 = sum of:
        0.029335603 = weight(_text_:22 in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029335603 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.108317085 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03093157 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4792, 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=4792)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(3/12)
    Abstract
    Moderne Verfahren des Information Retrieval verlangen nach aussagekräftigen und detailliert relationierten Dokumentationssprachen. Der selektive Transfer einzelner Modellierungsstrategien aus dem Bereich semantischer Technologien für die Gestaltung und Relationierung bestehender Dokumentationssprachen wird diskutiert. In Form einer Taxonomie wird ein hierarchisch strukturiertes Relationeninventar definiert, welches sowohl hinreichend allgemeine als auch zahlreiche spezifische Relationstypen enthält, die eine detaillierte und damit aussagekräftige Relationierung des Vokabulars ermöglichen. Das bringt einen Zugewinn an Übersichtlichkeit und Funktionalität. Im Gegensatz zu anderen Ansätzen und Überlegungen zur Schaffung von Relationeninventaren entwickelt der vorgestellte Vorschlag das Relationeninventar aus der Begriffsmenge eines bestehenden Gegenstandsbereichs heraus.
    Source
    Wissensspeicher in digitalen Räumen: Nachhaltigkeit - Verfügbarkeit - semantische Interoperabilität. Proceedings der 11. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Konstanz, 20. bis 22. Februar 2008. Hrsg.: J. Sieglerschmidt u. H.P.Ohly
  7. Kobrin, R.Y.: On the principles of terminological work in the creation of thesauri for information retrieval systems (1979) 0.01 
    0.009753818 = product of:
  0.058522902 = sum of:
    0.014744354 = weight(_text_:information in 2954) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014744354 = score(doc=2954,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.054299686 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 2954, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2954)
    0.04377855 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2954) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04377855 = score(doc=2954,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09356537 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.46789268 = fieldWeight in 2954, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2954)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)
  8. Salton, G.: Experiments in automatic thesaurus construction for information retrieval (1972) 0.01 
    0.009753818 = product of:
  0.058522902 = sum of:
    0.014744354 = weight(_text_:information in 5314) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014744354 = score(doc=5314,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.054299686 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 5314, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5314)
    0.04377855 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5314) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04377855 = score(doc=5314,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09356537 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.46789268 = fieldWeight in 5314, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5314)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)
  9. Maniez, J.: Fusion de banques de donnees documentaires at compatibilite des languages d'indexation (1997) 0.01 
    0.009522171 = product of:
  0.038088683 = sum of:
    0.010944845 = weight(_text_:information in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010944845 = score(doc=2246,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.054299686 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 2246, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2246)
    0.018762236 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018762236 = score(doc=2246,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09356537 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 2246, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2246)
    0.008381601 = product of:
      0.025144802 = sum of:
        0.025144802 = weight(_text_:22 in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025144802 = score(doc=2246,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.108317085 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03093157 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2246, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2246)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(3/12)
    Abstract
    Discusses the apparently unattainable goal of compatibility of information languages. While controlled languages can improve retrieval performance within a single system, they make cooperation across different systems more difficult. The Internet and downloading accentuate this adverse outcome and the acceleration of data exchange aggravates the problem of compatibility. Defines this familiar concept and demonstrates that coherence is just as necessary as it was for indexing languages, the proliferation of which has created confusion in grouped data banks. Describes 2 types of potential solutions, similar to those applied to automatic translation of natural languages: - harmonizing the information languages themselves, both difficult and expensive, or, the more flexible solution involving automatic harmonization of indexing formulae based on pre established concordance tables. However, structural incompatibilities between post coordinated languages and classifications may lead any harmonization tools up a blind alley, while the paths of a universal concordance model are rare and narrow
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
    Footnote
    Übers. d. Titels: Integration of information data banks and compatibility of indexing languages
  10. Neelameghan, A.: Lateral relationships in multicultural, multilingual databases in the spiritual and religious domains : the OM Information service (2001) 0.01 
    0.009455394 = product of:
  0.05673236 = sum of:
    0.044094343 = weight(_text_:multimedia in 1146) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044094343 = score(doc=1146,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14343803 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6372695 = idf(docFreq=1163, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.30741042 = fieldWeight in 1146, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.6372695 = idf(docFreq=1163, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1146)
    0.0126380185 = weight(_text_:information in 1146) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0126380185 = score(doc=1146,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.054299686 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 1146, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1146)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)
    Abstract
    Mapping a multidimensional universe of subjects for linear representation, such as in class number, subject heading, and faset structure is problematic. Into this context is recalled the near-seminal and postulational approach suggested by S. R Ranganathan. The non-hierarchical associative relationship or lateral relationship (LR) is distinguished at different levels-among information sources, databases, records of databases, and among concepts (LR-0). Over thirty lateral relationships at the concept level (LR-0) are identified and enumerated with examples from spiritual and religious texts. Special issues relating to LR-0 in multicultural, multilingual databases intended to be used globally by peoples of different cultures and faith are discussed, using as example the multimedia OM Information Service. Vocabulary assistance for users is described.
