Search (27 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Begriffstheorie"
  1. Dahlberg, I.: ¬Die gegenstandsbezogene, analytische Begriffstheorie und ihre Definitionsarten (1987) 0.02
    0.02475569 = product of:
      0.04951138 = sum of:
        0.04951138 = product of:
          0.09902276 = sum of:
            0.09902276 = weight(_text_:22 in 880) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09902276 = score(doc=880,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 880, 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=880)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Pages
    S.9-22
  2. Wüster, E.: Begriffs- und Themaklassifikation : Unterschiede in ihrem Wesen und in ihrer Anwendung (1971) 0.02
    0.021219164 = product of:
      0.04243833 = sum of:
        0.04243833 = product of:
          0.08487666 = sum of:
            0.08487666 = weight(_text_:22 in 3904) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08487666 = score(doc=3904,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3904, 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=3904)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Nachrichten für Dokumentation. 22(1971) H.3, S.98-104 (T.1); H.4, S.143-150 (T.2)
  3. Wilbert, R.: Assoziative Begriffsrepräsentation in neuronalen Netzwerken : Zur Problematik eines assoziativen Zugriffs in Information Retrieval Systemen (1991) 0.02
    0.021110734 = product of:
      0.042221468 = sum of:
        0.042221468 = product of:
          0.084442936 = sum of:
            0.084442936 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.084442936 = score(doc=479,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = queryNorm
                0.5347345 = fieldWeight in 479, 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=479)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  4. Evens, M.: Thesaural relations in information retrieval (2002) 0.02
    0.01770189 = product of:
      0.03540378 = sum of:
        0.03540378 = product of:
          0.07080756 = sum of:
            0.07080756 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07080756 = score(doc=1201,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = queryNorm
                0.44838852 = fieldWeight in 1201, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1201)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Thesaural relations have long been used in information retrieval to enrich queries; they have sometimes been used to cluster documents as well. Sometimes the first query to an information retrieval system yields no results at all, or, what can be even more disconcerting, many thousands of hits. One solution is to rephrase the query, improving the choice of query terms by using related terms of different types. A collection of related terms is often called a thesaurus. This chapter describes the lexical-semantic relations that have been used in building thesauri and summarizes some of the effects of using these relational thesauri in information retrieval experiments
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  5. Dahlberg, I.: Begriffsarbeit in der Wissensorganisation (2010) 0.01
    0.014146109 = product of:
      0.028292218 = sum of:
        0.028292218 = product of:
          0.056584436 = sum of:
            0.056584436 = weight(_text_:22 in 3726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.056584436 = score(doc=3726,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3726, 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=3726)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Wissensspeicher in digitalen Räumen: Nachhaltigkeit - Verfügbarkeit - semantische Interoperabilität. Proceedings der 11. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Konstanz, 20. bis 22. Februar 2008. Hrsg.: J. Sieglerschmidt u. H.P.Ohly
  6. Khoo, C.; Myaeng, S.H.: Identifying semantic relations in text for information retrieval and information extraction (2002) 0.01
    0.013711825 = product of:
      0.02742365 = sum of:
        0.02742365 = product of:
          0.0548473 = sum of:
            0.0548473 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0548473 = score(doc=1197,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = queryNorm
                0.34732026 = fieldWeight in 1197, 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=1197)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Automatic identification of semantic relations in text is a difficult problem, but is important for many applications. It has been used for relation matching in information retrieval to retrieve documents that contain not only the concepts but also the relations between concepts specified in the user's query. It is an integral part of information extraction-extracting from natural language text, facts or pieces of information related to a particular event or topic. Other potential applications are in the construction of relational thesauri (semantic networks of related concepts) and other kinds of knowledge bases, and in natural language processing applications such as machine translation and computer comprehension of text. This chapter examines the main methods used for identifying semantic relations automatically and their application in information retrieval and information extraction.
  7. Casagrande, J.B.; Hale, K.L.: Semantic relations in Papago folk definitions (1967) 0.01
    0.013194209 = product of:
      0.026388418 = sum of:
        0.026388418 = product of:
          0.052776836 = sum of:
            0.052776836 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1194) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.052776836 = score(doc=1194,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = queryNorm
                0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 1194, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1194)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Footnote
    Zitiert in: Evens, M.: Thesaural relations in information retrieval. In: The semantics of relationships: an interdisciplinary perspective. Eds: R. Green u.a. Dordrecht: Kluwer 2002. S.143-160.
  8. Principles of semantic networks : explorations in the representation of knowledge (1991) 0.01
    0.013194209 = product of:
      0.026388418 = sum of:
        0.026388418 = product of:
          0.052776836 = sum of:
            0.052776836 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.052776836 = score(doc=1677,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = queryNorm
                0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 1677, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1677)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  9. Sechser, O.: Modi der Bedeutung von Elementarausdrücken in Retrieval-Sprachen (1979) 0.01
    0.0130616 = product of:
      0.0261232 = sum of:
        0.0261232 = product of:
          0.0522464 = sum of:
            0.0522464 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0522464 = score(doc=1425,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = queryNorm
                0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 1425, 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=1425)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Denotation und Intension sind die bevorzugten Bedeutungsmode für Sprachen mit fixem semantischem Universum und ohne Polysemie (formale Sprachen, terminologische Subsets von Fachsprachen). Je nach dem philosophischen Standpunkt und dem methodologischen Ansatz können diese Modi unterschiedlich, manchmal auch präziser definiert und unterteilt werden. Bei der Auswahl von Ausdrücken für thematische und informationsinhaltliche Beschreibung von Texten spielt der Modus der Konnotation eine besondere Rolle. Durch Untersuchung der relevanzvermittelten Konnotation wird Einblick in die innere semantische Struktur der untersuchten Retrieval-Sprache gewonnen
  10. Hetzler, B.: Visual analysis and exploration of relationships (2002) 0.01
    0.0130616 = product of:
      0.0261232 = sum of:
        0.0261232 = product of:
          0.0522464 = sum of:
            0.0522464 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0522464 = score(doc=1189,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = queryNorm
                0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 1189, 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=1189)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Relationships can provide a rich and powerful set of information and can be used to accomplish application goals, such as information retrieval and natural language processing. A growing trend in the information science community is the use of information visualization-taking advantage of people's natural visual capabilities to perceive and understand complex information. This chapter explores how visualization and visual exploration can help users gain insight from known relationships and discover evidence of new relationships not previously anticipated.
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  11. Storms, G.; VanMechelen, I.; DeBoeck, P.: Structural-analysis of the intension and extension of semantic concepts (1994) 0.01
    0.012377845 = product of:
      0.02475569 = sum of:
        0.02475569 = product of:
          0.04951138 = sum of:
            0.04951138 = weight(_text_:22 in 2574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04951138 = score(doc=2574,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2574, 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=2574)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2000 19:17:40
  12. Bauer, G.: ¬Die vielseitigen Anwendungsmöglichkeiten des Kategorienprinzips bei der Wissensorganisation (2006) 0.01
    0.012377845 = product of:
      0.02475569 = sum of:
        0.02475569 = product of:
          0.04951138 = sum of:
            0.04951138 = weight(_text_:22 in 5710) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04951138 = score(doc=5710,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5710, 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=5710)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Pages
    S.22-33
  13. ¬The semantics of relationships : an interdisciplinary perspective (2002) 0.01
    0.0114265205 = product of:
      0.022853041 = sum of:
        0.022853041 = product of:
          0.045706082 = sum of:
            0.045706082 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.045706082 = score(doc=1430,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = queryNorm
                0.28943354 = fieldWeight in 1430, 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=1430)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Work on relationships takes place in many communities, including, among others, data modeling, knowledge representation, natural language processing, linguistics, and information retrieval. Unfortunately, continued disciplinary splintering and specialization keeps any one person from being familiar with the full expanse of that work. By including contributions form experts in a variety of disciplines and backgrounds, this volume demonstrates both the parallels that inform work on relationships across a number of fields and the singular emphases that have yet to be fully embraced, The volume is organized into 3 parts: (1) Types of relationships (2) Relationships in knowledge representation and reasoning (3) Applications of relationships
    Content
    Enthält die Beiträge: Pt.1: Types of relationships: CRUDE, D.A.: Hyponymy and its varieties; FELLBAUM, C.: On the semantics of troponymy; PRIBBENOW, S.: Meronymic relationships: from classical mereology to complex part-whole relations; KHOO, C. u.a.: The many facets of cause-effect relation - Pt.2: Relationships in knowledge representation and reasoning: GREEN, R.: Internally-structured conceptual models in cognitive semantics; HOVY, E.: Comparing sets of semantic relations in ontologies; GUARINO, N., C. WELTY: Identity and subsumption; JOUIS; C.: Logic of relationships - Pt.3: Applications of relationships: EVENS, M.: Thesaural relations in information retrieval; KHOO, C., S.H. MYAENG: Identifying semantic relations in text for information retrieval and information extraction; McCRAY, A.T., O. BODENREICHER: A conceptual framework for the biiomedical domain; HETZLER, B.: Visual analysis and exploration of relationships
  14. Stock, W.: Begriffe und semantische Relationen in der Wissensrepräsentation (2009) 0.01
    0.011195658 = product of:
      0.022391316 = sum of:
        0.022391316 = product of:
          0.04478263 = sum of:
            0.04478263 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04478263 = score(doc=3218,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = queryNorm
                0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 3218, 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=3218)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Begriffsorientiertes Information Retrieval bedarf einer informationswissenschaftlichen Theorie der Begriffe sowie der semantischen Relationen. Ein Begriff wird durch seine Intension und Extension sowie durch Definitionen bestimmt. Dem Problem der Vagheit begegnen wir durch die Einführung von Prototypen. Wichtige Definitionsarten sind die Begriffserklärung (nach Aristoteles) und die Definition über Familienähnlichkeiten (im Sinne Wittgensteins). Wir modellieren Begriffe als Frames (in der Version von Barsalou). Die zentrale paradigmatische Relation in Wissensordnungen ist die Hierarchie, die in verschiedene Arten zu gliedern ist: Hyponymie zerfällt in die Taxonomie und die einfache Hyponymie, Meronymie in eine ganze Reihe unterschiedlicher Teil-Ganzes-Beziehungen. Wichtig für praktische Anwendungen ist die Transitivität der jeweiligen Relation. Eine unspezifische Assoziationsrelation ist bei den angepeilten Anwendungen wenig hilfreich und wird durch ein Bündel von generalisierbaren und fachspezifischen Relationen ersetzt. Unser Ansatz fundiert neue Optionen der Anwendung von Wissensordnungen in der Informationspraxis neben ihrem "klassischen" Einsatz beim Information Retrieval: Erweiterung von Suchanfragen (Anwendung der semantischen Nähe), automatisches Schlussfolgern (Anwendung der terminologischen Logik in Vorbereitung eines semantischen Web) und automatische Berechnungen (bei Funktionalbegriffen mit numerischen Wertangaben).
  15. Treude, L.: ¬Das Problem der Konzeptdefinition in der Wissensorganisation : über einen missglückten Versuch der Klärung (2013) 0.01
    0.010609582 = product of:
      0.021219164 = sum of:
        0.021219164 = product of:
          0.04243833 = sum of:
            0.04243833 = weight(_text_:22 in 3060) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04243833 = score(doc=3060,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3060, 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=3060)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    LIBREAS: Library ideas. no.22, 2013, S.xx-xx
  16. Hudon, M.: Preparing terminological definitions for indexing and retrieval thesauri : a model (1996) 0.01
    0.010555367 = product of:
      0.021110734 = sum of:
        0.021110734 = product of:
          0.042221468 = sum of:
            0.042221468 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.042221468 = score(doc=5193,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = queryNorm
                0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 5193, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5193)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  17. Campos, L.M.: Princípios teóricos usados na elaboracao de ontologias e sua influência na recuperacao da informacao com uso de de inferências [Theoretical principles used in ontology building and their influence on information retrieval using inferences] (2021) 0.01
    0.009329714 = product of:
      0.018659428 = sum of:
        0.018659428 = product of:
          0.037318856 = sum of:
            0.037318856 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037318856 = score(doc=826,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = queryNorm
                0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 826, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=826)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Several instruments of knowledge organization will reflect different possibilities for information retrieval. In this context, ontologies have a different potential because they allow knowledge discovery, which can be used to retrieve information in a more flexible way. However, this potential can be affected by the theoretical principles adopted in ontology building. The aim of this paper is to discuss, in an introductory way, how a (not exhaustive) set of theoretical principles can influence an aspect of ontologies: their use to obtain inferences. In this context, the role of Ingetraut Dahlberg's Theory of Concept is discussed. The methodology is exploratory, qualitative, and from the technical point of view it uses bibliographic research supported by the content analysis method. It also presents a small example of application as a proof of concept. As results, a discussion about the influence of conceptual definition on subsumption inferences is presented, theoretical contributions are suggested that should be used to guide the formation of hierarchical structures on which such inferences are supported, and examples are provided of how the absence of such contributions can lead to erroneous inferences
  18. Nakamura, Y.: Subdivisions vs. conjunctions : a discussion on concept theory (1998) 0.01
    0.009235946 = product of:
      0.018471893 = sum of:
        0.018471893 = product of:
          0.036943786 = sum of:
            0.036943786 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 69) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.036943786 = score(doc=69,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15791564 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = queryNorm
                0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 69, 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=69)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    After studying the relations between two words(nouns) that constitute a compound term, the relation between corresponding concepts discussed. The impossibility of having a conjunction between two concepts that have no common feature causes inconvenience in the application of concept theory to information retrieval problems. Another kind of conjunctions, different from that by co-occurrence, is proposed and characteristics of this conjunction is studied. It revealed that one of new ones has the same character with colon combination in UDC. The possibility of having three kinds of conjunction including Wsterian concept conjunction is presented. It is also discussed that subdivisions can be replaced by new conjunctions
  19. Jouis, C.: Logic of relationships (2002) 0.01
    0.008841318 = product of:
      0.017682636 = sum of:
        0.017682636 = product of:
          0.035365272 = sum of:
            0.035365272 = weight(_text_:22 in 1204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.035365272 = score(doc=1204,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1204, 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=1204)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    1.12.2002 11:12:22
  20. Marradi, A.: ¬The concept of concept : concepts and terms (2012) 0.01
    0.008841318 = product of:
      0.017682636 = sum of:
        0.017682636 = product of:
          0.035365272 = sum of:
            0.035365272 = weight(_text_:22 in 33) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.035365272 = score(doc=33,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18281296 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052204985 = 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)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 1.2012 13:11:25