Search (909 results, page 1 of 46)

  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Functional requirements for subject authority data (FRSAD) : a conceptual model (2011) 0.13 
    0.12648627 = product of:
  0.3794588 = sum of:
    0.103690654 = weight(_text_:relationship in 2880) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.103690654 = score(doc=2880,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2292412 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.45232117 = fieldWeight in 2880, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2880)
    0.27576816 = weight(_text_:datenmodell in 2880) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.27576816 = score(doc=2880,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.3738479 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.8682456 = idf(docFreq=45, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.737648 = fieldWeight in 2880, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          7.8682456 = idf(docFreq=45, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2880)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    RSWK
    Entity-Relationship-Datenmodell
    Subject
    Entity-Relationship-Datenmodell
  2. Verwer, K.: Freiheit und Verantwortung bei Hans Jonas (2011) 0.08 
    0.07546404 = product of:
  0.45278424 = sum of:
    0.45278424 = weight(_text_:3a in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.45278424 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40282002 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        1.1240361 = fieldWeight in 973, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=973)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Content
    Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fcreativechoice.org%2Fdoc%2FHansJonas.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1TM3teaYKgABL5H9yoIifA&opi=89978449.
  3. Xiao, G.: ¬A knowledge classification model based on the relationship between science and human needs (2013) 0.07 
    0.07462993 = product of:
  0.2238898 = sum of:
    0.14664072 = weight(_text_:relationship in 138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14664072 = score(doc=138,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2292412 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.6396787 = fieldWeight in 138, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=138)
    0.07724908 = weight(_text_:22 in 138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07724908 = score(doc=138,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16638419 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 138, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=138)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Date
    22. 2.2013 12:36:34
  4. Kleineberg, M.: Context analysis and context indexing : formal pragmatics in knowledge organization (2014) 0.06 
    0.0628867 = product of:
  0.3773202 = sum of:
    0.3773202 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.3773202 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40282002 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Source
    http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja
  5. Weisbrod, D.: Pflichtablieferung von Dissertationen mit Forschungsdaten an die DNB : Anlagerungsformen und Datenmodell (2018) 0.06 
    0.056290947 = product of:
  0.33774567 = sum of:
    0.33774567 = weight(_text_:datenmodell in 4352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.33774567 = score(doc=4352,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.3738479 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.8682456 = idf(docFreq=45, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.9034307 = fieldWeight in 4352, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          7.8682456 = idf(docFreq=45, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4352)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Im Rahmen des DFG-Projektes "Elektronische Dissertationen Plus" (eDissPlus) entwickeln die Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (HU) und die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek (DNB) Lösungen für eine zeitgemäße Archivierung und Publikation von Forschungsdaten, die im Zusammenhang mit Promotionsvorhaben entstehen. Dabei müssen die unterschiedlichen Anlagerungsformen von Forschungsdaten an eine Dissertation berücksichtigt und in einem Datenmodell abgebildet sowie das von der DNB verwendete Metadatenschema XMetaDissPlus überarbeitet werden. Das ist notwendig, um die Relationen zwischen der Dissertation und den abgelieferten Forschungsdaten-Supplementen sowie den Daten, die auf externen Repositorien verbleiben sollen, nachzuweisen und im Katalog der DNB recherchierbar zu machen. Dieser Beitrag stellt das Datenmodell und die Änderungen im Metadatenschema vor.