    Series
    Information science and knowledge management; vol.2
  11. Evens, M.: Thesaural relations in information retrieval (2002) 0.01 
    0.009347228 = product of:
  0.05608337 = sum of:
    0.014129735 = weight(_text_:information in 1201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014129735 = score(doc=1201,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.054299686 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 1201, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1201)
    0.041953634 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041953634 = score(doc=1201,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.09356537 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.44838852 = fieldWeight in 1201, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1201)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)
    Abstract
    Thesaural relations have long been used in information retrieval to enrich queries; they have sometimes been used to cluster documents as well. Sometimes the first query to an information retrieval system yields no results at all, or, what can be even more disconcerting, many thousands of hits. One solution is to rephrase the query, improving the choice of query terms by using related terms of different types. A collection of related terms is often called a thesaurus. This chapter describes the lexical-semantic relations that have been used in building thesauri and summarizes some of the effects of using these relational thesauri in information retrieval experiments
    Series
    Information science and knowledge management; vol.3
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  12. Maniez, J.: Actualité des langages documentaires : fondements théoriques de la recherche d'information (2002) 0.01 
    0.009232889 = product of:
  0.05539733 = sum of:
    0.017872857 = weight(_text_:information in 887) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017872857 = score(doc=887,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.054299686 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.3291521 = fieldWeight in 887, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=887)
    0.037524473 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 887) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037524473 = score(doc=887,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09356537 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 887, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=887)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)
    Footnote
    Übers. d. Titels: Actuality of information languages: theoretical foundation of information retrieval
  13. Miller, U.; Teitelbaum, R.: Pre-coordination and post-coordination : past and future (2002) 0.01 
    0.008776283 = product of:
  0.052657694 = sum of:
    0.014744354 = weight(_text_:information in 1395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014744354 = score(doc=1395,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.054299686 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 1395, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1395)
    0.037913337 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037913337 = score(doc=1395,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09356537 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.40520695 = fieldWeight in 1395, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1395)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)
    Abstract
    This article deals with the meaningful processing of information in relation to two systems of Information processing: pre-coordination and post-coordination. The different approaches are discussed, with emphasis an the need for a controlled vocabulary in information retrieval. Assigned indexing, which employs a controlled vocabulary, is described in detail. Types of indexing language can be divided into two broad groups - those using pre-coordinated terms and those depending an post-coordination. They represent two different basic approaches in processing and Information retrieval. The historical development of these two approaches is described, as well as the two tools that apply to these approaches: thesauri and subject headings.
