-
Peters, I.: Folksonomies : indexing and retrieval in Web 2.0 (2009)
0.01
0.014835967 = product of:
0.0890158 = sum of:
0.0890158 = sum of:
0.040415287 = weight(_text_:web in 4203) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040415287 = score(doc=4203,freq=12.0), product of:
0.11439841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.35328537 = fieldWeight in 4203, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4203)
0.048600513 = weight(_text_:seite in 4203) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048600513 = score(doc=4203,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19633847 = queryWeight, product of:
5.601063 = idf(docFreq=443, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.24753433 = fieldWeight in 4203, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.601063 = idf(docFreq=443, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4203)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Abstract
- Kollaborative Informationsdienste im Web 2.0 werden von den Internetnutzern nicht nur dazu genutzt, digitale Informationsressourcen zu produzieren, sondern auch, um sie inhaltlich mit eigenen Schlagworten, sog. Tags, zu erschließen. Dabei müssen die Nutzer nicht wie bei Bibliothekskatalogen auf Regeln achten. Die Menge an nutzergenerierten Tags innerhalb eines Kollaborativen Informationsdienstes wird als Folksonomy bezeichnet. Die Folksonomies dienen den Nutzern zum Wiederauffinden eigener Ressourcen und für die Recherche nach fremden Ressourcen. Das Buch beschäftigt sich mit Kollaborativen Informationsdiensten, Folksonomies als Methode der Wissensrepräsentation und als Werkzeug des Information Retrievals.
- Footnote
- Zugl.: Düsseldorf, Univ., Diss., 2009 u.d.T.: Peters, Isabella: Folksonomies in Wissensrepräsentation und Information Retrieval Rez. in: IWP - Information Wissenschaft & Praxis, 61(2010) Heft 8, S.469-470 (U. Spree): "... Nachdem sich die Rezensentin durch 418 Seiten Text hindurch gelesen hat, bleibt sie unentschieden, wie der auffällige Einsatz langer Zitate (im Durchschnitt drei Zitate, die länger als vier kleingedruckte Zeilen sind, pro Seite) zu bewerten ist, zumal die Zitate nicht selten rein illustrativen Charakter haben bzw. Isabella Peters noch einmal zitiert, was sie bereits in eigenen Worten ausgedrückt hat. Redundanz und Verlängerung der Lesezeit halten sich hier die Waage mit der Möglichkeit, dass sich die Leserin einen unmittelbaren Eindruck von Sprache und Duktus der zitierten Literatur verschaffen kann. Eindeutig unschön ist das Beenden eines Gedankens oder einer Argumentation durch ein Zitat (z. B. S. 170). Im deutschen Original entstehen auf diese Weise die für deutsche wissenschaftliche Qualifikationsarbeiten typischen denglischen Texte. Für alle, die sich für Wissensrepräsentation, Information Retrieval und kollaborative Informationsdienste interessieren, ist "Folksonomies : Indexing and Retrieval in Web 2.0" trotz der angeführten kleinen Mängel zur Lektüre und Anschaffung - wegen seines beinahe enzyklopädischen Charakters auch als Nachschlage- oder Referenzwerk geeignet - unbedingt zu empfehlen. Abschließend möchte ich mich in einem Punkt der Produktinfo von de Gruyter uneingeschränkt anschließen: ein "Grundlagenwerk für Folksonomies".
- Object
- Web 2.0
- RSWK
- World Wide Web 2.0
- Subject
- World Wide Web 2.0
-
Santini, M.: Zero, single, or multi? : genre of web pages through the users' perspective (2008)
0.01
0.0135324355 = product of:
0.040597305 = sum of:
0.032609943 = product of:
0.06521989 = sum of:
0.06521989 = weight(_text_:web in 2059) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06521989 = score(doc=2059,freq=20.0), product of:
0.11439841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.5701118 = fieldWeight in 2059, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2059)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.00798736 = product of:
0.023962079 = sum of:
0.023962079 = weight(_text_:29 in 2059) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023962079 = score(doc=2059,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12330827 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 2059, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2059)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- The goal of the study presented in this article is to investigate to what extent the classification of a web page by a single genre matches the users' perspective. The extent of agreement on a single genre label for a web page can help understand whether there is a need for a different classification scheme that overrides the single-genre labelling. My hypothesis is that a single genre label does not account for the users' perspective. In order to test this hypothesis, I submitted a restricted number of web pages (25 web pages) to a large number of web users (135 subjects) asking them to assign only a single genre label to each of the web pages. Users could choose from a list of 21 genre labels, or select one of the two 'escape' options, i.e. 'Add a label' and 'I don't know'. The rationale was to observe the level of agreement on a single genre label per web page, and draw some conclusions about the appropriateness of limiting the assignment to only a single label when doing genre classification of web pages. Results show that users largely disagree on the label to be assigned to a web page.