  6. Zumer, M.; Zeng, M.L.; Salaba, A.: FRSAD: conceptual modeling of aboutness (2012) 0.05 
    0.05362159 = product of:
  0.32172954 = sum of:
    0.32172954 = weight(_text_:datenmodell in 1960) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.32172954 = score(doc=1960,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.3738479 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.8682456 = idf(docFreq=45, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.8605894 = fieldWeight in 1960, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          7.8682456 = idf(docFreq=45, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1960)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    RSWK
    Datenmodell / Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data
    Subject
    Datenmodell / Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data
  7. Neuer internationaler Standard für Thesauri veröffentlicht (2012) 0.05 
    0.04596136 = product of:
  0.27576816 = sum of:
    0.27576816 = weight(_text_:datenmodell in 183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.27576816 = score(doc=183,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.3738479 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.8682456 = idf(docFreq=45, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.737648 = fieldWeight in 183, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          7.8682456 = idf(docFreq=45, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=183)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    ISO 25964-1 ist der neue internationale Standard für Thesauri. Die Norm ersetzt ISO 2788 und ISO 5964. Erschienen unter dem vollständigen Titel "Information and documentation -Thesauri and interoperability with other vocabularies - Part 1: Thesauri for information retrieval" berücksichtigt ISO 25964-1 einsprachige und mehrsprachige Thesauri sowie die heutigen Anforderungen an Interoperabilität, Networking und die gemeinsame Nutzung von Daten (Data Sharing). Im Standard sind folgende Themen enthalten: - Erstellung einsprachiger und mehrsprachiger Thesauri; - Klärung des Unterschieds zwischen Benennungen und Begriffen und ihrer Beziehungen zueinander; - Richtlinien zur Facettenanalyse, zur Gestaltung und Darstellung von Thesauri; - Richtlinien zur Thesaurusnutzung in computergestützten und vernetzten Systemen; Best-Practice-Modell für Management der Thesaurusentwicklung und -wartung; - Leitfaden Thesaurusverwaltungssoftware; - Datenmodell für ein- und mehrsprachige Thesauri; - zusammengefasste Empfehlungen für Austauschformate und -protokolle. Aus dem Datenmodell wurde ein XML-Schema für Datenaustauschzwecke erstellt, das frei verfügbar ist unter http://www.niso.org/schemas/iso25964/.
  8. Gödert, W.; Lepsky, K.: Informationelle Kompetenz : ein humanistischer Entwurf (2019) 0.04 
    0.044020694 = product of:
  0.26412416 = sum of:
    0.26412416 = weight(_text_:3a in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.26412416 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40282002 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 5955, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5955)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Philosophisch-ethische Rezensionen vom 09.11.2019 (Jürgen Czogalla), Unter: https://philosophisch-ethische-rezensionen.de/rezension/Goedert1.html. In: B.I.T. online 23(2020) H.3, S.345-347 (W. Sühl-Strohmenger) [Unter: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.b-i-t-online.de%2Fheft%2F2020-03-rezensionen.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0iY3f_zNcvEjeZ6inHVnOK]. In: Open Password Nr. 805 vom 14.08.2020 (H.-C. Hobohm) [Unter: https://www.password-online.de/?mailpoet_router&endpoint=view_in_browser&action=view&data=WzE0MywiOGI3NjZkZmNkZjQ1IiwwLDAsMTMxLDFd].
  9. Ruther, D.: Möglichkeit zur Realisierung des FRBR-Modells im Rahmen des relationalen Datenbankmodells (2015) 0.04 
    0.043332785 = product of:
  0.2599967 = sum of:
    0.2599967 = weight(_text_:datenmodell in 1747) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2599967 = score(doc=1747,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3738479 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.8682456 = idf(docFreq=45, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.6954612 = fieldWeight in 1747, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.8682456 = idf(docFreq=45, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1747)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    "Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records" bezeichnet ein Datenmodell, welches es ermöglicht bibliographische Datensätze hierarchisch darzustellen. Dazu werden Entitäten definiert, welche untereinander in Verbindung stehen und so die katalogisierten Medien beschreiben. In dieser Arbeit wird das FRBR-Modell in Form einer relationalen Datenbank realisiert. Dazu wird das Programm SQL-Server 2014 genutzt, um es später mit dem linearen Datenbanksystem "Midos6" in Hinblick auf Datenmodulation und daraus resultierende Darstellungsmöglichkeiten zu vergleichen.
  10. Marradi, A.: ¬The concept of concept : concepts and terms (2012) 0.04 
    0.039532 = product of:
  0.11859599 = sum of:
    0.08640887 = weight(_text_:relationship in 33) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08640887 = score(doc=33,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2292412 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.3769343 = fieldWeight in 33, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=33)
    0.03218712 = weight(_text_:22 in 33) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03218712 = score(doc=33,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16638419 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 33, 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=33)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    The concept of concept has seldom been examined in its entirety, and the term very seldom defined. The rigidity, or lack thereof, and the homogeneity, or lack thereof, of concepts, are only two of their characteristics that have been debated. These issues are reviewed in this paper, namely: 1) does a concept represent its referent(s), or is it a free creation of the mind?; 2) can a concept be analyzed in parts or elements?; 3) must a concept be general, i.e., refer to a category or a type, or can it refer to a single object, physical or mental?; 4) are concepts as clearly delimited as terms are? Are concepts voiceless terms?; and, 5) what do terms contribute to an individual's and a community's conceptual richness? As regards the relationship of concepts with their referents in the stage of formation, it seems reasonable to conclude that said relationship may be close in some concepts, less close in others, and lacking altogether in some cases. The set of elements of a concept, which varies from individual to individual and across time inside the same individual, is called the intension of a concept. The set of referents of a concept is called the extension of that concept. Most concepts don't have a clearly delimited extension: their referents form a fuzzy set. The aspects of a concept's intension form a scale of generality. A concept is not equal to the term that describes it; rather, many terms are joined to concepts. Language, therefore, renders a gamut of services to the development, consolidation, and communication of conceptual richness.