    Theme
    Verbale Doksprachen im Online-Retrieval
  14. Takeda, N.: Problems in hierarchical structures in thesauri : their influences on the results of information retrieval (1994) 0.01 
    0.008625813 = product of:
  0.051754877 = sum of:
    0.008425346 = weight(_text_:information in 2642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008425346 = score(doc=2642,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.054299686 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 2642, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2642)
    0.04332953 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04332953 = score(doc=2642,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09356537 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.46309367 = fieldWeight in 2642, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2642)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)
    Abstract
    In online retrieval search results do not always match the intent in spite of using correct keywords (descriptors). One of the causes of this problem is found in the hierarchical structures of the thesaurus, which often contains relations between broader and narrower concepts, the opposite of which is not necessarily true. Some examples are described from 2 thesauri, MeSH and JICST. In these cases searchers need to make an effort to increase precision
    Theme
    Verbale Doksprachen im Online-Retrieval
  15. Mooers, C.N.: ¬The indexing language of an information retrieval system (1985) 0.01 
    0.007804529 = product of:
  0.031218115 = sum of:
    0.007372177 = weight(_text_:information in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007372177 = score(doc=3644,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.054299686 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
    0.018956669 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018956669 = score(doc=3644,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09356537 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.20260347 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
    0.0048892675 = product of:
      0.014667802 = sum of:
        0.014667802 = weight(_text_:22 in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014667802 = score(doc=3644,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.108317085 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03093157 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(3/12)
    Abstract
    Calvin Mooers' work toward the resolution of the problem of ambiguity in indexing went unrecognized for years. At the time he introduced the "descriptor" - a term with a very distinct meaning-indexers were, for the most part, taking index terms directly from the document, without either rationalizing them with context or normalizing them with some kind of classification. It is ironic that Mooers' term came to be attached to the popular but unsophisticated indexing methods which he was trying to root out. Simply expressed, what Mooers did was to take the dictionary definitions of terms and redefine them so clearly that they could not be used in any context except that provided by the new definition. He did, at great pains, construct such meanings for over four hundred words; disambiguation and specificity were sought after and found for these words. He proposed that all indexers adopt this method so that when the index supplied a term, it also supplied the exact meaning for that term as used in the indexed document. The same term used differently in another document would be defined differently and possibly renamed to avoid ambiguity. The disambiguation was achieved by using unabridged dictionaries and other sources of defining terminology. In practice, this tends to produce circularity in definition, that is, word A refers to word B which refers to word C which refers to word A. It was necessary, therefore, to break this chain by creating a new, definitive meaning for each word. Eventually, means such as those used by Austin (q.v.) for PRECIS achieved the same purpose, but by much more complex means than just creating a unique definition of each term. Mooers, however, was probably the first to realize how confusing undefined terminology could be. Early automatic indexers dealt with distinct disciplines and, as long as they did not stray beyond disciplinary boundaries, a quick and dirty keyword approach was satisfactory. The trouble came when attempts were made to make a combined index for two or more distinct disciplines. A number of processes have since been developed, mostly involving tagging of some kind or use of strings. Mooers' solution has rarely been considered seriously and probably would be extremely difficult to apply now because of so much interdisciplinarity. But for a specific, weIl defined field, it is still weIl worth considering. Mooers received training in mathematics and physics from the University of Minnesota and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He was the founder of Zator Company, which developed and marketed a coded card information retrieval system, and of Rockford Research, Inc., which engages in research in information science. He is the inventor of the TRAC computer language.
    Footnote
    Original in: Information retrieval today: papers presented at an Institute conducted by the Library School and the Center for Continuation Study, University of Minnesota, Sept. 19-22, 1962. Ed. by Wesley Simonton. Minneapolis, Minn.: The Center, 1963. S.21-36.
  16. Vickery, B.B.: Structure and function in retrieval languages (2006) 0.01 
    0.0077434834 = product of:
  0.0464609 = sum of:
    0.008936428 = weight(_text_:information in 5584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008936428 = score(doc=5584,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.054299686 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 5584, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5584)
    0.037524473 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037524473 = score(doc=5584,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.09356537 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 5584, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5584)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to summarize the varied structural characteristics which may be present in retrieval languages. Design/methodology/approach - The languages serve varied purposes in information systems, and a number of these are identified. The relations between structure and function are discussed and suggestions made as to the most suitable structures needed for various purposes. Findings - A quantitative approach has been developed: a simple measure is the number of separate terms in a retrieval language, but this has to be related to the scope of its subject field. Some ratio of terms to items in the field seems a more suitable measure of the average specificity of the terms. Other aspects can be quantified - for example, the average number of links in hierarchical chains, or the average number of cross-references in a thesaurus. Originality/value - All the approaches to the analysis of retrieval language reported in this paper are of continuing value. Some practical studies of computer information systems undertaken by Aslib Research Department have suggested a further approach.
