Search (12 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0055017523 = product of:
  0.08252628 = sum of:
    0.08252628 = weight(_text_:evaluation in 2617) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08252628 = score(doc=2617,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.13272417 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.6217879 = fieldWeight in 2617, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2617)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

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.

0.004920917 = product of:
  0.07381375 = sum of:
    0.07381375 = weight(_text_:evaluation in 142) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07381375 = score(doc=142,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13272417 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.556144 = fieldWeight in 142, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=142)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

0.004920917 = product of:
  0.07381375 = sum of:
    0.07381375 = weight(_text_:evaluation in 7626) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07381375 = score(doc=7626,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13272417 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.556144 = fieldWeight in 7626, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=7626)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

0.004920917 = product of:
  0.07381375 = sum of:
    0.07381375 = weight(_text_:evaluation in 5814) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07381375 = score(doc=5814,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13272417 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.556144 = fieldWeight in 5814, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5814)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

0.00440151 = product of:
  0.06602265 = sum of:
    0.06602265 = weight(_text_:software in 2088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06602265 = score(doc=2088,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12552431 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.525975 = fieldWeight in 2088, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2088)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Source

2nd Symposium on Empirical Foundations of Information and Software Science, 3.-5.10.84, Atlanta

0.00440151 = product of:
  0.06602265 = sum of:
    0.06602265 = weight(_text_:software in 2961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06602265 = score(doc=2961,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12552431 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.525975 = fieldWeight in 2961, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2961)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Source

Empirical foundation of information and software science. Ed.: J.C. Agarwal u. P. Zunde

0.003280611 = product of:
  0.049209163 = sum of:
    0.049209163 = weight(_text_:evaluation in 3842) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049209163 = score(doc=3842,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13272417 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.37076265 = fieldWeight in 3842, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3842)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

Explores the extent to which techniques of word association can be applied to the development of interfaces for data browsing and searching for which the present methods are either not adequate or completely ineffective. Focuses on the development, application and evaluation of aids for browsing associative semantics displayed textually in interfaces as a network of related terms, or displayed visually as a network of terms and pictures

0.0028705348 = product of:
  0.04305802 = sum of:
    0.04305802 = weight(_text_:evaluation in 5828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04305802 = score(doc=5828,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13272417 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = queryNorm
        0.32441732 = fieldWeight in 5828, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.1947007 = idf(docFreq=1811, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5828)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

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

0.0014289691 = product of:
  0.021434534 = sum of:
    0.021434534 = product of:
      0.04286907 = sum of:
        0.04286907 = weight(_text_:22 in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04286907 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.110801086 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031640913 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Date

5. 8.2006 13:22:44

0.001073302 = product of:
  0.01609953 = sum of:
    0.01609953 = product of:
      0.03219906 = sum of:
        0.03219906 = weight(_text_:online in 1300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03219906 = score(doc=1300,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.096027054 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031640913 = queryNorm
            0.33531237 = fieldWeight in 1300, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1300)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

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

Source

Online information 93: 17th International Online Meeting Proceedings, London, 7.-9.12.1993. Ed. by D.I. Raitt et al

0.001062515 = product of:
  0.015937723 = sum of:
    0.015937723 = product of:
      0.031875446 = sum of:
        0.031875446 = weight(_text_:online in 2773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031875446 = score(doc=2773,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.096027054 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031640913 = queryNorm
            0.33194235 = fieldWeight in 2773, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2773)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

The Book House is an interactive, multimedia, online public access catalogue designed to support casual, novice users in information retrieval. It uses icons, text and animation in the display interface in order to enhance the utility of the system. A prerequisite for the design of The Book House was a cognitive analysis of users' information needs and search queries. The paper describes The BookHouse and discusses its relevance as a solution to the current OPAC developments

9.928709E-4 = product of:
  0.014893063 = sum of:
    0.014893063 = weight(_text_:web in 2755) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014893063 = score(doc=2755,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10326045 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.031640913 = 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)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

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).