- Date
- 30. 7.2008 10:29:54
-
Peters, I.: Folksonomies und kollaborative Informationsdienste : eine Alternative zur Websuche? (2011)
0.01
0.012037851 = product of:
0.036113553 = sum of:
0.023333777 = product of:
0.046667553 = sum of:
0.046667553 = weight(_text_:web in 343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046667553 = score(doc=343,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11439841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.4079388 = fieldWeight in 343, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=343)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.012779775 = product of:
0.038339324 = sum of:
0.038339324 = weight(_text_:29 in 343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038339324 = score(doc=343,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12330827 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 343, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=343)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Folksonomies ermöglichen den Nutzern in Kollaborativen Informationsdiensten den Zugang zu verschiedenartigen Informationsressourcen. In welchen Fällen beide Bestandteile des Web 2.0 am besten für das Information Retrieval geeignet sind und wo sie die Websuche ggf. ersetzen können, wird in diesem Beitrag diskutiert. Dazu erfolgt eine detaillierte Betrachtung der Reichweite von Social-Bookmarking-Systemen und Sharing-Systemen sowie der Retrievaleffektivität von Folksonomies innerhalb von Kollaborativen Informationsdiensten.
- Pages
- S.29-53
- Source
- Handbuch Internet-Suchmaschinen, 2: Neue Entwicklungen in der Web-Suche. Hrsg.: D. Lewandowski
-
Catarino, M.E.; Baptista, A.A.: Relating folksonomies with Dublin Core (2008)
0.01
0.00968514 = product of:
0.02905542 = sum of:
0.017861202 = product of:
0.035722405 = sum of:
0.035722405 = weight(_text_:web in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035722405 = score(doc=2652,freq=6.0), product of:
0.11439841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 2652, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2652)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.011194218 = product of:
0.033582654 = sum of:
0.033582654 = weight(_text_:22 in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033582654 = score(doc=2652,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1227524 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2652, 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=2652)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Folksonomy is the result of describing Web resources with tags created by Web users. Although it has become a popular application for the description of resources, in general terms Folksonomies are not being conveniently integrated in metadata. However, if the appropriate metadata elements are identified, then further work may be conducted to automatically assign tags to these elements (RDF properties) and use them in Semantic Web applications. This article presents research carried out to continue the project Kinds of Tags, which intends to identify elements required for metadata originating from folksonomies and to propose an application profile for DC Social Tagging. The work provides information that may be used by software applications to assign tags to metadata elements and, therefore, means for tags to be conveniently gathered by metadata interoperability tools. Despite the unquestionably high value of DC and the significance of the already existing properties in DC Terms, the pilot study show revealed a significant number of tags for which no corresponding properties yet existed. A need for new properties, such as Action, Depth, Rate, and Utility was determined. Those potential new properties will have to be validated in a later stage by the DC Social Tagging Community.
