Search (10 results, page 1 of 1)

0.033974044 = product of:
  0.13589618 = sum of:
    0.13589618 = product of:
      0.27179235 = sum of:
        0.27179235 = weight(_text_:lehrbuch in 130) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.27179235 = score(doc=130,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.3139294 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.926203 = idf(docFreq=117, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045324896 = queryNorm
            0.86577535 = fieldWeight in 130, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.926203 = idf(docFreq=117, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=130)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

RSWK

Thesaurus / Verwendung / Struktur / Lehrbuch (SWB)

Subject

Thesaurus / Verwendung / Struktur / Lehrbuch (SWB)

0.033427 = product of:
  0.066854 = sum of:
    0.045360856 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3361) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045360856 = score(doc=3361,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13710396 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 3361, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3361)
    0.02149314 = product of:
      0.04298628 = sum of:
        0.04298628 = weight(_text_:22 in 3361) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04298628 = score(doc=3361,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15872006 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045324896 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3361, 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=3361)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This chapter considers the continuing relevance of the ideas of browsing, serendipity, information encountering and literature discovery in the context of the information retrieval (IR) environment of 2010, though its scope extends to the ideas in the broader contexts of information seeking and information-related behaviour. It is based around a selective review of the literature since 1990 and reflection and speculation on the results. The central focus is on questions of how the concept of browsing, serendipity and related ideas have changed in the new IR environment of the web and whether, indeed, they are still meaningfull concepts.

Pages

S.1-22

Source

Innovations in information retrieval: perspectives for theory and practice. Eds.: A. Foster, u. P. Rafferty

0.012960245 = product of:
  0.05184098 = sum of:
    0.05184098 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05184098 = score(doc=4539,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13710396 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.37811437 = fieldWeight in 4539, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4539)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims to discuss the history of online searching through the views of one of its pioneers. Design/methodology/approach - The paper presents, and comments on, the recollections of Jim Hall, one of the earliest UK-based operators of, and writers on, online retrieval systems. Findings - The paper gives an account of the development of online searching in the UK during the 1960s and 1970s. Originality/value - The paper presents the perspective of one of the pioneers of online searching.

0.01074657 = product of:
  0.04298628 = sum of:
    0.04298628 = product of:
      0.08597256 = sum of:
        0.08597256 = weight(_text_:22 in 844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08597256 = score(doc=844,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15872006 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045324896 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 844, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=844)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

7. 6.2008 16:22:20

0.009720184 = product of:
  0.038880736 = sum of:
    0.038880736 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038880736 = score(doc=1659,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13710396 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 1659, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1659)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The use of quantum concepts and formalisms in the information sciences is assessed through an analysis of published literature. Five categories are identified: use of loose analogies and metaphors between concepts in quantum physics and library/information science; use of quantum concepts and formalisms in information retrieval; use of quantum concepts and formalisms in studying meaning and concepts; quantum social science, in areas adjacent to information science; and the qualitative application of quantum concepts in the information disciplines. Quantum issues have led to demonstrable progress in information retrieval and semantic modelling, with less clear-cut progress elsewhere. Whether there may be a future "quantum turn" in the information sciences is debated, the implications of such a turn are considered, and a research agenda outlined.

0.008018742 = product of:
  0.03207497 = sum of:
    0.03207497 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03207497 = score(doc=2828,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13710396 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 2828, 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=2828)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

SIBRIS (Sandwich Interactive Browsing and Ranking Information System) is an interactive text retrieval system which has been developed to support the browsing of library and product files at Pfizer Central Research, Sandwich, UK. Once an initial ranking has been produced, the system will allow the user to select any document displayed on the screen at any point during the browse and to use that as the basis for another search. Facilities have been included to enable the user to keep track of the browse and to facilitate backtracking, thus allowing the user to move away from the original query to wander in and out of different areas of interest.

0.0068732076 = product of:
  0.02749283 = sum of:
    0.02749283 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3733) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02749283 = score(doc=3733,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13710396 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 3733, 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=3733)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Presents a selective literature review covering the process of browsing as a means of searching for information. References are selected in order to illustrate the major themes and to bring out points which have not been emphasised before. The main points covered in the review include: consideration of browsing as an important, but under rated and little understood, form of information access; the ability in browsing to find analogies, connections, and new lines of thought; the potential of browsings as an ideal technique for accasional or non expert users; the ability to apply browsing to both paper based and computerized information retrieval; and the ability to search for information in a semi-random fashion leading to serendipitous linkage. Concludes that, despite the acknowledges importance of browsing, the increased effort being expended in making computerized systems browsable and the many references to the concept in the computer literature, there is still a lack of real understanding of the basic concepts of the process

0.005727673 = product of:
  0.022910692 = sum of:
    0.022910692 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022910692 = score(doc=648,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13710396 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 648, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=648)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of the study was to compare an internet search engine, Google, with appropriate library databases and systems, in order to assess the relative value, strengths and weaknesses of the two sorts of system. Design/methodology/approach - A case study approach was used, with detailed analysis and failure checking of results. The performance of the two systems was assessed in terms of coverage, unique records, precision, and quality and accessibility of results. A novel form of relevance assessment, based on the work of Saracevic and others was devised. Findings - Google is superior for coverage and accessibility. Library systems are superior for quality of results. Precision is similar for both systems. Good coverage requires use of both, as both have many unique items. Improving the skills of the searcher is likely to give better results from the library systems, but not from Google. Research limitations/implications - Only four case studies were included. These were limited to the kind of queries likely to be searched by university students. Library resources were limited to those in two UK academic libraries. Only the basic Google web search functionality was used, and only the top ten records examined. Practical implications - The results offer guidance for those providing support and training for use of these retrieval systems, and also provide evidence for debates on the "Google phenomenon". Originality/value - This is one of the few studies which provide evidence on the relative performance of internet search engines and library databases, and the only one to conduct such in-depth case studies. The method for the assessment of relevance is novel.

0.005373285 = product of:
  0.02149314 = sum of:
    0.02149314 = product of:
      0.04298628 = sum of:
        0.04298628 = weight(_text_:22 in 683) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04298628 = score(doc=683,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15872006 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045324896 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 683, 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=683)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Understanding information policy. Proceedings of a British Library funded Information Policy Unit Workshop, Cumberland Lodge, UK, 22-24 July 1996. Ed. by Ian Rowlands

0.005373285 = product of:
  0.02149314 = sum of:
    0.02149314 = product of:
      0.04298628 = sum of:
        0.04298628 = weight(_text_:22 in 730) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04298628 = score(doc=730,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15872006 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045324896 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 730, 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=730)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

21. 1.2007 12:03:22