Search (25 results, page 1 of 2)

0.018503213 = product of:
  0.046258032 = sum of:
    0.03536452 = weight(_text_:semantic in 2755) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03536452 = score(doc=2755,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19245663 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1578603 = idf(docFreq=1879, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.18375319 = fieldWeight in 2755, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.1578603 = idf(docFreq=1879, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2755)
    0.010893514 = product of:
      0.021787029 = sum of:
        0.021787029 = weight(_text_:web in 2755) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021787029 = score(doc=2755,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15105948 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04628742 = queryNorm
            0.14422815 = fieldWeight in 2755, 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=2755)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Collaborative integration of knowledge in distributed and cross-disciplinary work domains poses a number of challenges to classification, comprising: 1) how to analyze the actors' current practice of integration of knowledge and 2) how to model consistent semantic support of diverse interpretive perspectives among the actors. This paper introduces a cognitive systems engineering approach to modelling collaborative integration of knowledge in work domains. A generic means-ends model provides a theoretical foundation for mapping the territory of collaborative work. A decision task model captures the actors' distributed decision-making in integration of knowledge. The problem of collaborative integration of knowledge in a distributed web-based film collaboratory is explored through an empirical case of collaborative film indexing. The empirical study identified a lack of tools for consistent support of integration of knowledge. The means-ends model and the decision task model guided the design of a conceptual structure of the common workspace of film indexing. The paper concludes with a proposal for further work an models for integration of knowledge through ecological classification schemes. 1. Introduction Current work practice and knowledge production to an increasing degree involves actors from different disciplines, cultures and organisations. Additionally, current work practice not only relies an authoritative orderings of knowledge, but also relies an the dynamism of the actors' ongoing collaborative integration of knowledge, i.e. their shared interpretations of knowledge, exchange of perspectives and joint knowledge production. Consequently, in order to support the actors' ongoing collaborative integration of knowledge, the design of support tools, like classification schemes, must address not only the order of knowledge, but also the situational contexts where collaborative integration of knowledge occurs. This paper introduces an ecological approach to integration of knowledge across boundaries in distributed collaboratory work environments, which is founded an (a) work domain analysis (b) the development of models for collaborative integration of knowledge. The work domain analysis is based an means-ends analysis of the territory of work and the actors' information needs during decision making. The result is conceptual structures of collaborative work that can be used to create collaborative classification schemes. Previous work an design of ecological classification schemes proposed that such schemes should be based an a finegrained empirical analysis of actors' collaborative decision tasks in order to identify the knowledge produced and needed by the actors (Pejtersen & Albrechtsen, 2000).

0.015882565 = product of:
  0.07941282 = sum of:
    0.07941282 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07941282 = score(doc=5120,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14001551 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.5671716 = fieldWeight in 5120, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5120)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Proceedings of the 12th Annual Internation ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. Ed.: N. Belkin et al

0.014974224 = product of:
  0.07487112 = sum of:
    0.07487112 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07487112 = score(doc=934,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14001551 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.5347345 = fieldWeight in 934, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=934)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.013102447 = product of:
  0.06551223 = sum of:
    0.06551223 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06551223 = score(doc=3249,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14001551 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.46789268 = fieldWeight in 3249, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3249)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.013102447 = product of:
  0.06551223 = sum of:
    0.06551223 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06551223 = score(doc=3250,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14001551 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.46789268 = fieldWeight in 3250, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3250)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.011230669 = product of:
  0.056153342 = sum of:
    0.056153342 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 142) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056153342 = score(doc=142,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14001551 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 142, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=142)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.011230669 = product of:
  0.056153342 = sum of:
    0.056153342 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1445) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056153342 = score(doc=1445,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14001551 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 1445, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1445)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.011230669 = product of:
  0.056153342 = sum of:
    0.056153342 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056153342 = score(doc=2088,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14001551 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 2088, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2088)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.011230669 = product of:
  0.056153342 = sum of:
    0.056153342 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056153342 = score(doc=2961,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14001551 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 2961, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2961)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.011230669 = product of:
  0.056153342 = sum of:
    0.056153342 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056153342 = score(doc=3088,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14001551 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 3088, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3088)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.011230669 = product of:
  0.056153342 = sum of:
    0.056153342 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3251) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056153342 = score(doc=3251,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14001551 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 3251, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3251)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.011230669 = product of:
  0.056153342 = sum of:
    0.056153342 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5814) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056153342 = score(doc=5814,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14001551 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 5814, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5814)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.011230669 = product of:
  0.056153342 = sum of:
    0.056153342 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056153342 = score(doc=5820,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.14001551 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The BOOK HOUSE system is an example of a system for fiction retrieval, where the structure of the work domain is represented by a metaphor familiar to users, which provides the proper associations for the information retrieval task. It presents for users a coherent display of a complex, rich information context within which they can navigate freely without being constrained by the system. It is intended to support retrieval and decision making of fiction retrieval in both familiar, ambigous and problematic situations for casual, novice end users, to whom it provides the capability of visual exploration of icons and direct perception and manipulation of the iconic objects of the artificial, but familiar, environment of the BOOK HOUSE

0.010609357 = product of:
  0.05304678 = sum of:
    0.05304678 = weight(_text_:semantic in 2617) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05304678 = score(doc=2617,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19245663 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1578603 = idf(docFreq=1879, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.2756298 = fieldWeight in 2617, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.1578603 = idf(docFreq=1879, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2617)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The paper presents a qualitative empirical evaluation of the Collate collaboratory, with special emphasis on management of knowledge integration and categorical complexity. The empirical evaluation of the Collate collaboratory was conducted in an evaluation workshop where professionals from the archives collaborated an co-creation of film censorship history, interacted with prototypes and discussed the use problems with the evaluators. The collaboratory features two distinct modules for management of knowledge integration in the common workspace, through annotation and indexing of documents. The empirical evaluation indicates that the deeper semantics of knowledge integration evolves in collaborative task situations, where the work processes of annotation and indexing are inexorably linked in the professionals' collaborative decision-making, and that there is a need for a consistent and uniform semantic support of management of knowledge integration in the collaboratory.

0.010609357 = product of:
  0.05304678 = sum of:
    0.05304678 = weight(_text_:semantic in 3005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05304678 = score(doc=3005,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19245663 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1578603 = idf(docFreq=1879, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.2756298 = fieldWeight in 3005, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.1578603 = idf(docFreq=1879, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3005)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Work centered design of classification schemes is an emerging area of research which poses particular challenges to domain analysis and scheme construction. A key challenge in work centered design of classification schemes is the evolving semantics of work. This article introduces a work centered approach to the design of classification schemes, based an the framework of cognitive work analysis. We launch collaborative task situations as a new unit of analysis for capturing evolving semantic structures in work domains. An example case from a cognitive work analysis of three national film research archives illustrates the application of the framework for identifying actors' needs for a classification scheme to support collaborative knowledge integration. It is concluded that a main contribution of the new approach is support for empirical analysis and overall design of classification schemes that can serve as material interfaces for actors' negotiations and integration of knowledge perspectives during collaborative work.

0.009726045 = product of:
  0.048630223 = sum of:
    0.048630223 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5839) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048630223 = score(doc=5839,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.14001551 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.34732026 = fieldWeight in 5839, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5839)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Decribes the BookHouse, a system for the retrieval and indexing of fiction and non fiction literature developed for public and school libraries though cooperation between library and information science professionals. Discusses 3 aspects of the system: domain characteristic; task analysis; and user characteristics. Outlines the framework underlying the collection of field data with special emphasis on the work involved in transforming the empirical field studies of user behaviour in the library into computer system specifications and subsequent design of a retrieval system providing subject access to fiction. Describes a few of the many indexing policies, rules and practices which evolved for concept identification and book descriptions as well as the functionality and associated displays of the system for supporting the retrieval and indexing of fiction

0.009264829 = product of:
  0.04632414 = sum of:
    0.04632414 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04632414 = score(doc=5828,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14001551 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 5828, 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=5828)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Issues concerning the formulation and application of a model of how humans value information are examined. Formulation of a value function is based on research from modelling, value assessment, human information seeking behavior, and human decision making. The proposed function is incorporated into a computer-based fiction retrieval system and evaluated using data from nine searches. Evaluation is based on the ability of an individual's value function to discriminate among novels selected, rejected, and not considered. The results are discussed in terms of both formulation and utilization of a value function as well as the implications for extending the proposed formulation to other information seeking environments

0.008105038 = product of:
  0.040525187 = sum of:
    0.040525187 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040525187 = score(doc=1300,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.14001551 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.28943354 = fieldWeight in 1300, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1300)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This paper describes a new OPAC system called The Book House and discusses its relevance as a solution to current OPAC developments. The Book House is an interactive, multimedia, online public access catalogue system designed to support casual and/or novice end-users in information retrieval. It runs on a Macintosh and is available on CD-ROM and disks in English and Danish (it can be purchased from Risø for $100). It comprises an interface and module for classifying and indexing fact and fiction books in the database called Book House Write. It uses icons, text and animation in the display interface in order to enhance the utility of the system for the general public. Both words and pictures can be used for searching, which makes the system suitable for all age groups. It plays on users' previous experiencees with computer games to support learning by doing something in an enjoyable way. A prerequisite for the design of The Book House was a new approach to cognitive analysis of retrieval in libraries. Based on the success of this approach, it is claimed that OPAC systems will only be really useful and widespread (1) when their domain and task characteristics allow supplementary information to be added to existing descriptions of book content in online card catalogues in order to match end-users' intentions and needs, and (2) when the user interface and routes to the databases are configured as an integrated and uniform set of displays which match the search strategies of users, as well as their mental capabilities and limitations

0.007941282 = product of:
  0.03970641 = sum of:
    0.03970641 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03970641 = score(doc=2997,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14001551 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 2997, 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=2997)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

While most research in the area of human-information behavior has focused an a single dimension-either the psychological or the social-this case study demonstrated the importance of a multidimensional approach. The Cognitive Work Analysis framework guided this field study of one event of collaborative information retrieval (CIR) carried out by design engineers at Microsoft, including observations and interviews. Various dimensions explained the motives for this CIR event and the challenges the participants encountered: the cognitive dimension, the specific task and decision, the organization of the teamwork, and the organizational culture. Even though it is difficult at times to separate one dimension from another, and all are interdependent, the analysis uncovered several reasons for design engineers to engage in CIR, such as when they are new to the organization or the team, when the information lends itself to various interpretations, or when most of the needed information is not documented. Similar multidimensional studies will enhance our understanding of human-information behavior.

0.007941282 = product of:
  0.03970641 = sum of:
    0.03970641 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03970641 = score(doc=5838,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14001551 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04628742 = queryNorm
        0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 5838, 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=5838)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Information retrieval and exploration of work domains through databases and integrated information systems has become increasingly important in many modern work settings (as well as in libraries). The problem space of the users is defined on occasion by the dynamically changing requirements from their tasks and goals. it is argued that IR system design should be based on an analysis of the properties of the work domain, the task situation and the user characteristics. The paper describes a general framework for IR system design that has been used in the design of a library system. A special problem identified from use of the framework in domain analysis of fiction retrieval is treated in more detail: mapping the authors' domain structures to the domain structures expressed in users' needs in indexing and representation of fiction