- Pages
- S.14-22
- Source
- Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
-
Danowski, P.: Authority files and Web 2.0 : Wikipedia and the PND. An Example (2007)
0.01
0.009513283 = product of:
0.028539848 = sum of:
0.02062434 = product of:
0.04124868 = sum of:
0.04124868 = weight(_text_:web in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04124868 = score(doc=1291,freq=8.0), product of:
0.11439841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.36057037 = fieldWeight in 1291, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1291)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.007915508 = product of:
0.023746524 = sum of:
0.023746524 = weight(_text_:22 in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023746524 = score(doc=1291,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1227524 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1291, 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=1291)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- More and more users index everything on their own in the web 2.0. There are services for links, videos, pictures, books, encyclopaedic articles and scientific articles. All these services are library independent. But must that really be? Can't libraries help with their experience and tools to make user indexing better? On the experience of a project from German language Wikipedia together with the German person authority files (Personen Namen Datei - PND) located at German National Library (Deutsche Nationalbibliothek) I would like to show what is possible. How users can and will use the authority files, if we let them. We will take a look how the project worked and what we can learn for future projects. Conclusions - Authority files can have a role in the web 2.0 - there must be an open interface/ service for retrieval - everything that is indexed on the net with authority files can be easy integrated in a federated search - O'Reilly: You have to found ways that your data get more important that more it will be used
- Content
- Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".
- Object
- Web 2.0
-
Beuth, P.: ¬Ein Freund weckt Vertrauen : Experten sehen im Online-Portal Twitter ein neues Massenmedium heranwachsen (2008)
0.01
0.009493749 = product of:
0.05696249 = sum of:
0.05696249 = sum of:
0.0144370375 = weight(_text_:web in 4273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0144370375 = score(doc=4273,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11439841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.12619963 = fieldWeight in 4273, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4273)
0.04252545 = weight(_text_:seite in 4273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04252545 = score(doc=4273,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19633847 = queryWeight, product of:
5.601063 = idf(docFreq=443, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.21659255 = fieldWeight in 4273, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.601063 = idf(docFreq=443, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4273)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Content
- "Vinu schreibt: "Ich habe gerade eine weitere laute Explosion gehört. Das alles passiert nur zwei Gehminuten von meiner Wohnung entfernt." Netra schreibt: "Keine Panik. Nicht auf die Nachrichten hören. Die verbreiten Gerüchte und nehmen sie später zurück. Bleibt im Haus und bleibt ruhig." Vinu: "Die Schüsse kommen definitiv aus einer AK-47, und unsere Polizisten sind da draußen ohne schusssichere Westen und mit Scheiß-Gewehren." Sie waren näher dran als die meisten Journalisten - und sie berichteten unaufhörlich im Internet: Augenzeugen in Bombay nutzten beliebte Plattformen wie Twitter und Flickr, um aus erster Hand zu beschreiben, was in der indischen Metropole passierte. Auf der Seite Twitter.com schreiben User in 140 Zeichen, was sie gerade tun. Kaffee trinken, sich im Büro langweilen, eine Party suchen. Nun ist Twitter kurzzeitig zu einer Art Nachrichtenticker geworden: Über Filterbegriffe wie Bombay und Terror konnte jeder nachvollziehen, in welcher Lage sich die Menschen in der Stadt befanden, was sie von den Angriffen, Schießereien und Explosionen mitbekamen. Und wo sie bei Flickr.com ihre Bilder vom Geschehen hochgeladen haben. Das alles passierte beinahe in Echtzeit. Die Fotoplattform Flickr, sonst eher eine Sammelstelle für Urlaubsbilder und Material von ambitionierten Amateurfotografen, wurde zur Bilderstrecke über die Vorgänge in Bombay. Bewaffnete Terroristen, brennende Gebäude, verwüstete Hotellobbys und Blutlachen auf dem Boden - manche wagten sich gefährlich nahe an das Geschehen heran. Zumindest schien es so, denn ob die Bilder wirklich von denen gemacht wurden, die sie hochgeladen haben, war nicht immer klar. Manche dieser Bilder waren auch auf den Internetseiten von TV-Sendern zu sehen, und wer da von wem geklaut hat, ist schwer zu sagen. Auch im Wust der Twitter-Einträge, der sogenannten Tweets, ging unter, was authentisch ist, was einfach nur von anderen Medien abgeschrieben und hundertfach weitergetwittert wurde - und was schlicht und einfach unwahr ist. Blogger "Tom" (tomstechblog.com) aus der Umgebung von Los Angeles hat Botschaften entdeckt, nach denen auch das Marriott-Hotel in Bombay angegriffen wurde. Eine Falschmeldung. Für Menschen, deren Verwandte oder Freunde in dem Hotel wohnen, sei das extrem beängstigend, schreibt er.