  17. Engerer, V.: Control and syntagmatization : vocabulary requirements in information retrieval thesauri and natural language lexicons (2017) 0.01 
    0.007522528 = product of:
  0.045135166 = sum of:
    0.0126380185 = weight(_text_:information in 3678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0126380185 = score(doc=3678,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.054299686 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 3678, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3678)
    0.03249715 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03249715 = score(doc=3678,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09356537 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.34732026 = fieldWeight in 3678, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3678)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)
    Abstract
    This paper explores the relationships between natural language lexicons in lexical semantics and thesauri in information retrieval research. These different areas of knowledge have different restrictions on use of vocabulary; thesauri are used only in information search and retrieval contexts, whereas lexicons are mental systems and generally applicable in all domains of life. A set of vocabulary requirements that defines the more concrete characteristics of vocabulary items in the 2 contexts can be derived from this framework: lexicon items have to be learnable, complex, transparent, etc., whereas thesaurus terms must be effective, current and relevant, searchable, etc. The differences in vocabulary properties correlate with 2 other factors, the well-known dimension of Control (deliberate, social activities of building and maintaining vocabularies), and Syntagmatization, which is less known and describes vocabulary items' varying formal preparedness to exit the thesaurus/lexicon, enter into linear syntactic constructions, and, finally, acquire communicative functionality. It is proposed that there is an inverse relationship between Control and Syntagmatization.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.6, S.1480-1490
  18. Riesthuis, G.J.A.: Zoeken met woorden : hergebruik van onderwerpsontsluiting (1998) 0.01 
    0.006967013 = product of:
  0.041802075 = sum of:
    0.010531682 = weight(_text_:information in 3154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010531682 = score(doc=3154,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.054299686 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 3154, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3154)
    0.031270392 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031270392 = score(doc=3154,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09356537 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 3154, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3154)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)
    Abstract
    Theory of information languages. Decomposition of UDC-notations
    Theme
    Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
  19. Casagrande, J.B.; Hale, K.L.: Semantic relations in Papago folk definitions (1967) 0.01 
    0.006967013 = product of:
  0.041802075 = sum of:
    0.010531682 = weight(_text_:information in 1194) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010531682 = score(doc=1194,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.054299686 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 1194, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1194)
    0.031270392 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1194) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031270392 = score(doc=1194,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09356537 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 1194, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1194)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)
    Footnote
    Zitiert in: Evens, M.: Thesaural relations in information retrieval. In: The semantics of relationships: an interdisciplinary perspective. Eds: R. Green u.a. Dordrecht: Kluwer 2002. S.143-160.
  20. Gilchrist, A.: Structure and function in retrieval (2006) 0.01 
    0.0069055962 = product of:
  0.041433576 = sum of:
    0.008936428 = weight(_text_:information in 5585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008936428 = score(doc=5585,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.054299686 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 5585, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5585)
    0.03249715 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03249715 = score(doc=5585,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09356537 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03093157 = queryNorm
        0.34732026 = fieldWeight in 5585, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5585)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)
    Abstract
    Purpose - This paper forms part of the series "60 years of the best in information research", marking the 60th anniversary of the Journal of Documentation. It aims to review the influence of Brian Vickery's 1971 paper, "Structure and function in retrieval languages". The paper is not an update of Vickery's work, but a comment on a greatly changed environment, in which his analysis still has much validity. Design/methodology/approach - A commentary on selected literature illustrates the continuing relevance of Vickery's ideas. Findings - Generic survey and specific reference are still the main functions of retrieval languages, with minor functional additions such as relevance ranking. New structures are becoming increasingly significant, through developments such as XML. Future development in artificial intelligence hold out new prospects still. Originality/value - The paper shows the continuing relevance of "traditional" ideas of information science from the 1960s and 1970s.

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 70
  • d 11
  • f 3
  • ja 1
  • nl 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 69
  • m 9
  • s 7
  • el 3
  • r 3
  • x 2
  • d 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications