Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0014796278 = product of:
  0.010357394 = sum of:
    0.010357394 = product of:
      0.051786967 = sum of:
        0.051786967 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051786967 = score(doc=4607,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.47264296 = fieldWeight in 4607, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4607)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Content

Es handelt sich um die 3. Aufl. von: 'Information retrieval systems: characteristics, testing and evaluation' des ersten Autors

0.0011342503 = product of:
  0.007939752 = sum of:
    0.007939752 = product of:
      0.03969876 = sum of:
        0.03969876 = weight(_text_:system in 4014) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03969876 = score(doc=4014,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.3479797 = fieldWeight in 4014, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4014)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Reports results of an evaluation of 2 expert systems designed for use in library reference services: ReferenceExpert (RE), developed by Houston University; and SourceFinder (SF), developed by Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign. The test group consisted of 60 graduate students at the initial stage of an intermediate level reference course. The evaluation involved test questions already used in an earlier study (College and research libraries 52(1991) no.5, S.454-465). Results indicated that: there was no significant difference between RE and SF students in the confidence they expressed regarding understanding of their test questions; no significant correlation was found between confidence in understanding the question and success in selecting appropriate sources; only 1/5 of the students agreed that the system they used could be considered 'intelligent'; the majority did not consider the system they used to be 'competent'; almost half agreed that the subject categories provided by the menus were too broad; a little more than half wer not satisfied with the information sources selected by their system; significantly more RE users than SF users agreed that they found the menu interface useful; and a keyword search capability was the feature most often mentioned as a needed system enhancement. Overall results indicated that current expert systems for the selection of reference sources cannot perform as well as experienced subject oriented reference librarians

0.0011228506 = product of:
  0.007859954 = sum of:
    0.007859954 = product of:
      0.039299767 = sum of:
        0.039299767 = weight(_text_:system in 3000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039299767 = score(doc=3000,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.34448233 = fieldWeight in 3000, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3000)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

An overview of levels and approaches in the evalution of knowledge-based systems is presented. There is a need for empirical studies using objective criteria in advance of completing the technical evaluation of such systems. A methodology for this type of evaluation developed for a particular knowledge-based indexing system is presented. It is suggested that the proposed study may serve as a model for the design of any evaluation in which the results of existing intellectual procedures are compared with results achieved when these procedures are aided by use of an appropriate expert system

9.0740033E-4 = product of:
  0.006351802 = sum of:
    0.006351802 = product of:
      0.03175901 = sum of:
        0.03175901 = weight(_text_:system in 839) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03175901 = score(doc=839,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 839, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=839)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Based partly on chapters in a forthcoming book 'Technology and Management in Library and Information Sciences' by F.W. Lancaster and B. Sandore. Some inportant functions of a research library operating largely in a networked digital environment are illustrated. The ability of artificial intelligence and expert system technologies to contribute to these functions is discussed, in the light of a report from the American Association for Artificial Intelligence, as well as experiences with these technologies in the library world and elsewhere

8.3700387E-4 = product of:
  0.0058590267 = sum of:
    0.0058590267 = product of:
      0.029295133 = sum of:
        0.029295133 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 7128) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029295133 = score(doc=7128,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 7128, 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=7128)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

This piece of research traces the evolution of guidelines and principles for the construction of information retrieval thesauri from 1959 to 1993. We conclude that the majority of the basic problems of thesaurus construction has already been identified and solved by 1967 and that Eugene Wall, more than any other individual, has profoundly influenced the entire development in this area

7.323784E-4 = product of:
  0.0051266486 = sum of:
    0.0051266486 = product of:
      0.025633242 = sum of:
        0.025633242 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025633242 = score(doc=752,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 752, 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=752)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Content

Enthält folgende Kapitel: Pre-coordinate indexes; consistency of indexing: quality of indexing; abstracts: types and functions, writing the abstract, natural language in information retrieval, automatic indexing. There are exercises in both indexing and abstracting procedures