Die Spielzeuge des Web 2.0 werden in solchen Situationen trotzdem zu Nachrichtenkanälen, ungefiltert und schneller als etablierte Medien. Ihr Reiz ist gerade die Subjektivität, die Emotionalität und die Vernetzung von Tausenden Personen rund um den Erdball. Die reinen Fakten gibt es woanders. "Social Media" heißen solche Dienste schließlich. Trotzdem werden sie ernstgenommen. Nach Untersuchungen der Harvard-Soziologin Shoshana Zuboff glauben die Menschen heutzutage in erster Linie ihren Freunden, während das Vertrauen in Unternehmen und Institutionen abnimmt. Übertragen auf das Internet bedeutet das: Wenn Informationen von Freunden aus der jeweiligen Online-Community stammen, vertraut man ihnen schneller, als wenn sie von einem unbekannten Redakteur irgendeiner Zeitung verbreitet werden. Im Fall Bombay zeigten die Reaktionen vieler sogenannter "Follower", also Leser von Twitter-Einträgen einer Person: Hier wird nicht viel hinterfragt. Hier wird kopiert und weitergeschickt, an die eigenen Follower. Für manche markiert der 24-stündige Sturm von 140-Zeichen-Meldungen nicht weniger als eine "epochale Veränderung des Nachrichtenflusses". So diktierte es etwa der New Yorker Journalismus-Professor Jeff Jarvis dem Handelsblatt-Blogger Thomas Knüwer. Der legt sich, wie auch der prominenteste TechBlogger der USA, Michael Arrington von TechCrunch, fest: "Der heutige Tag wird ein Durchbruch werden auf dem Weg Twitters zum Massenmedium.""
-
Kruk, S.R.; Kruk, E.; Stankiewicz, K.: Evaluation of semantic and social technologies for digital libraries (2009)
0.01
0.008999648 = product of:
0.02699894 = sum of:
0.017500332 = product of:
0.035000663 = sum of:
0.035000663 = weight(_text_:web in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035000663 = score(doc=3387,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11439841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 3387, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3387)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.009498609 = product of:
0.028495826 = sum of:
0.028495826 = weight(_text_:22 in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028495826 = score(doc=3387,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1227524 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3387, 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=3387)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Libraries are the tools we use to learn and to answer our questions. The quality of our work depends, among others, on the quality of the tools we use. Recent research in digital libraries is focused, on one hand on improving the infrastructure of the digital library management systems (DLMS), and on the other on improving the metadata models used to annotate collections of objects maintained by DLMS. The latter includes, among others, the semantic web and social networking technologies. Recently, the semantic web and social networking technologies are being introduced to the digital libraries domain. The expected outcome is that the overall quality of information discovery in digital libraries can be improved by employing social and semantic technologies. In this chapter we present the results of an evaluation of social and semantic end-user information discovery services for the digital libraries.
- Date
- 1. 8.2010 12:35:22
-
Marchitelli, A.; Piazzini, T.: OPAC, SOPAC e social networking : cataloghi di biblioteca 2.0? (2008)
0.01
0.00853978 = product of:
0.02561934 = sum of:
0.0144370375 = product of:
0.028874075 = sum of:
0.028874075 = weight(_text_:web in 3862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028874075 = score(doc=3862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11439841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 3862, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3862)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.011182303 = product of:
0.033546906 = sum of:
0.033546906 = weight(_text_:29 in 3862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033546906 = score(doc=3862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12330827 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 3862, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3862)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- In this article are compared traditional OPAC systems, enriched OPAC, social OPAC and social cataloguing systems.the aim is to underline new theoretical trends and to offer a taxonomic outline of such tools, according to the interaction level granted to users and to the chance to manage user's generated contents in the point of view of the application of web 2.0 tendecies to libraries, in the library 2.0. At the end, a brief review of softwares, both open source and not, that seem promising for this future application.
- Date
- 29. 1.1996 17:18:10
-
Müller-Prove, M.: Modell und Anwendungsperspektive des Social Tagging (2008)
0.01
0.00848153 = product of:
0.050889175 = sum of:
0.050889175 = product of:
0.07633376 = sum of:
0.038339324 = weight(_text_:29 in 2882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038339324 = score(doc=2882,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12330827 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 2882, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2882)
0.037994437 = weight(_text_:22 in 2882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037994437 = score(doc=2882,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1227524 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2882, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2882)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Date
- 21. 6.2009 9:55:29
- Pages
- S.15-22
-
Niemann, C.: Tag-Science : Ein Analysemodell zur Nutzbarkeit von Tagging-Daten (2011)
0.01
0.007684536 = product of:
0.046107214 = sum of:
0.046107214 = product of:
0.06916082 = sum of:
0.040664997 = weight(_text_:29 in 164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040664997 = score(doc=164,freq=4.0), product of:
0.12330827 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.3297832 = fieldWeight in 164, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=164)
0.028495826 = weight(_text_:22 in 164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028495826 = score(doc=164,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1227524 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 164, 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=164)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Date
- 29. 5.2012 13:58:08
29. 5.2012 14:15:36
- Source
- ¬Die Kraft der digitalen Unordnung: 32. Arbeits- und Fortbildungstagung der ASpB e. V., Sektion 5 im Deutschen Bibliotheksverband, 22.-25. September 2009 in der Universität Karlsruhe. Hrsg: Jadwiga Warmbrunn u.a
-
Corrado, E.; Moulaison, H.L.: Social tagging and communities of practice : two case studies (2008)
0.01
0.0073198117 = product of:
0.021959435 = sum of:
0.012374603 = product of:
0.024749206 = sum of:
0.024749206 = weight(_text_:web in 2271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024749206 = score(doc=2271,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11439841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 2271, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2271)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.009584831 = product of:
0.028754493 = sum of:
0.028754493 = weight(_text_:29 in 2271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028754493 = score(doc=2271,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12330827 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 2271, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2271)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Content
- In investigating the use of social tagging for knowledge organization and sharing, this paper reports on two case studies. Each study examines how two disparate communities of practices utilize social tagging to disseminate information to other community members in the online environment. Through the use of these tags, community members may retrieve and view relevant Web sites and online videos. The first study looks at tagging within the Code4Lib community of practice. The second study examines the use of tagging on video sharing sites used by a community of French teenagers. Uses of social tagging to share information within these communities are analyzed and discussed, and recommendations for future study are provided.
- Date
- 27.12.2008 11:20:29
-
Rolla, P.J.: User tags versus Subject headings : can user-supplied data improve subject access to library collections? (2009)
0.01
0.007291071 = product of:
0.021873213 = sum of:
0.012374603 = product of:
0.024749206 = sum of:
0.024749206 = weight(_text_:web in 3601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024749206 = score(doc=3601,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11439841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 3601, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3601)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.009498609 = product of:
0.028495826 = sum of:
0.028495826 = weight(_text_:22 in 3601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028495826 = score(doc=3601,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1227524 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3601, 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=3601)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Some members of the library community, including the Library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control, have suggested that libraries should open up their catalogs to allow users to add descriptive tags to the bibliographic data in catalog records. The web site LibraryThing currently permits its members to add such user tags to its records for books and therefore provides a useful resource to contrast with library bibliographic records. A comparison between the LibraryThing tags for a group of books and the library-supplied subject headings for the same books shows that users and catalogers approach these descriptors very differently. Because of these differences, user tags can enhance subject access to library materials, but they cannot entirely replace controlled vocabularies such as the Library of Congress subject headings.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Weiand, K.; Hartl, A.; Hausmann, S.; Furche, T.; Bry, F.: Keyword-based search over semantic data (2012)
0.01
0.0064307675 = product of:
0.038584605 = sum of:
0.038584605 = product of:
0.07716921 = sum of:
0.07716921 = weight(_text_:web in 432) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07716921 = score(doc=432,freq=28.0), product of:
0.11439841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.6745654 = fieldWeight in 432, product of:
5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
28.0 = termFreq=28.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=432)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Abstract
- For a long while, the creation of Web content required at least basic knowledge of Web technologies, meaning that for many Web users, the Web was de facto a read-only medium. This changed with the arrival of the "social Web," when Web applications started to allow users to publish Web content without technological expertise. Here, content creation is often an inclusive, iterative, and interactive process. Examples of social Web applications include blogs, social networking sites, as well as many specialized applications, for example, for saving and sharing bookmarks and publishing photos. Social semantic Web applications are social Web applications in which knowledge is expressed not only in the form of text and multimedia but also through informal to formal annotations that describe, reflect, and enhance the content. These annotations often take the shape of RDF graphs backed by ontologies, but less formal annotations such as free-form tags or tags from a controlled vocabulary may also be available. Wikis are one example of social Web applications for collecting and sharing knowledge. They allow users to easily create and edit documents, so-called wiki pages, using a Web browser. The pages in a wiki are often heavily interlinked, which makes it easy to find related information and browse the content.
- Source
- Semantic search over the Web. Eds.: R. De Virgilio, et al
- Theme
- Semantic Web
-
Yi, K.: Harnessing collective intelligence in social tagging using Delicious (2012)
0.01
0.0060758926 = product of:
0.018227678 = sum of:
0.01031217 = product of:
0.02062434 = sum of:
0.02062434 = weight(_text_:web in 515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02062434 = score(doc=515,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11439841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 515, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=515)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.007915508 = product of:
0.023746524 = sum of:
0.023746524 = weight(_text_:22 in 515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023746524 = score(doc=515,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1227524 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 515, 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=515)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- A new collaborative approach in information organization and sharing has recently arisen, known as collaborative tagging or social indexing. A key element of collaborative tagging is the concept of collective intelligence (CI), which is a shared intelligence among all participants. This research investigates the phenomenon of social tagging in the context of CI with the aim to serve as a stepping-stone towards the mining of truly valuable social tags for web resources. This study focuses on assessing and evaluating the degree of CI embedded in social tagging over time in terms of two-parameter values, number of participants, and top frequency ranking window. Five different metrics were adopted and utilized for assessing the similarity between ranking lists: overlapList, overlapRank, Footrule, Fagin's measure, and the Inverse Rank measure. The result of this study demonstrates that a substantial degree of CI is most likely to be achieved when somewhere between the first 200 and 400 people have participated in tagging, and that a target degree of CI can be projected by controlling the two factors along with the selection of a similarity metric. The study also tests some experimental conditions for detecting social tags with high CI degree. The results of this study can be applicable to the study of filtering social tags based on CI; filtered social tags may be utilized for the metadata creation of tagged resources and possibly for the retrieval of tagged resources.
- Date
- 25.12.2012 15:22:37
-
Heckner, M.: Tagging, rating, posting : studying forms of user contribution for web-based information management and information retrieval (2009)
0.01
0.005434991 = product of:
0.032609943 = sum of:
0.032609943 = product of:
0.06521989 = sum of:
0.06521989 = weight(_text_:web in 2931) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06521989 = score(doc=2931,freq=20.0), product of:
0.11439841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.5701118 = fieldWeight in 2931, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2931)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Content
- The Web of User Contribution - Foundations and Principles of the Social Web - Social Tagging - Rating and Filtering of Digital Resources Empirical Analysisof User Contributions - The Functional and Linguistic Structure of Tags - A Comparative Analysis of Tags for Different Digital Resource Types - Exploring Relevance Assessments in Social IR Systems - Exploring User Contribution Within a Higher Education Scenario - Summary of Empirical Results and Implications for Designing Social Information Systems User Contribution for a Participative Information System - Social Information Architecture for an Online Help System
- Object
- Web 2.0
- RSWK
- World Wide Web 2.0 / Benutzer / Online-Publizieren / Information Retrieval / Soziale Software / Hilfesystem
Social Tagging / Filter / Web log / World Wide Web 2.0
- Subject
- World Wide Web 2.0 / Benutzer / Online-Publizieren / Information Retrieval / Soziale Software / Hilfesystem
Social Tagging / Filter / Web log / World Wide Web 2.0
-
Blumauer, A.; Hochmeister, M.: Tag-Recommender gestützte Annotation von Web-Dokumenten (2009)
0.01
0.005380366 = product of:
0.032282196 = sum of:
0.032282196 = product of:
0.06456439 = sum of:
0.06456439 = weight(_text_:web in 4866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06456439 = score(doc=4866,freq=10.0), product of:
0.11439841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.5643819 = fieldWeight in 4866, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4866)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Abstract
- In diesem Kapitel wird die zentrale Bedeutung der Annotation von Webdokumenten bzw. von Ressourcen in einem Semantischen Web diskutiert. Es wird auf aktuelle Methoden und Techniken in diesem Gebiet eingegangen, insbesondere wird das Phänomen "Social Tagging" als zentrales Element eines "Social Semantic Webs" beleuchtet. Weiters wird der Frage nachgegangen, welchen Mehrwert "Tag Recommender" beim Annotationsvorgang bieten, sowohl aus Sicht des End-Users aber auch im Sinne eines kollaborativen Ontologieerstellungsprozesses. Schließlich wird ein Funktionsprinzip für einen semi-automatischen Tag-Recommender vorgestellt unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Anwendbarkeit in einem Corporate Semantic Web.