    Date
    22. 1.2012 13:11:25
  11. Keilty, P.: Sexual boundaries and subcultural discipline (2012) 0.04 
    0.039532 = product of:
  0.11859599 = sum of:
    0.08640887 = weight(_text_:relationship in 631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08640887 = score(doc=631,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2292412 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.3769343 = fieldWeight in 631, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=631)
    0.03218712 = weight(_text_:22 in 631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03218712 = score(doc=631,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16638419 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 631, 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=631)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    The purpose of this essay is to demonstrate that the mechanisms of power around classifications of gender and sexuality are not always top-down or bottom-up. Instead, the weight of social discipline among members of sexual subcultures themselves helps to create these classifications, often reflecting the nomenclature of subjects and desires within sexual subcultures in a complex relationship to a dominant culture. Critically examining two benchmarks in the development of sexual nomenclature within queer subcultures, this paper finds its evidence in George Chauncey's little known analysis (1985) of a navy investigation of male homosexuality at the Newport Naval Training Station during the World War I era and in contemporary folksonomic classifications of representations of queer desire within Xtube, a database of online pornography. Social discipline within these sexual subcultures occurs in the stabilization of nomenclature through socialization and through members' overt intervention into each others' self-understanding. Both the Newport and Xtube evidence also reveals a complex social and cultural structure among members of sexual subcultures by drawing our attention to the particularity of various modes of sexual being and the relationship between those modes and particular configurations of sexual identity. In the process, this paper allows us to reassess, first, a presupposition of folksonomies as free of discipline allowing for their emancipatory potential and, second, the prevailing binary understandings of authority in the development of sexual nomenclatures and classifications as either top-down or bottom-up.
    Date
    22. 2.2013 11:24:44
  12. Bronstein, J.; Gazit, T.; Perez, O.; Bar-Ilan, J.; Aharony, N.; Amichai-Hamburger, Y.: ¬An examination of the factors contributing to participation in online social platforms (2016) 0.04 
    0.039532 = product of:
  0.11859599 = sum of:
    0.08640887 = weight(_text_:relationship in 3364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08640887 = score(doc=3364,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2292412 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.3769343 = fieldWeight in 3364, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3364)
    0.03218712 = weight(_text_:22 in 3364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03218712 = score(doc=3364,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16638419 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3364, 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=3364)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine participation in online social platforms consisting of information exchange, social network interactions, and political deliberation. Despite the proven benefits of online participation, the majority of internet users read social media data but do not directly contribute, a phenomenon called lurking. Design/methodology/approach A survey was administered electronically to 507 participants and consisted of ten sections in a questionnaire to gather data on the relationship between online participation and the following variables: anonymity, social value orientation, motivations, and participation in offline activities, as well as the internet's political influence and personality traits. Findings Findings show that users with high levels of participation also identify themselves, report higher levels of extroversion, openness, and activity outside the internet, the motivations being an intermediary variable in the relationship between the variables value. Originality/value The study shows that participation in online social platforms is not only related to personality traits, but they are impacted by the nature of the motivations that drive them to participate in the particular social platform, as well as by the interest toward the specific topic, or the type or nature of the social group with whom they are communicating.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  13. Ortega, J.L.: ¬The presence of academic journals on Twitter and its relationship with dissemination (tweets) and research impact (citations) (2017) 0.04 
    0.039532 = product of:
  0.11859599 = sum of:
    0.08640887 = weight(_text_:relationship in 4410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08640887 = score(doc=4410,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2292412 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.3769343 = fieldWeight in 4410, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4410)
    0.03218712 = weight(_text_:22 in 4410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03218712 = score(doc=4410,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16638419 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4410, 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=4410)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze the relationship between dissemination of research papers on Twitter and its influence on research impact. Design/methodology/approach Four types of journal Twitter accounts (journal, owner, publisher and no Twitter account) were defined to observe differences in the number of tweets and citations. In total, 4,176 articles from 350 journals were extracted from Plum Analytics. This altmetric provider tracks the number of tweets and citations for each paper. Student's t-test for two-paired samples was used to detect significant differences between each group of journals. Regression analysis was performed to detect which variables may influence the getting of tweets and citations. Findings The results show that journals with their own Twitter account obtain more tweets (46 percent) and citations (34 percent) than journals without a Twitter account. Followers is the variable that attracts more tweets (ß=0.47) and citations (ß=0.28) but the effect is small and the fit is not good for tweets (R2=0.46) and insignificant for citations (R2=0.18). Originality/value This is the first study that tests the performance of research journals on Twitter according to their handles, observing how the dissemination of content in this microblogging network influences the citation of their papers.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  14. Fonseca, F.; Marcinkowski, M.; Davis, C.: Cyber-human systems of thought and understanding (2019) 0.04 
    0.039532 = product of:
  0.11859599 = sum of:
    0.08640887 = weight(_text_:relationship in 5011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08640887 = score(doc=5011,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2292412 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.3769343 = fieldWeight in 5011, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5011)
    0.03218712 = weight(_text_:22 in 5011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03218712 = score(doc=5011,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16638419 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5011, 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=5011)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    The present challenge faced by scientists working with Big Data comes in the overwhelming volume and level of detail provided by current data sets. Exceeding traditional empirical approaches, Big Data opens a new perspective on scientific work in which data comes to play a role in the development of the scientific problematic to be developed. Addressing this reconfiguration of our relationship with data through readings of Wittgenstein, Macherey, and Popper, we propose a picture of science that encourages scientists to engage with the data in a direct way, using the data itself as an instrument for scientific investigation. Using GIS as a theme, we develop the concept of cyber-human systems of thought and understanding to bridge the divide between representative (theoretical) thinking and (non-theoretical) data-driven science. At the foundation of these systems, we invoke the concept of the "semantic pixel" to establish a logical and virtual space linking data and the work of scientists. It is with this discussion of the relationship between analysts in their pursuit of knowledge and the rise of Big Data that this present discussion of the philosophical foundations of Big Data addresses the central questions raised by social informatics research.
    Date
    7. 3.2019 16:32:22
  15. Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Teil 1 der Thesaurus-Norm ISO 25964 veröffentlicht (2012) 0.04 
    0.03791619 = product of:
  0.22749713 = sum of:
    0.22749713 = weight(_text_:datenmodell in 176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.22749713 = score(doc=176,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3738479 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.8682456 = idf(docFreq=45, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.60852855 = fieldWeight in 176, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.8682456 = idf(docFreq=45, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=176)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Die neue internationale Thesaurus-Norm ISO 25964-1 ersetzt die Normen ISO 2788 und ISO 5964. Ihr englischer Titel lautet "Information and documentation - Thesauri and interoperability with other vocabularies - Part 1: Thesauri for information retrieval". Die Norm umfasst ein- und mehrsprachige Thesauri und berück sichtigt die Notwendigkeit von Datenaustausch, Vernetzung und Interoperabilität. Zu den Inhalten gehören - Konstruktion ein- und mehrsprachiger Thesauri - Unterschied zwischen Begriff und Benennung und ihren Beziehungen - Facettenanalyse und Layout - Einsatz von Thesauri in computergestützten und vernetzten Systemen - Management und Pflege von Thesauri - Richtlinien für Thesaurusmanagement-Software - Datenmodell für ein- und mehrsprachige Thesauri - Empfehlungen
  16. Müller, R.: RDA - Das Regelwerk für alles : Ein konzeptuelles Modell und ein Workflow für die Katalogisierung nach RDA (2013) 0.04 
    0.03791619 = product of:
  0.22749713 = sum of:
    0.22749713 = weight(_text_:datenmodell in 1026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.22749713 = score(doc=1026,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3738479 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.8682456 = idf(docFreq=45, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.60852855 = fieldWeight in 1026, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.8682456 = idf(docFreq=45, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1026)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Der neue Katalogisierungsstandard RDA baut grundlegend auf dem Prinzip auf unterschiedliche Publikationsformen in der Erschließung möglichst gleich zu behandeln; er trägt jedoch auch der Tatsache Rechnung, dass für die Beschreibung mitunter sehr spezifische, je nach Publikationstyp unterschiedliche Charakteristika heranzuziehen sind. Die Kombination dieser gegenläufigen Anforderungen mit FRBR, die das zugrundeliegende Datenmodell für die RDA bilden, hat zur Folge, dass Katalogisate hochkomplexe Strukturen sind. Basierend auf den RDA-Elementen wird hier nun ein konzeptuelles Modell angeboten, das die innere Struktur von Katalogisaten systematisiert; zusätzlich dazu und darauf aufbauend lässt sich zudem ein allgemeiner Workflow für die Katalogisierung erstellen.