- Source
- Social Semantic Web: Web 2.0, was nun? Hrsg.: A. Blumauer u. T. Pellegrini
-
Chen, M.; Liu, X.; Qin, J.: Semantic relation extraction from socially-generated tags : a methodology for metadata generation (2008)
0.01
0.005300956 = product of:
0.031805735 = sum of:
0.031805735 = product of:
0.0477086 = sum of:
0.023962079 = weight(_text_:29 in 2648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023962079 = score(doc=2648,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12330827 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 2648, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2648)
0.023746524 = weight(_text_:22 in 2648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023746524 = score(doc=2648,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1227524 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2648, 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=2648)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Date
- 20. 2.2009 10:29:07
- Source
- Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
-
Hsu, M.-H.; Chen, H.-H.: Efficient and effective prediction of social tags to enhance Web search (2011)
0.00
0.0048612035 = product of:
0.02916722 = sum of:
0.02916722 = product of:
0.05833444 = sum of:
0.05833444 = weight(_text_:web in 4625) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05833444 = score(doc=4625,freq=16.0), product of:
0.11439841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.5099235 = fieldWeight in 4625, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4625)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Abstract
- As the web has grown into an integral part of daily life, social annotation has become a popular manner for web users to manage resources. This method of management has many potential applications, but it is limited in applicability by the cold-start problem, especially for new resources on the web. In this article, we study automatic tag prediction for web pages comprehensively and utilize the predicted tags to improve search performance. First, we explore the stabilizing phenomenon of tag usage in a social bookmarking system. Then, we propose a two-stage tag prediction approach, which is efficient and is effective in making use of early annotations from users. In the first stage, content-based ranking, candidate tags are selected and ranked to generate an initial tag list. In the second stage, random-walk re-ranking, we adopt a random-walk model that utilizes tag co-occurrence information to re-rank the initial list. The experimental results show that our algorithm effectively proposes appropriate tags for target web pages. In addition, we present a framework to incorporate tag prediction in a general web search. The experimental results of the web search validate the hypothesis that the proposed framework significantly enhances the typical retrieval model.
-
Bentley, C.M.; Labelle, P.R.: ¬A comparison of social tagging designs and user participation (2008)
0.00
0.004860714 = product of:
0.014582142 = sum of:
0.008249735 = product of:
0.01649947 = sum of:
0.01649947 = weight(_text_:web in 2657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01649947 = score(doc=2657,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11439841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.14422815 = fieldWeight in 2657, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2657)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.0063324063 = product of:
0.018997218 = sum of:
0.018997218 = weight(_text_:22 in 2657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018997218 = score(doc=2657,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1227524 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2657, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2657)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Social tagging empowers users to categorize content in a personally meaningful way while harnessing their potential to contribute to a collaborative construction of knowledge (Vander Wal, 2007). In addition, social tagging systems offer innovative filtering mechanisms that facilitate resource discovery and browsing (Mathes, 2004). As a result, social tags may support online communication, informal or intended learning as well as the development of online communities. The purpose of this mixed methods study is to examine how undergraduate students participate in social tagging activities in order to learn about their motivations, behaviours and practices. A better understanding of their knowledge, habits and interactions with such systems will help practitioners and developers identify important factors when designing enhancements. In the first phase of the study, students enrolled at a Canadian university completed 103 questionnaires. Quantitative results focusing on general familiarity with social tagging, frequently used Web 2.0 sites, and the purpose for engaging in social tagging activities were compiled. Eight questionnaire respondents participated in follow-up semi-structured interviews that further explored tagging practices by situating questionnaire responses within concrete experiences using popular websites such as YouTube, Facebook, Del.icio.us, and Flickr. Preliminary results of this study echo findings found in the growing literature concerning social tagging from the fields of computer science (Sen et al., 2006) and information science (Golder & Huberman, 2006; Macgregor & McCulloch, 2006). Generally, two classes of social taggers emerge: those who focus on tagging for individual purposes, and those who view tagging as a way to share or communicate meaning to others. Heavy del.icio.us users, for example, were often focused on simply organizing their own content, and seemed to be conscientiously maintaining their own personally relevant categorizations while, in many cases, placing little importance on the tags of others. Conversely, users tagging items primarily to share content preferred to use specific terms to optimize retrieval and discovery by others. Our findings should inform practitioners of how interaction design can be tailored for different tagging systems applications, and how these findings are positioned within the current debate surrounding social tagging among the resource discovery community. We also hope to direct future research in the field to place a greater importance on exploring the benefits of tagging as a socially-driven endeavour rather than uniquely as a means of managing information.
- Source
- Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
-
DeZelar-Tiedman, V.: Doing the LibraryThing(TM) in an academic library catalog (2008)
0.00
0.004860714 = product of:
0.014582142 = sum of:
0.008249735 = product of:
0.01649947 = sum of:
0.01649947 = weight(_text_:web in 2666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01649947 = score(doc=2666,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11439841 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.14422815 = fieldWeight in 2666, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2666)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.0063324063 = product of:
0.018997218 = sum of:
0.018997218 = weight(_text_:22 in 2666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018997218 = score(doc=2666,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1227524 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03505379 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2666, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2666)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Many libraries and other cultural institutions are incorporating Web 2.0 features and enhanced metadata into their catalogs (Trant 2006). These value-added elements include those typically found in commercial and social networking sites, such as book jacket images, reviews, and usergenerated tags. One such site that libraries are exploring as a model is LibraryThing (www.librarything.com) LibraryThing is a social networking site that allows users to "catalog" their own book collections. Members can add tags and reviews to records for books, as well as engage in online discussions. In addition to its service for individuals, LibraryThing offers a feebased service to libraries, where institutions can add LibraryThing tags, recommendations, and other features to their online catalog records. This poster will present data analyzing the quality and quantity of the metadata that a large academic library would expect to gain if utilizing such a service, focusing on the overlap between titles found in the library's catalog and in LibraryThing's database, and on a comparison between the controlled subject headings in the former and the user-generated tags in the latter. During February through April 2008, a random sample of 383 titles from the University of Minnesota Libraries catalog was searched in LibraryThing. Eighty works, or 21 percent of the sample, had corresponding records available in LibraryThing. Golder and Huberman (2006) outline the advantages and disadvantages of using controlled vocabulary for subject access to information resources versus the growing trend of tags supplied by users or by content creators. Using the 80 matched records from the sample, comparisons were made between the user-supplied tags in LibraryThing (social tags) and the subject headings in the library catalog records (controlled vocabulary system). In the library records, terms from all 6XX MARC fields were used. To make a more meaningful comparison, controlled subject terms were broken down into facets according to their headings and subheadings, and each unique facet counted separately. A total of 227 subject terms were applied to the 80 catalog records, an average of 2.84 per record. In LibraryThing, 698 tags were applied to the same 80 titles, an average of 8.73 per title. The poster will further explore the relationships between the terms applied in each source, and identify where overlaps and complementary levels of access occur.
- Source
- Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