  17. Zeng, Q.; Yu, M.; Yu, W.; Xiong, J.; Shi, Y.; Jiang, M.: Faceted hierarchy : a new graph type to organize scientific concepts and a construction method (2019) 0.04 
    0.03773202 = product of:
  0.22639212 = sum of:
    0.22639212 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.22639212 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40282002 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Content
    Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.
  18. Suchenwirth, L.: Sacherschliessung in Zeiten von Corona : neue Herausforderungen und Chancen (2019) 0.04 
    0.03773202 = product of:
  0.22639212 = sum of:
    0.22639212 = weight(_text_:3a in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.22639212 = score(doc=484,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40282002 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 484, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=484)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Footnote
    https%3A%2F%2Fjournals.univie.ac.at%2Findex.php%2Fvoebm%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F5332%2F5271%2F&usg=AOvVaw2yQdFGHlmOwVls7ANCpTii.
  19. Cho, H.; Chen, M.-H.; Chung, S.: Testing an integrative theoretical model of knowledge-sharing behavior in the context of Wikipedia (2010) 0.04 
    0.037314966 = product of:
  0.1119449 = sum of:
    0.07332036 = weight(_text_:relationship in 3460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07332036 = score(doc=3460,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2292412 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.31983936 = fieldWeight in 3460, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3460)
    0.03862454 = weight(_text_:22 in 3460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03862454 = score(doc=3460,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16638419 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3460, 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=3460)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    This study explores how and why people participate in collaborative knowledge-building practices in the context of Wikipedia. Based on a survey of 223 Wikipedians, this study examines the relationship between motivations, internal cognitive beliefs, social-relational factors, and knowledge-sharing intentions. Results from structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis reveal that attitudes, knowledge self-efficacy, and a basic norm of generalized reciprocity have significant and direct relationships with knowledge-sharing intentions. Altruism (an intrinsic motivator) is positively related to attitudes toward knowledge sharing, whereas reputation (an extrinsic motivator) is not a significant predictor of attitude. The study also reveals that a social-relational factor, namely, a sense of belonging, is related to knowledge-sharing intentions indirectly through different motivational and social factors such as altruism, subjective norms, knowledge self-efficacy, and generalized reciprocity. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.
    Date
    1. 6.2010 10:13:22
  20. Huang, M.; Barbour, J.; Su, C.; Contractor, N.: Why do group members provide information to digital knowledge repositories? : a multilevel application of transactive memory theory (2013) 0.04 
    0.037314966 = product of:
  0.1119449 = sum of:
    0.07332036 = weight(_text_:relationship in 666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07332036 = score(doc=666,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2292412 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.31983936 = fieldWeight in 666, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=666)
    0.03862454 = weight(_text_:22 in 666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03862454 = score(doc=666,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16638419 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047513504 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 666, 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=666)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    The proliferation of digital knowledge repositories (DKRs) used for distributed and collocated work raises important questions about how to manage these technologies. This study investigates why individuals contribute information to DKRs by applying and extending transactive memory theory. Data from knowledge workers (N = 208) nested in work groups (J = 17) located in Europe and the United States revealed, consistent with transactive memory theory, that perceptions of experts' retrieval of information were positively related to the likelihood of information provision to DKRs. The relationship between experts' perceptions of retrieval and information provision varied from group to group, and cross-level interactions indicated that trust in how the information would be used and the interdependence of tasks within groups could explain that variation. Furthermore, information provision to DKRs was related to communication networks in ways consistent with theorizing regarding the formation of transactive memory systems. Implications for theory and practice are discussed, emphasizing the utility of multilevel approaches for conceptualizing and modeling why individuals provide information to DKRs.
    Date
    22. 3.2013 19:39:00

Authors

Languages

  • e 711
  • d 189
  • a 1
  • hu 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 802
  • el 75
  • m 60
  • s 21
  • x 13
  • r 7
  • b 5
  • i 1
  • z 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications